Understanding the Viability of Gmail's Origin Indicator for Identifying the Sender
summary
Study uses an interactive survey with n=180 Gmail users to evaluate Gmail’s via indicator. The paper measures comprehension and behavior, finds 89% noticed the indicator but no statistically significant change in safer actions, reports 32% interpret “via” as an intermediary and 31% as the actual sender, and finds over half still believe random-looking via domains are owned by the purported sender. Authors test header variants, conclude the passive indicator fails to communicate risk and propose augmenting or removing it.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (8)
- 0:00Email sender verification
- 1:52Gmail’s Via indicator
- 3:38Study design with three groups
- 5:43Users notice Via indicator
- 7:27Via indicator meaning
- 9:14Via indicator misunderstandings
- 10:17Future for Via indicator
- 11:20Summary of findings
related talks
12m"I don’t know why I check this...'' Investigating Expert Users' Strategies to Detect...
09mPresenting Suspicious Details in User-Facing E-mail Headers Does Not Improve...
24mEnd-to-End Measurements of Email Spoofing Attacks
22mNot that Simple: Email Delivery in the 21st Century
43mExploiting Curiosity and Context: How to Make People Click on a Dangerous Link...
13mWhat Drives SMiShing Susceptibility? A U.S. Interview Study of How and Why Mobile Phone
28mAn Inconvenient Trust: User Attitudes Toward Security and Usability Tradeoffs...
56mEmail vs Capitalism, or, Why We Can't Have Nice Things