Next: How can things be
Up: Why do users make
Previous: It's someone else's problem
Parker (in [Adams and Sasse, 1999]) suggests that the need-to-know
approach has been adopted by many security departments. Users are told very
little because they are seen as a security liability. But as we've seen from
previous sections (such as Section 3.4) it is actually lack of
knowledge that can be dangerous. If users knew more, for example, about
how dictionary attacks occur, they would understand better how to create good
passwords. But if security experts continue to think of users as dumb
because of the mistakes they make, and reinforce that by not teaching them
anything, then we will be stuck with the status quo for a very long time.
This attitude that users are ``lusers" is a significant barrier to good
security. Just as in the airline industry, we need to look beyond ``the user
did that because the user is dumb and didn't read the manual" to ``the
user did that because the system didn't explain what the consequences
were." And we are unlikely to do so if users are seen as just a liability
rather than an active participant in developing secure systems.
Next: How can things be
Up: Why do users make
Previous: It's someone else's problem
Terri
2004-01-05