Slashdot Mirror
Fujitsu Psychology Tool Profiles Users At Risk of Cyberattacks
itwbennett writes Fujitsu Laboratories is developing an enterprise tool that can identify and advise people who are more vulnerable to cyberattacks, based on certain traits. For example, the researchers found that users who are more comfortable taking risks are also more susceptible to virus infections, while those who are confident of their computer knowledge were at greater risk for data leaks. Rather than being like an antivirus program, the software is more like "an action log analysis than looks into the potential risks of a user," said a spokesman for the lab. "It judges risk based on human behavior and then assigns a security countermeasure for a given user."
It's odd that they are trying to track how much people pay attention to privacy policies. I figure there's no point in reading them since they are all just complicated ways to say "We'll screw you whenever we want to."
For which I'm sure for many users that amounts to "system shut down will begin in ....".
We used to have a receptionist who would install pretty much anything from anywhere. Animated dinosaur cursors? Bring 'em on. A game? Make it so. She'd click any link, any button, anywhere.
Periodically it was just easier to wipe her machine, re-install from an image, and then let her destroy it again.
I honestly never knew why they let her near a computer -- it was always so full of garbage that she couldn't do anything with it, and no amount of telling her why she shouldn't do that would work.
She clearly never used the damned thing for anything work related, she couldn't have had the time. And then when she got it so broken it was unusable, she demanded the IT guy come immediately and fix it ... because she was obviously losing valuable time clicking on pointless crap on the internet.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Obviously all of them. It's so easy to do, anyone could do it.
Looking at those traits I can help but think the system would class your typical programmer as a large security risk and lock the system down so tight that writing code was not an option...
>those who are confident of their computer knowledge were at greater risk for data leaks.
Doesn't that depend on why they are confident? If you're confident because you don't know what you don't know then maybe it's valid but if you're confident because you happen to have been designing computers for 30 years and are deeply involved in security architecture of computers, then maybe your confidence is well placed.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
My late father had a weakness for naughty bits, especially in the Double-D category. No how many times I tried to explain this to him, he always gets his computer infected with spyware, virius and other crap. He even paid $90 bucks for anti-spyware program that suddenly popped up on his computer one day. I hated driving 300 miles round trip to clean up his computer.
if (user.equals('zoequinn')||isCritical('nolanmovies')) {
alert(Alert.HIGH);
}
i hate cyber attacks :) than any 1 :)
It's all in the subject line
"It judges risk based on human behavior and then assigns a security countermeasure for a given user by sending all that info to security software advertisers."
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
I have a minor interest in social engineering, partly due to my run-ins with sociopaths, but psychology has always been an interest of mine in general.
If there's one thing I, without fail, lecture my less-tech-savvy friends on anytime I ever have to fix anything computer-related, is that they are always the weak link in computer security.
At least once a year, when I become sufficiently annoyed with other people because they post things on Facebook that get my security nerves up, I will post messages like: stop telling people you're not home, or be careful with screen shots and signatures that reveal what kind of device you have.
Though the biggest anecdote I tell my friends, which in general seems to make them stop and think about things, is that if I really wanted to take up as an identity thief, I'd probably become a hairdresser. Think about how many small-talk questions they ask (it's alarming how often they ask if I have any plans for the weekend; my answer is always "staying home and cleaning the house"). Of course, I lie like a bastard if I want to be polite that day (other times I give short answers in a tone that indicates I'm not much in the mood for chit-chat) and tip generously regardless.
Point I'm making is that you should always kind of assume that everyone is at a risk for cyberattacks. There are just different vectors to get there.
Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.