
DeReact, DeFatigue and Deceive: Psychology for Better Cybersecurity Design
Failed to add items
Add to Cart failed.
Add to Wish List failed.
Remove from wishlist failed.
Adding to library failed
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
-
Narrated by:
-
By:
About this listen
Episode Notes:
- Dr. Reeves’ Background – Trained as a psychologist, his interest in cybersecurity emerged from a talk connecting human error to security breaches.
- Cybersecurity Fatigue Defined – A form of disengagement where employees lose motivation to follow security practices due to overload and conflicting advice.
- Not Just Apathy – Fatigue often affects people who initially cared about cybersecurity but were worn down by excessive or ineffective interventions.
- Training Shortcomings – Lecture-style, one-way training is frequently perceived as boring, irrelevant, or contradictory to users' experiences.
- Compliance vs. Effectiveness – Many organizations implement security training to meet legal requirements, even if it fails to change behavior.
- Reactance in Security – Users may intentionally ignore advice or rules to assert control, especially when training feels micromanaging or patronizing.
- Better Through Design – Reeves argues that secure systems should reduce the need for user decisions by simplifying or removing risky options altogether.
- Remove Rather Than Train – Limiting administrative rights is often more effective than trying to educate users out of risky behaviors.
- Mismatch With Reality – Generic training that conflicts with real policies or system restrictions can confuse or alienate users.
- Cognitive Load and Decision-Making – Under stress or fatigue, users rely on mental shortcuts (heuristics), which attackers exploit.
- Personal Example of Being Fooled – Reeves recounts nearly falling for a scam due to time pressure, illustrating how stress weakens judgment.
- Cybersecurity Buddy System – Recommends encouraging users to consult peers when making sensitive decisions, especially under pressure.
- Cyber Deception Strategies – Reeves now researches ways to mislead and trap attackers inside systems using decoys and tripwires.
- Applying Psychology to Attackers – The same behavioral models used to study users can help predict and manipulate attacker behavior.
- Empowering Defenders – Deception technologies can help security teams regain a sense of agency, shifting from reactive defense to proactive engagemen
About our guest:
Dr. Andrew Reeves
- https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewreevescyber/
- https://research.unsw.edu.au/people/dr-andrew-reeves
- https://www.unsw.edu.au/research/ifcyber
Papers or resources mentioned in this episode:
Reeves, A., Delfabbro, P., & Calic, D. (2021). Encouraging employee engagement with cybersecurity: How to tackle cyber fatigue. SAGE Open, 11(1).
https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211000049
Reeves, A., Calic, D., & Delfabbro, P. (2023). Generic and unusable: Understanding employee perceptions of cybersecurity training and measuring advice fatigue. Computers & Security, 128, 103137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2023.103137
Reeves, A., & Ashenden, D. (2023). Understanding decision making in security operations centres: Building the case for cyber deception technology. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1165705.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1165705
Other:
UNSW Institute for Cyber Security (IFCYBER)
https://www.unsw.edu.au/research/ifcyber