“Warning fatigue” means browser users ignore up to 70% of security alerts

http://www.welivesecurity.com/2013/...ser-users-ignore-up-to-70-of-security-alerts/

 

I get those "fake" warnings all the time, I ignore them always, no matter what webpage or even if it is a legitimate warning, I just want to go there. An example.

 

In my experience, it really is going to depend on the what generation is experiencing the pop-up.

Knowing my parents, I'd imagine it would probably go something like this:
Plan A: restart the computer, check the paper tray, check the ink cartridge. Cycle through a check list of other simple stuff.
Plan B: (Operating Dad can fix this)fiddle with it, reinstall software or operating system. Likely result: corrupt driver installation, data loss including the NIC information for the system.
Plan B: (Operation Mom) Buy a new machine or take it in for repair.

Knowing my friends in high school, they would probably do this:
Plan A: Google the error. Find a thousand different forums discussing a similar issue or the exact same one. They mentioned something about changing registry files and svchost.exe, but offer no easy fix. Finally found a toolkit, download it, infect computer. ****. It's blue screening. Search on another computer the costs of a repair. See an ad for the new MacBook Air.

Plan B.1: Time to by a Mac. 2 months later, get an infection. Geniuses offer to sell you a new Mac. Perpetual Cycle.

Plan B.2: Time to install Linux (free), spend the money I saved on the new COD and PS3.

All giggles aside, when you honestly think about the alerts types its no wonder users respond so irrationally. Either they are so cryptographic the user doesn't know what it means and guess. It provides no real information to troubleshoot, even for someone with the brains to Google. Or it produces a scary message, similar to those ones you read about online for randomsomeware and other scary stuff. Should you click okay, click the red X, ignore it? This seems to be a standard across applications, operating systems, and browsers. Honestly, who thought any of this was good idea? Am I the only one that thinks this is intentional so that users will just buy a new computer?

 

Oh, for the good old DOS days. I remember when DOS 5 first came out, how delighted we were that MS error messages finally made sense most of the time, plus more often than not suggested a useful fix. Good riddance, "bad command ... bad, BAD command."