Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
Fujitsu Ltd and Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd have announced the development of the industry's first technology for identifying users vulnerable to cyberattacks based on the ways they use their computers, such as their e-mail and web activities. This will make it possible to implement security measures tailored to individuals and organizations.
While there are numerous security measures already in existence, the weakness that most cyberattacks and data breaches take advantage of is human error, such as, for example, when a user carelessly clicks on a malicious link in a faked e-mail message. Because this depends on individual traits, it is difficult to develop a standardized security measure to defend against it.
Fujitsu and Fujitsu Laboratories used online questionnaires to identify the relationship between the psychological traits and behavior of people likely to suffer three kinds of attack: virus infections, scams, and data leakage. At the same time, based on activity logs on PCs, such as when the PCs freeze, they have developed a technology for calculating different users' risks of being victimized.
This technology could be used to precisely tailor security measures, such as, for example, by displaying individualized warning messages to users who often click on URLs in suspicious e-mail messages without checking them carefully, or escalating the threat level of suspicious e-mails sent between departments with virus-prone users.
© JCN Newswire
8 Comments
Login to comment
ArtistAtLarge
The biggest problem is still the end user. Modern firewalls and anti virus are more than adequate for protection and many of them are free! Yet people still do not utilize these tools and even some companies are often lax in the implementation of these defenses.
That said, congratulations to Fujitsu. Improvement in cyber defense is always a good thing.
volland
Artist... when was the last time your AV actually found a virus????? Which you had caught while not on a porn-site?
Almost all finds, without exception, are false positives... I turned off my AV software for one whole months and then used several AVs incl malwarebytes and stinger and stinger,,, ZERO! And trust me I am all over the place.
Next thought... Do you actually believ that these AVs will protect youa against the worst viruses of all, government spying?
Just think about it... These AVs have total access tio your WHOLE computer, think of the possibilities....
LFRAgain
What on the earth are you talking about? AV software from the 90s?! False positives do indeed exist and have caused serious problems for computer users, but they are the exception rather than the norm. Your claim of *"almost quite contrary to what you would have readers believe.
False positive frequency rates for various AV software suites is researched vigorously by a number of independent sources, including PC Magazine, AV Comparatives, and Virus Bulletin, and the results are publicly ranked for consumer perusal. Obviously, some software performs worse than others, but the claim that the vast majority of results given by AV software are false positives is patently untrue. At the low end, poorly-performing software had false positive rates of 10~11%. But some of the best performing software kept false positive rates down to less than 0.2 percent.
It should be noted that in the realm of false positive research, Microsoft Security Essentials AV suite, the clear go-to AV solution for the casual PC user since it’s already automatically bundled with the oft-maligned Windows OS, consistently provides the best performance in the industry in terms of low occurrence of false positives. This is significant as the overwhelming majority of PC users simply never think about the AV protection while they click happily away to the next Nigerian diamond mine “trust me” e-mail. These folks need their AV software.
Suggesting that people simply ditch their AV software and go commando, so to speak, is not only irresponsible, but also wholly unsubstantiated. The intentional spread of misinformation like yours is as much a part of the problem of virus proliferation as people foolishly opening files they shouldn't or believing in offers that are obviously too good to be true.
albaleo
"Microsoft Security Essentials AV suite ...,consistently provides the best performance in the industry in terms of low occurrence of false positives. "
I've read that MSE has slipped down the rankings for security since 2009 when it ranked top. So I'm wondering if a low occurrence of false positives is just a consequence of low positives overall. I see it described these days as "baseline" security. On the other hand, it's what I use on Windows 7. (But I only use Windows for a few tasks, and never for e-mail.)
ArtistAtLarge
Volland, it's not the frequency of viruses, it's the devastating effect of just one getting through and yes, one got through a few years ago and if it weren't for the AV, I would not have a chance of repairing my PC at all.
Do you wear a seat belt when driving because you have a lot of accidents?
But it's not just AV, but firewalls and inoculation (passive AV) that are required these days. If you stop the virus from getting in, it's far better than trying to stop it once it is in. I use all three and only the occasional malware/spyware gets through, but is easily eradicated with the daily update.
Most OS's now come with their own brand of AV and firewall and they work good, but only if you keep the updates up.
Professionally, I still see infections every week. Never forget, it is literally an arms race between virus writers and AV.
William Hal Harkrider
****In the USA hacking goes for rare bloodtype..the hackers are led by the crime stoppers. Freq.by telephone exchange 287...278... etc near 170 Hrz federal prison usa.
volland
Artist at large... do you read your comments?
"A few years ago one was actually there..."
People pay for that garbage, because they do not know that it is more probable that an asteroid will hit earth tomorrow than that a free AV will miss something, that a pay AV will find...
I had pro versions of Avast, of malwarebytes and uninstalled both nofthem because they kept pestering me with warnings of websites I personally knew... And they apologized to me for not being able to do anything about it! I do not know who buys their products, other than huge companies....
lostrune2
An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.
The cost of antivirus/antispyware is minimal compared to the cost and time repairing the damage afterwards.
Remember, PEBKAC! It only takes once.