Barriers to science in security

Longstaff, Thomas A.; Balenson, David; Matties, Mark Alan

doi:10.1145/1920261.1920281

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Q2: How is usability research incented and rewarded by the peer community, relative to other areas of computer Similar questions raised in the NSPW 2010 panel [28] and by Longstaff [27], remain far from resolved, and have been considered generically or relative to network security and intrusion detection more than specifically to usable security or authentication proposals.…”

Section: Specific Questions For Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Should we follow the computer scientist's preferred approach of describing a mechanism, building a prototype, and evaluating performance; or condense these to allow greater emphasis on explaining the methodology and results of one or more scientific experiments [27,28]?…”

Section: Specific Questions For Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three barriers to adopting a scientific approach to information security have been highlighted previously [27]:…”

Section: Suggestion: Competition To Evaluate Real-world Usable Securimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the rich literature discussing scientific method and progress by experimentation, we have cited only two items herein: the 1964 strong inference paper of Platt [35], and Feynman's 1974 address [16]. Selected works connecting such topics to questions in computer security research are the NSPW 2010 panel report of Maxion et al [28], and essays of Longstaff [27] and Schell [38].…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We feel that the lack of resolution of such questions poses roadblocks to the advancement of numerous areas of experimental and empirically-based computer security research involving users. We see this as related to questions about the lack of science (and scientific experimentation) within security research, as discussed at NSPW 2010 by Maxion et al [28] and in Longstaff's essay [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A multi-word password proposal (gridWord) and exploring questions about science in security research and usable security evaluation

Biçakcı

Oorschot

2011

Proceedings of the 2011 New Security Paradigms Workshop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our agenda is two-fold. First, we introduce and give a technical description of gridWord, a novel knowledge-based authentication mechanism involving elements of both text and graphical passwords. It is intended to address a new research challenge arising from the evolution of Internet access devices, and which may arguably be viewed as motivating a new paradigm: remote access password schemes which accommodate users who alternately login from devices with, and without, full physical keyboards (e.g., users alternating between desktops with easy text input, and mobile devices with tiny or touch-screen virtual keyboards). While the core ideas behind gridWord are well-formed, and may be viewed as a new variation of old (text-based) ideas of building passwords from multiple words, many aspects including recommended parameterization and configuration details, preferred platforms, and primary targets of application remain to be explored in detail. We nonetheless solicit early feedback from the community for several reasons, related to our second agenda item: we use gridWord as a concrete target to focus exploration of a number of questions involving (a) the evaluation of usable security proposals, (b) the often conflicting objectives of various parties involved in the publication of academic research, and (c) the relationship between the design and publication of new security mechanisms and the pursuit of scientific knowledge through experimentation. We believe the second agenda item is important to pursue, given our observation that experts in usability and security have widely varying expectations, and lack consensus on what is important for the evaluation, comparison, and publication of usable security proposals.

show abstract

Section: Specific Questions For Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Specific Questions For Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three barriers to adopting a scientific approach to information security have been highlighted previously [27]:…”

Section: Suggestion: Competition To Evaluate Real-world Usable Securimentioning

confidence: 99%