Security and privacy risks in electronic communications: A user's assessment

Fariborz Farahmand, Joshua Ripple, M. Atallah, R. Dillon-Merrill
{"title":"Security and privacy risks in electronic communications: A user's assessment","authors":"Fariborz Farahmand, Joshua Ripple, M. Atallah, R. Dillon-Merrill","doi":"10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8249009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most research today in electronic communications focuses on developing new technologies and “best practices” to enhance security and privacy. However, these technologies and best-practice codes are all too often not used, and in this failure the users are often their own worst enemies. It is thus important to develop an enhanced understanding of why users indicate concern about security and privacy, but when given the opportunity act contrary to their stated intention. We collect data from 435 participants about 24 electronic activities with a survey and a mixed effects model. We find a significant inverse relationship between their assessed risk and benefit (recognizing that the particular technology matters where some technologies are inherently perceived as more risky than others). This significant inverse relationship represents a departure from decision theories that assume purely cognitive information processing, and the separation of the probabilities and the utilities. We shed light on the role of affect, which commonly competes with cognition, and works as an orienting mechanism in security and privacy behaviors, and discuss business and policy implications of our findings.","PeriodicalId":403890,"journal":{"name":"2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8249009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most research today in electronic communications focuses on developing new technologies and “best practices” to enhance security and privacy. However, these technologies and best-practice codes are all too often not used, and in this failure the users are often their own worst enemies. It is thus important to develop an enhanced understanding of why users indicate concern about security and privacy, but when given the opportunity act contrary to their stated intention. We collect data from 435 participants about 24 electronic activities with a survey and a mixed effects model. We find a significant inverse relationship between their assessed risk and benefit (recognizing that the particular technology matters where some technologies are inherently perceived as more risky than others). This significant inverse relationship represents a departure from decision theories that assume purely cognitive information processing, and the separation of the probabilities and the utilities. We shed light on the role of affect, which commonly competes with cognition, and works as an orienting mechanism in security and privacy behaviors, and discuss business and policy implications of our findings.
电子通信中的安全和隐私风险:一个用户的评估
当今电子通信领域的大多数研究都集中在开发新技术和“最佳实践”上,以增强安全性和隐私性。然而,这些技术和最佳实践代码往往没有被使用,在这种失败中,用户往往是他们自己最大的敌人。因此,重要的是要进一步了解为什么用户表示关心安全和隐私,但在有机会时却采取与他们声明的意图相反的行动。我们通过调查和混合效应模型收集了435名参与者关于24项电子活动的数据。我们发现它们评估的风险和收益之间存在显著的反比关系(认识到某些技术在本质上被认为比其他技术风险更大的情况下,特定技术很重要)。这种重要的反向关系代表了对纯认知信息处理的决策理论的背离,以及概率和效用的分离。我们阐明了情感的作用,它通常与认知竞争,并作为安全和隐私行为的导向机制,并讨论了我们的研究结果对商业和政策的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信