In a recent study which (hopefully) is not applicable to our readers, it was confirmed that users are “idiots”. From the article:
[T]he students seemed to find any dialog box a distraction from their assigned task; nearly half said that all they cared about was getting rid of these dialogs.
The dialog boxes they are referring to are fake dialog boxes you typically see while browsing the web (i.e. the kind that offer you a free DVD player or “warn” you about the spyware on your computer).
I do not use the word confirmed loosely either:
Of the 42 students, 26 clicked the OK button for the “real” dialog. But 25 clicked the same button for two of the fakes, and 23 hit OK on the third (the one with the status bar showing). Only nine of them closed the window—two fewer than had closed the real dialog. In all cases, a few of the users simply minimized the window or dragged it out of the way, presumably leaving the machine’s next user at risk.
Even if this isn’t applicable to you directly, it goes to show that many computer users have no concept of computer security. This may effect you indirectly, however, because people you know (friends, parents, etc.) might be a part of that “many”.
Regardless, this is a really good read and quite shocking… in a not so shocking way (if that makes sense).
Jason Faulkner is the man who brings you our daily tips. He is based in Atlanta, Georgia.
Then there are the idiots that are so ’security conscious’, they run two of everything, virus scanners, ad ware blockers …… and then there are those who flip out at the slightest sign of of malware outbreak. I guess it was for them that Windows Vista was created.
The study doesn’t make sense. How is that an example of security? Wouldn’t a fake dialog box already cause damage? It would already be too late.
Actually, the example proves that software producers (perhaps Microsoft) is doing a poor job of securing their operating system and not providing security dialog boxes that tell the user of the dangers, or adequately stop the security breach without involving the user.
Users deserve better.
>> Actually, the example proves that software producers (perhaps Microsoft) is doing a poor job of securing their operating system and not providing security dialog boxes that tell the user of the dangers, or adequately stop the security breach without involving the user.
Microsoft did this with UAC in Vista and everyone complains about how ‘annoying’ it is. No matter what system security you have in place, it cannot protect users from themselves and this study demonstrates it.
“Microsoft did this with UAC in Vista and everyone complains about how ‘annoying’ it is.”
Yes, because it is annoying and MS said it was created to be annoying. Didn’t you read this? It was annoying because MS had motivations like getting the software developers to follow MS directives on secure software. MS was trying to annoy users so they would complain to developers. It’s a rather strange way to write secure software.
“No matter what system security you have in place, it cannot protect users from themselves and this study demonstrates it.”
No, it demonstrates that users can be manipulated and it proves nothing. If anything, it proves that an operating system has many vulnerabilities that users cannot protect themselves adequately from internet attacks. Also, that dialog boxes are very annoying and uninformative.
Is this why PC users are switching to Macs? Just make it secure and users will flock to the most secure system. With Vista, it’s an interim improvement.