About a week late, but updated: https://github.com/tomrittervg/crypto-usability-study
Some of the larger Open Questions: - Are we settled on unicorns? (This is more about how it's generated: http://unicornify.appspot.com/making-of) - We have two participants speaking fingerprints aloud to each other. Do we want them to do it over a cell phone to add difficulty, or just omit that bit? - We're settled on not trying to do a head-fake? -tom On 13 March 2014 09:29, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]> wrote: > On 03/13/2014 02:18 AM, Tom Ritter wrote: >> On 11 March 2014 00:41, Trevor Perrin <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Fingerprint Types >>> - Visual and poetry fingerprints seem worth including. >> >> Does anyone have a preference for type of visual fingerprint? Some of >> the implementations I know of are: >> - Identicons: >> http://haacked.com/archive/2007/01/22/Identicons_as_Visual_Fingerprints.aspx/ >> - Monsters: http://www.splitbrain.org/projects/monsterid >> - Wavatars: http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1462 >> - Unicorns (really) >> http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/37328/my-godits-full-of-unicorns >> >> I think I will go with identicons unless anyone really thinks unicorns >> is better ;) > > i think for all of the above, we're going to have a difficult time > designing credible similarity metrics that roughly match the metrics > used by the "fuzzy fingerprinting" work. > > i do ♥ the unicorns though. > > --dkg > > _______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list [email protected] https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
