Robot Social Engineering

Postnikoff, Brittany; Goldberg, Ian

doi:10.1145/3173386.3176908

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This behaviour opens the door to social engineers who will connect with you on social media to work to develop more directed social engineering attacks (Hallas, 2018) (Vishwanath, 2014) (Kayes & Iamnitchi, 2017) (Tsikerdekis & Zeadally, 2014). Before the invention of Social Media and Social Media scraping tools, the reconnaissance process was very labour-intensive, so a social engineer would be limited to targeting a small number of people at a time (Postnikoff & Goldberg, 2018). Now social engineers can gather information on hundreds of potential targets and then develop an increased number of attacks, which increases their likelihood of being successful (Wilcox & Bhattacharya, 2019) (Gharibi & Shaabi, 2012) (Weir et al, 2011).…”

Section: Humans and Their Behavioursmentioning

confidence: 99%

Including Human Behaviors into IA Training Assessment: A Better Way Forward!

Collier

2022

eccws

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few can argue against the reality that humans are the weakest link in cybersecurity, and Social Engineers work very hard to take advantage of this human weakness. Many cybersecurity practitioners believe the only way to solve this problem is through a technical solution; however, this solution is elusive because humans are still in control and can circumvent these technical measures. In cybersecurity, the human is the critical component of the human firewall, and it is going to take a multi-disciplinary approach to solve the human problem. The human firewall is the first line of defense for cybersecurity. Historically, the primary solution to the human problem has been the Information Awareness training program, designed to teach the end-user about the risks and assess their risk. The biggest problem with the information awareness training program is that it does not modify behavior. Cybersecurity practitioners need to understand better the human firewall and how it can be strengthened. It is necessary to understand how the human makes security-minded decisions, how these decisions affect the cybersecurity decision-making process, and if there is a way to assess a person's susceptibility level more precisely when working to strengthen the human firewall. Humans are multifaceted, complex beings influenced by both internal and external factors. The most significant internal factor that affects a person's decision-making process is behavior, while Social Media is one of the most significant external factors that impact a person's decision-making capacity. This study presents a new method of assessing a person's susceptibility to cybercrime by including behavioral and social media usage factors into a Dynamic/Adaptable information awareness training assessment tool. This study shows that including human behaviors and social media usage behaviors into an Information Awareness (IA) training assessment tool produces a more precise measure of a person's accurate susceptibility level.

show abstract

Section: Humans and Their Behavioursmentioning

confidence: 99%

Including Human Behaviors into IA Training Assessment: A Better Way Forward!

Collier

2022

eccws

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social engineering is already prevalent, and requires an emotional connection to the person being engineered. These issues are discussed in depth by Postnikoff (2020), but authority, conformity, reciprocity, empathy and trust are key elements to the definition of the problem. With more well defined models of social agents, we are running into the dilemma posed by these security and privacy concerns.…”

Section: Ethical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure is Management of Uncertainty in Groups

Hoey¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I argue that the management of uncertainty by agents in a social world is foundational to the formation of social structures and to the definition of culture. I present a deep Bayesian model for this management of uncertainty in intelligent systems, and I argue for its applicability to cultural sociology. As social systems grow more heterogeneous, management of uncertainty in any participating agent becomes computationally difficult, and I propose that combinations of a small number of layers of reasoning in a deep Bayesian model are sufficient to account for some of the salient ways by which humans manage this uncertainty. Three forces come into play when considering such a model, and each is connected to a particular form of uncertainty. A denotative layer in the model represents uncertainty in the world or environment (ambiguity and risk about outcomes), a connotative layer manages the uncertainty about relationships with other social agents, and the connection between denotative and connotative handles uncertainty about identities of the self and others, and of behaviours taken. I show how the tradeoff between these three factors maps to different social structures, and I use use the model to make predictions across a range of domains, and show its relationship to cultural sociological, social psychological, economic and sociological theorizing. I further link this model to Bayesian views of the mind, primarily the enactive inference model of human intelligence, and compare and contrast to more traditional artificial intelligence.

show abstract

“…In future, there is a strong need to educate people regarding social engineering attacks and to develop a mechanism to protect against robotic social engineering attacks. 22 Similarly in many studies, the author emphasized the importance to educate people regarding information security and social engineering attacks. 12,23 The authors of the study, 23 Ghafir et al, first analyzed the threats associated with human and then suggested the strategies to defend those attacks.…”

Section: F I G U R E 1 Research Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In case of time pressure, as there is less time to consult and a person is expected to respond quickly, this factor is used by the social engineers. By putting victim under time pressure and make him not think rationale Diffusion of responsibility 5 A person in less likely to take responsibility for work in which others are present by assuming others responsible for work Lying 22 Person under certain pressure, situation, or fear may speak lie Laziness 15 A person is thought to be lazy if he can perform a particular task but do not perform as an effort is involved in it Natural inclination to help 23 By nature people help others who are in need of assistance T A B L E 4 Various theories and concepts used in literature to relate social engineering activities…”

Section: Human Factors References Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemplating social engineering studies and attack scenarios: A review study

Yasin

Fatima

Liu

et al. 2019

Security and Privacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The previous year has seen an enormous increase in the studies related to social engineering. This increase is partly due to increasing number of social engineering attacks and partly due to people's inability to identify the attack. Thus, it is of great importance to find solutions which are helpful for human to understand the social engineering attacks and scenarios. To address this, we have performed a literature review of studies (on social engineering) in top-notch journals and conferences. In this paper, we have enlisted the types of attacks, and the persuasion techniques used by social engineers as listed in the literature. We also combined different theories which researchers tried to use to explain various activities of social engineers. Furthermore, we have mentioned that a better understanding of the social engineering attack scenarios can be done using thematic and game-based analysis techniques.Preliminary empirical evaluation of the proposed game based method shows overall neutral results. Future extension and evaluation is needed for the proposed methods. K E Y W O R D Scybercrime, cyber-security, human factors, human-centered, information security, review, social engineering

show abstract

Robot Social Engineering

Cited by 15 publications

References 35 publications

Including Human Behaviors into IA Training Assessment: A Better Way Forward!

Including Human Behaviors into IA Training Assessment: A Better Way Forward!

Structure is Management of Uncertainty in Groups

Contemplating social engineering studies and attack scenarios: A review study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About