Towards Robust Experimental Design for User Studies in Security and Privacy

Towards Robust Experimental Design for User Studies in Security and Privacy
复制标题

安全和隐私用户研究的稳健实验设计

DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Sasse
M. Sasse
中科院分区：
--
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kat Krol;Jonathan M. Spring;S. Parkin;M. Sasse

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

背景：人类是计算机不可分割的一部分 安全，无论我们是积极参与还是简单地 建立系统。尽管如此，理解 用户及其与安全的交互是一个盲点 对于大多数安全从业者和设计师来说。/目的：确定进行实验的原则， 可用的安全性和隐私性，以提高研究的稳健性 和实用性。/数据：作者进行几项研究的经验 项目辅以文献调查。 方法：我们提取的原则的基础上的相关性， 先进技术的进步。然后我们证明我们的 选择通过提供已发表的实验作为案例， 这些原则在实践中被遵循或没有被遵循 来展示它的影响。每一个原则都是一个特定的学科 理想实验设计元素的实例化 正如先前在哲学领域所建立的那样， 科学。成果：五项高度优先原则-㈠让参与者 一个首要任务;（二）纳入现实的风险; (iii)避免启动参与者;（iv）进行双盲 （5）尽可能地进行实验;（5）仔细思考 关于威胁这个词的含义 模型、安全性、隐私和可用性。结论：原则不能取代研究者 智慧或经验，但他们可以提供一个有价值的 促进评估、指导年轻人 研究人员和学生，并标记一个基线共同 讨论进一步改进的语言。
Background: Human beings are an integral part of computer security, whether we actively participate or simply build the systems. Despite this importance, understanding users and their interaction with security is a blind spot for most security practitioners and designers. / Aim: Define principles for conducting experiments into usable security and privacy, to improve study robustness and usefulness. / Data: The authors’ experiences conducting several research projects complemented with a literature survey. Method: We extract principles based on relevance to the advancement of the state of the art. We then justify our choices by providing published experiments as cases of where the principles are and are not followed in practice to demonstrate the impact. Each principle is a discipline specific instantiation of desirable experiment-design elements as previously established in the domain of philosophy of science. / Results: Five high-priority principles – (i) give participants a primary task; (ii) incorporate realistic risk; (iii) avoid priming the participants; (iv) perform doubleblind experiments whenever possible and (v) think carefully about how meaning is assigned to the terms threat model, security, privacy, and usability. / Conclusion: The principles do not replace researcher acumen or experience, however they can provide a valuable service for facilitating evaluation, guiding younger researchers and students, and marking a baseline common language for discussing further improvements.