Security vs. Usability
Good essay: “When Security Gets in the Way.”
The numerous incidents of defeating security measures prompts my cynical slogan: The more secure you make something, the less secure it becomes. Why? Because when security gets in the way, sensible, well-meaning, dedicated people develop hacks and workarounds that defeat the security. Hence the prevalence of doors propped open by bricks and wastebaskets, of passwords pasted on the fronts of monitors or hidden under the keyboard or in the drawer, of home keys hidden under the mat or above the doorframe or under fake rocks that can be purchased for this purpose.
We are being sent a mixed message: on the one hand, we are continually forced to use arbitrary security procedures. On the other hand, even the professionals ignore many of them. How is the ordinary person to know which ones matter and which don’t? The confusion has unexpected negative side-effects. I once discovered a computer system that was missing essential security patches. When I queried the computer’s user, I discovered that the continual warning against clicking on links or agreeing to requests from pop-up windows had been too effective. This user was so frightened of unwittingly agreeing to install all those nasty things from “out there” that all requests were denied, even the ones for essential security patches. On reflection, this is sensible behavior: It is very difficult to distinguish the legitimate from the illegitimate. Even experts slip up, as the confessions reported occasionally in various computer digests I attest.
Clive Robinson • August 5, 2009 6:29 AM
….
“The more secure you make something, the less secure it becomes.”
Is somewhat true due to the human aspect. (ie it’s less usable from the user point so they work around it).
The so called “Usability -v- Security See-saw”.
However, what is less commonly known is that there is another, which is the,
“Efficiency -v- Security See-Saw”
Put simply the more efficient a system is at serving out it’s resources the less secure it is.
Basically “efficiency” opens up “side/covert” channels that can be exploited actively/passively to the detriment of the system owner/user.
And unlike crypto “certification failures” these are real nasty implementation dependant and quite easily exploitable and are very very difficult to spot depending on the bandwidth of the channel.
Worse an ordinary user on the system can simply by “doing their work” effectively turn these channels on and off simply by the load they place on the system.
Currently they are very real very practical attacks on secure systems based on COTS components, and little if nothing is being done about them.