Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Risk

9/23/2008
08:50 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Phony Pop-Up Warning Messages Dupe Most Users

New research from NC State University shows how even savvy users fall for malicious system error messages

You can’t count on most users to do the right thing when they’re faced with fake pop-up warning windows, according to new research.

The study, conducted by researchers in the North Carolina State University Psychology Department, looked at whether visual design cues in a malicious warning message would give it away as a phony. Most users can't detect the cues, the study says.

Participants were fooled by phony system error messages 63 percent of the time. That means that they chose the “OK” button in the message box, rather than closing it or minimizing it, according to the study. Only 27 percent of the participants closed out the warning box.

The real Windows XP pop-up and the three fake ones used in the study had similar look and feel, but with a few differences. The text message was the same for all four pop-ups: “The instruction at ‘0x77f41d24’ referenced memory at ‘0x595c2a4c.’ The memory could not be ‘read.’ Click OK to terminate program.”

The first fake warning message had a visible minimize button and changed the cursor to a hand icon when the mouse hovered over it. The second phony one had the same features, plus a flashing background from black to white. The third fake message displayed a minimize button, the Internet browser status bar, and changed the cursor to a hand icon when hovering over the “OK” button.

Over 40 undergraduates participated in the study, using Windows XP Service Pack 2, a MySQL database used to collect participant responses, and a specially designed Internet browser simulator. The participants were not aware of the actual purpose of the study, but were told to rate 20 health-related Websites for clutter on the page via an online rating scale. During that process, the subjects received the four types of error messages.

The researchers discovered in a post-study survey of the participants that even most of those who were aware of the existence of fake pop-up warning windows were duped. Around 12 percent of participants said they clicked on the OK button in the pop-up because the text instructed them to do so, and 23 percent say they always click on OK when they receive an error message. Over 40 percent said they did so because they wanted to “get rid of” the box, and 23 percent had various other reasons for hitting OK.

Getting hit with multiple warnings didn’t do much to improve their ability to distinguish the bad from the legit, either. The majority of respondents fell for the fake ones over and over again.

The researchers -- David Sharek, Cameron Swofford, and Michael Wogalter -- say one solution to the problem of users falling for phony pop-up warnings would be for vendors to create noticeable and “unique” features in their error messages, as well as educating users on what to look out for. But, they acknowledge, the bad guys could then potentially mimic these pop-ups as well.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Sodinokibi Ransomware: Where Attackers' Money Goes
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  10/15/2019
Data Privacy Protections for the Most Vulnerable -- Children
Dimitri Sirota, Founder & CEO of BigID,  10/17/2019
7 SMB Security Tips That Will Keep Your Company Safe
Steve Zurier, Contributing Writer,  10/11/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: The old using of sock puppets for Shoulder Surfing technique. 
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
2019 Online Malware and Threats
2019 Online Malware and Threats
As cyberattacks become more frequent and more sophisticated, enterprise security teams are under unprecedented pressure to respond. Is your organization ready?
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-17513
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-18
An issue was discovered in Ratpack before 1.7.5. Due to a misuse of the Netty library class DefaultHttpHeaders, there is no validation that headers lack HTTP control characters. Thus, if untrusted data is used to construct HTTP headers with Ratpack, HTTP Response Splitting can occur.
CVE-2019-8216
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-17
Adobe Acrobat and Reader versions , 2019.012.20040 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2015.006.30503 and earlier, and 2015.006.30503 and earlier have an out-of-bounds read vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to information disclosure .
CVE-2019-8217
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-17
Adobe Acrobat and Reader versions , 2019.012.20040 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2015.006.30503 and earlier, and 2015.006.30503 and earlier have an use after free vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to arbitrary code execution .
CVE-2019-8218
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-17
Adobe Acrobat and Reader versions , 2019.012.20040 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2015.006.30503 and earlier, and 2015.006.30503 and earlier have an out-of-bounds read vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to information disclosure .
CVE-2019-8219
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-17
Adobe Acrobat and Reader versions , 2019.012.20040 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2017.011.30148 and earlier, 2015.006.30503 and earlier, and 2015.006.30503 and earlier have an use after free vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to arbitrary code execution .