Oh no, you're thinking, yet another cookie pop-up. Well, sorry, it's the law. We measure how many people read us, and ensure you see relevant ads, by storing cookies on your device. If you're cool with that, hit “Accept all Cookies”. For more info and to customize your settings, hit “Customize Settings”.

Review and manage your consent

Here's an overview of our use of cookies, similar technologies and how to manage them. You can also change your choices at any time, by hitting the “Your Consent Options” link on the site's footer.

Manage Cookie Preferences
  • These cookies are strictly necessary so that you can navigate the site as normal and use all features. Without these cookies we cannot provide you with the service that you expect.

  • These cookies are used to make advertising messages more relevant to you. They perform functions like preventing the same ad from continuously reappearing, ensuring that ads are properly displayed for advertisers, and in some cases selecting advertisements that are based on your interests.

  • These cookies collect information in aggregate form to help us understand how our websites are being used. They allow us to count visits and traffic sources so that we can measure and improve the performance of our sites. If people say no to these cookies, we do not know how many people have visited and we cannot monitor performance.

See also our Cookie policy and Privacy policy.

This article is more than 1 year old

Google boffins PROVE security warnings don't ... LOOK! A funny cat!

Designing a UI people care about is harder than it looks

The revised SSL warning interface introduced in Chrome 37, designed to teach users more secure behaviours, was only a partial success – according to the Chrome security team's own analysis.

Confusing security warnings serve only to make users more insecure and normalise risky behaviours, according to Google. To try and beat that, Google tried to make its interface easier to understand, and try to restrict itself to warnings when a real risk existed.

This Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) paper and presentation explain that the attempt was only a partial success.

Even with Google's resources behind them, the group that authored the paper says it's difficult to craft a security warning that is readable down to grade-six level, and will give users either the information they need to stay safe, or to guide them towards a secure decision.

“We ultimately failed at our goal of a well-understood warning. However, nearly 30% more total users chose to remain safe after seeing our warning,” the paper says.

With a redesigned SSL dialogue designed to strip out jargon and tell users they might be in danger, the best the design team could manage was about 58 per cent compliance.

Google testing warning dialogues

Best of a bad lot: this SSL warning nearly doubled user compliance, but too many users still don't get it

The Chromium security team, led by Adrienne Porter Felt, reckons there are many degrees between a genuine attack on and end user and a browser generating a warning when none is needed, but they generate the same generic popups.

If a client clock is wrong, or if an employer has a DPI box or content filter between a user and the Internet, or a client is missing a root certificate, a user will get an SSL warning that tells them nothing, and serves only to teach them to click “OK” on a dialogue.

As the paper states, “An ideal SSL warning would empower users to make informed decisions and, failing that, guide confused users to safety”.

“We attribute the low comprehension rates to the difficulty of creating an SSL warning that is simultaneously brief, non-technical, simple, and specific”, the paper concludes. ®

 

Similar topics

TIP US OFF

Send us news


Other stories you might like