- The report finds that humans have seen malware with a precision rate of 88%
- Additional tools such as the task manager can help them identify it even more
- There are still fairly common false ideas surrounding the certificates
A new report by researchers from the University of Guelph and the University of Waterloo has revealed a slight improvement in human detection of potential threats of cybersecurity, but warned that we are still missing too many signs.
The small study of 36 participants (also divided between basic, intermediate and advanced PC users) faced them with six distinct software samples, half of which included malicious software, with different levels of assistance.
Participants have already managed to note an 88% malware detection precision in the face of potential threats, but this has further improved at 94% with the use of an improved task management interface, showing details such as the use of the processor, network activity and access to files.
Humans are not too bad to detect malware
Despite relatively strong detection, the researchers observed three false keys.
Use users have generally misinterpreted the UAC shield icon as a security sign while demonstrating a lack of understanding of digital certificates. They also noted a reversal of file names and interface aesthetics.
Users’ detection techniques varied according to their experience levels, basic users based strongly on superficial clues such as icons, typing faults and aesthetics.
Intermediate users were able to improve their accuracy with additional system data, but advanced users have often taken a step backwards by over-analyzing threats, leading to false positives.
In this particular test, researchers were able to identify 25 separate secondary indicators that users used to determine whether something is a threat or not, in addition to four main indicators.
One of the newspaper’s limitations mentions the fact that the participants knew that they were trying to identify malware-the victims without distrust downloading files from the web are not often as lucky to have a tête-à-tête.
However, research is particularly precious for developers, who can use the results to modify their software “to eradicate false ideas and improve interfaces and notifications related to security”.
