Internet users often neglect important security actions (e.g., installing security updates or changing passwords) because they interrupt users’ main task at inopportune times. Commitment devices, such as reminders and promises, have been found to be effective at reducing procrastination in other domains. In a series of online experiments ( \(n{\gt}3{,}000\) ), we explored the effects of reminders and promises on users’ willingness to change a compromised password. We find that adding an option to delay the task increases the share of people willing to eventually change their password considerably. Critically, the option to delay yields this overall increase without reducing the share of people choosing to change their password immediately. Additionally, most participants who promised to change their password later, or asked to be reminded to do so, indeed followed through on their commitment, leading to a net positive effect. Reminding participants of their previous commitment further increased this effect.

Commitment devices are a technique from behavioral economics that have been shown to mitigate the effects of present bias---the tendency to discount future risks and gains in favor of immediate gratifications. In this paper, we explore the feasibility of using commitment devices to nudge users towards complying with varying online security mitigations. Using two online experiments, with over 1,000 participants total, we offered participants the option to be reminded or to schedule security tasks in the future. We find that both reminders and commitment nudges can increase users' intentions to install security updates and enable two-factor authentication, but not to configure automatic backups. Using qualitative data, we gain insights into the reasons for postponement and how to improve future nudges. We posit that current nudges may not live up to their full potential, as the timing options offered to users may be too rigid.

The Security Behavior Intentions Scale (SeBIS) measures the computer security attitudes of end-users. Because intentions are a prerequisite for planned behavior, the scale could therefore be useful for predicting users' computer security behaviors. We performed three experiments to identify correlations between each of SeBIS's four sub-scales and relevant computer security behaviors. We found that testing high on the awareness sub-scale correlated with correctly identifying a phishing website; testing high on the passwords sub-scale correlated with creating passwords that could not be quickly cracked; testing high on the updating sub-scale correlated with applying software updates; and testing high on the securement sub-scale correlated with smartphone lock screen usage (e.g., PINs). Our results indicate that SeBIS predicts certain computer security behaviors and that it is a reliable and valid tool that should be used in future research.

Despite the plethora of security advice and online education materials offered to end-users, there exists no standard measurement tool for end-user security behaviors. We present the creation of such a tool. We surveyed the most common computer security advice that experts offer to end-users in order to construct a set of Likert scale questions to probe the extent to which respondents claim to follow this advice. Using these questions, we iteratively surveyed a pool of 3,619 computer users to refine our question set such that each question was applicable to a large percentage of the population, exhibited adequate variance between respondents, and had high reliability (i.e., desirable psychometric properties). After performing both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, we identified a 16-item scale consisting of four sub-scales that measures attitudes towards choosing passwords, device securement, staying up-to-date, and proactive awareness.

While individual differences in decision-making have been examined within the social sciences for several decades, they have only recently begun to be applied by computer scientists to examine privacy and security attitudes (and ultimately behaviors). Specifically, several researchers have shown how different online privacy decisions are correlated with the "Big Five" personality traits. In this paper, we show that the five factor model is actually a weak predictor of privacy attitudes, and that other well-studied individual differences in the psychology literature are much stronger predictors. Based on this result, we introduce the new paradigm of psychographic targeting of privacy and security mitigations: we believe that the next frontier in privacy and security research will be to tailor mitigations to users' individual differences. We explore the extensive work on choice architecture and "nudges," and discuss the possible ways it could be leveraged to improve security outcomes by personalizing privacy and security mitigations to specific user traits.