I decided to conduct a survey among students in my school to get an idea of their opinions about phishing and who is at fault if a user falls into a social engineering trap, and the results were quite interesting. Feel free to tell us your thoughts as well!
In a survey of 10 high school students with half experienced and inexperienced with technology, they were asked three questions:
- What if your experience and comfort level with computers?
- If a computer virus infected your computer, who is at fault?
- If someone slipped at a restaurant because floor is slippery, who is at fault?
Those who stated they had experience with computers also stated that the user is at fault for negligence. Those who did not have extensive experience with computers stated that the person who created the malware is at fault for unethical practices. This is an interesting result, as it shows that people with considerable experience with computers may be aware to measures a user can take to prevent getting hacked and being the victim of malware. Additionally, it may show that helping employees become more comfortable with computers may lower their risk of falling for malware, as they can detect deviations and the social engineering more easily.
However, both groups stated that in a restaurant, the restaurant would be at fault for a risk not assumed by the customer. This could translate to consumers blaming companies who create technology if they fall for malware. They could claim that it is the fault of the creator (the restaurant), for leaving a potential risk (slippery floor) that doesn't not have to be assumed by the user (the customer).
These are definitely some viewpoints we are excited to consider and develop in our paper.
-James
In a survey of 10 high school students with half experienced and inexperienced with technology, they were asked three questions:
- What if your experience and comfort level with computers?
- If a computer virus infected your computer, who is at fault?
- If someone slipped at a restaurant because floor is slippery, who is at fault?
Those who stated they had experience with computers also stated that the user is at fault for negligence. Those who did not have extensive experience with computers stated that the person who created the malware is at fault for unethical practices. This is an interesting result, as it shows that people with considerable experience with computers may be aware to measures a user can take to prevent getting hacked and being the victim of malware. Additionally, it may show that helping employees become more comfortable with computers may lower their risk of falling for malware, as they can detect deviations and the social engineering more easily.
However, both groups stated that in a restaurant, the restaurant would be at fault for a risk not assumed by the customer. This could translate to consumers blaming companies who create technology if they fall for malware. They could claim that it is the fault of the creator (the restaurant), for leaving a potential risk (slippery floor) that doesn't not have to be assumed by the user (the customer).
These are definitely some viewpoints we are excited to consider and develop in our paper.
-James
No comments:
Post a Comment