Biblio

Mobile applications frequently request sensitive data. While prior work has focused on analyzing sensitive-data uses originating from well-dened API calls in the system, the security and privacy implications of inputs requested via application user interfaces have been widely unexplored. In this paper, our goal is to understand the broad implications of such requests in terms of the type of sensitive data being requested by applications.

To this end, we propose UiRef (User Input REsolution Framework), an automated approach for resolving the semantics of user inputs requested by mobile applications. UiRef’s design includes a number of novel techniques for extracting and resolving user interface labels and addressing ambiguity in semantics, resulting in signicant improvements over prior work.We apply UiRef to 50,162 Android applications from Google Play and use outlier analysis to triage applications with questionable input requests. We identify concerning developer practices, including insecure exposure of account passwords and non-consensual input disclosures to third parties. These ndings demonstrate the importance of user-input semantics when protecting end users.

We discuss our ongoing work with an agent-based password simulation which models how site-enforced password requirements a ect aggregate security when people interact with multiple authentication systems. We model two password memorization techniques: passphrase generation and spaced repetition. Our simulation suggests system-generated passphrases lead to lower aggregate security across services that enforce even moderate password requirements. Furthermore, allowing users to expand their password length over time via spaced repetition increases aggregate security.

The existence of and market for notebooks designedfor users to write down passwords illuminates a sharp contrast: what is often prescribed as proper password behavior—e.g., never write down passwords—differs from what many users actually do. These password logbooks and their reviews provide many unique and surprising insights into their users’ beliefs, motivations, and behaviors. We examine the password logbooks and analyze, using grounded theory, their reviews, to better understand how these users think and behave with respectto password authentication. Several themes emerge including: previous password management strategies, gifting, organizational strategies, password sharing, and dubious security advice. Some users argue these books enhance security.

Workarounds to computer access in healthcare are sufficiently common that they often go unnoticed. Clinicians focus on patient care, not cybersecurity. We argue and demonstrate that understanding workarounds to healthcare workers’ computer access requires not only analyses of computer rules, but also interviews and observations with clinicians. In addition, we illustrate the value of shadowing clinicians and conducing focus groups to understand their motivations and tradeoffs for circumvention. Ethnographic investigation of the medical workplace emerges as a critical method of research because in the inevitable conflict between even well-intended people versus the machines, it’s the people who are the more creative, flexible, and motivated. We conducted interviews and observations with hundreds of medical workers and with 19 cybersecurity experts, CIOs, CMIOs, CTO, and IT workers to obtain their perceptions of computer security. We also shadowed clinicians as they worked. We present dozens of ways workers ingeniously circumvent security rules. The clinicians we studied were not “black hat” hackers, but just professionals seeking to accomplish their work despite the security technologies and regulations.
 

Workarounds to computer access in healthcare are sufficiently common that they often go unnoticed. Clinicians focus on patient care, not cybersecurity. We argue and demonstrate that understanding workarounds to healthcare workers’ computer access requires not only analyses of computer rules, but also interviews and observations with clinicians. In addition, we illustrate the value of shadowing clinicians and conducing focus groups to understand their motivations and tradeoffs for circumvention. Ethnographic investigation of the medical workplace emerges as a critical method of research because in the inevitable conflict between even well-intended people versus the machines, it’s the people who are the more creative, flexible, and motivated. We conducted interviews and observations with hundreds of medical workers and with 19 cybersecurity experts, CIOs, CMIOs, CTO, and IT workers to obtain their perceptions of computer security. We also shadowed clinicians as they worked. We present dozens of ways workers ingeniously circumvent security rules. The clinicians we studied were not “black hat” hackers, but just professionals seeking to accomplish their work despite the security technologies and regulations.

Healthcare professionals have unique motivations, goals, perceptions, training, tensions, and behaviors, which guide workflow and often lead to unprecedented workarounds that weaken the efficacy of security policies and mechanisms. Identifying and understanding these factors that contribute to circumvention, as well as the acts of circumvention themselves, is key to designing, implementing, and maintaining security subsystems that achieve security goals in healthcare settings. To this end, we present our research on workarounds to computer security in healthcare settings without compromising the fundamental health goals. We argue and demonstrate that understanding workarounds to computer security, especially in medical settings, requires not only analyses of computer rules and processes, but also interviews and observations with users and security personnel. In addition, we discuss the value of shadowing clinicians and conducting focus groups with them to understand their motivations and tradeoffs for circumvention. Ethnographic investigation of workflow is paramount to achieving security objectives.

Conventional wisdom is that the textbook view describes reality, and only bad people (not good people trying to get their jobs done) break the rules. And yet it doesn't, and good people circumvent.
 

Maintaining the security and privacy hygiene of mobile apps is a critical challenge. Unfortunately, no program analysis algorithm can determine that an application is “secure” or “malware-free.” For example, if an application records audio during a phone call, it may be malware. However, the user may want to use such an application to record phone calls for archival and benign purposes. A key challenge for automated program analysis tools is determining whether or not that behavior is actually desired by the user (i.e., user expectation). This talk presents recent research progress in exploring user expectations in mobile app security.

Given the ever increasing number of research tools to automatically generate inputs to test Android applications (or simply apps), researchers recently asked the question "Are we there yet?" (in terms of the practicality of the tools). By conducting an empirical study of the various tools, the researchers found that Monkey (the most widely used tool of this category in industrial settings) outperformed all of the research tools in the study. In this paper, we present two signi cant extensions of that study. First, we conduct the rst industrial case study of applying Monkey against WeChat, a popular  messenger app with over 762 million monthly active users, and report the empirical ndings on Monkey's limitations in an industrial setting. Second, we develop a new approach to address major limitations of Monkey and accomplish substantial code-coverage improvements over Monkey. We conclude the paper with empirical insights for future enhancements to both Monkey and our approach.