Socio-Technical Collaborative Security Support System(Stcs3)

Collaborative Reflection Support at Work: a Socio-Technical Design Task

On Tools for Socio-Technical Security Analysis

Many systems are hacked daily and apparently without much effort (e.g., see [1]). This happens because hackers prefer not to break security mechanisms immediately, but rather to target unguarded components first. Such components, e.g., users and human-computer ceremonies [2], are hacked by exploiting cognitive features (e.g., trust) and people’s dismay with ill-designed interfaces. These user-r...

Security analysis of socio-technical physical systems

Recent initiatives that evaluate the security of physical systems with objects as assets and people as agents –here called Socio-Technical Physical Systems– have limitations: their agent behaviour is too simple, they just estimate feasibility and not the likelihood of attacks, or they do estimate likelihood but on explicitly provided attacks only. We propose a model that can detect and quantify...

Socio-technical Security Analysis of Wireless Hotspots

We present a socio-technical analysis of security of Hotspot and Hotspot 2.0. The analysis focuses is user-centric, and aim at understanding which user action can compromise security in presence of a attacker. We identify research questions about possible factors that may affect user’s security decisions, and propose experiments to answer them.

A Socio-Technical Investigation into Smartphone Security

Many people do not deliberately act to protect the data on their Smartphones. The most obvious explanation for a failure to behave securely is that the appropriate mechanisms are unusable. Does this mean usable mechanisms will automatically be adopted? Probably not! Poor usability certainly plays a role, but other factors also contribute to non-adoption of precautionary mechanisms and behaviour...