skip to main content
10.1145/3383668.3419917acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

The Social Engineer: An Immersive Virtual Reality Educational Game to Raise Social Engineering Awareness

Published:03 November 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

As system infrastructures are becoming more secure against technical attacks, it is more difficult for attackers to overcome them with technical means. Social engineering instead exploits the human factor of information security and can have a significant impact on organizations. The lack of awareness about social engineering favors the successful realization of social engineering attacks, as employees do not recognize them as such early enough, resulting in high costs for the affected company. Current training approaches and awareness courses are limited in their versatility and create little motivation for employees to deal with the topic. The high immersion of virtual reality can improve learning in this context. We created The Social Engineer, an immersive educational game in virtual reality, to raise awareness and to sensitize players about social engineering. The player impersonates a penetration tester and conducts security audits in a virtually simulated company. The game consists of a detailed game world containing three distinct missions that require the player to apply different social engineering attack methods. Our concept enables the game to be highly extensible and flexible regarding different playable scenarios and settings. The Social Engineer can potentially benefit companies as an immersive self-training tool for their employees, support security experts in teaching social engineering awareness as part of a comprehensive training course, and entertain interested individuals by leveraging fun and innovative gameplay mechanics.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

cpsd1001vf.mp4

mp4

90.7 MB

References

  1. IO Interactive A/S. 2016. Hitman. Game [Microsoft Windows]. (11 March 2016). Square Enix, Tokyo, Japan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Kristian Beckers and Sebastian Pape. 2016. A serious game for eliciting social engineering security requirements. In 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE). IEEE, 16--25.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. John P Ceraolo. 1996. Penetration testing through social engineering. Information systems security 4, 4 (1996), 37--48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Nic Chantler and Roderic Broadhurst. 2008. Social engineering and crime prevention in cyberspace. Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Criminology (2008), 65--92.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Meng-Tzu Cheng, Yu-Wen Lin, Hsiao-Ching She, and Po-Chih Kuo. 2017. Is immersion of any value? Whether, and to what extent, game immersion experience during serious gaming afects science learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 48, 2 (2017), 246--263.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Marilyn Cohodas. 2014. Poll: Employees Clueless About Social Engineering. https://www.darkreading.com/perimeter/poll-employees-clueless-aboutsocial-engineering-/a/d-id/1316280. (Accessed on 04/05/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Darina Dicheva, Christo Dichev, Gennady Agre, and Galia Angelova. 2015. Gamiication in education: A systematic mapping study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 18, 3 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Trajce Dimkov, André Van Cleef, Wolter Pieters, and Pieter Hartel. 2010. Two methodologies for physical penetration testing using social engineering. In Proceedings of the 26th annual computer security applications conference. 399--408.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Matt Dixon, Nalin Asanka Gamagedara Arachchilage, and James Nicholson. 2019. Engaging Users with Educational Games: The Case of Phishing. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Tobias Drey, Pascal Jansen, Fabian Fischbach, Julian Frommel, and Enrico Rukzio. 2020. Towards Progress Assessment for Adaptive Hints in Educational Virtual Reality Games. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Eidos-Montréal. 2014. Thief. Game [Microsoft Windows]. (25 February 2014). Square Enix, Tokyo, Japan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Enrico Frumento. 2018. Social Engineering: an IT Security problem doomed to get worse. https://medium.com/our-insights/social-engineering-an-it-securityproblem-doomed-to-get-worst-c9429ccf3330. (Accessed on 04/02/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. HTC Corporation. 2020. VIVE? | Discover Virtual Reality Beyond Imagination. https://www.vive.com (Accessed on 06/01/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Imperva. 2019. What is Social Engineering | Attack Techniques & Prevention Methods | Incapsula. https://www.incapsula.com/web-application-security/socialengineering-attack.html (Accessed on 06/01/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Klei Entertainment Inc. 2015. Invisible, Inc. Game [Microsoft Windows]. (12 May 2015). Klei Entertainment Inc., Vancouver, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Katharina Krombholz, Heidelinde Hobel, Markus Huber, and Edgar Weippl. 2015. Advanced social engineering attacks. Journal of Information Security and Applications 22 (jun 2015), 113--122. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JISA.2014.09.005Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Guido Makransky, Stefan Borre-Gude, and Richard E Mayer. 2019. Motivational and cognitive beneits of training in immersive virtual reality based on multiple assessments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 35, 6 (2019), 691--707.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Efthymia Metalidou, Catherine Marinagi, Panagiotis Trivellas, Niclas Eberhagen, Christos Skourlas, and Georgios Giannakopoulos. 2014. The human factor of information security: Unintentional damage perspective. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 147 (2014), 424--428.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Martin Mink and Felix C Freiling. 2006. Is attack better than defense? Teaching information security the right way. In Proceedings of the 3rd annual conference on Information security curriculum development. 44--48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Konstantin Mitgutsch and Matthew J Weise. 2011. Subversive game design for recursive learning. (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Francois Mouton, Mercia M Malan, Louise Leenen, and Hein S Venter. 2014. Social engineering attack framework. In 2014 Information Security for South Africa. IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Pierluigi Paganini. 2018. The Most Common Social Engineering Attacks. https://resources.infosecinstitute.com/common-social-engineering-attacks/(Accessed on 06/01/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Meisam Rezaeian, Nader Sale Gilani, and Hadi Modaghegh. 2015. Information Security Management In Iranian Smart Metering Project. (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Kevin Richards, Ryan LaSalle, M Devost, F van der Dool, and J Kennedy-White. 2017. Cost of cybercrime study, insight on the security investments that make a diference. Ponemon Institute LLC, MI, USA (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Schutzwerk GmbH. 2020. Welcome To Schutzwerk. https://www.schutzwerk.com (Accessed on 03/01/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Unity Technologies. 2020. Unity Real-Time Development Platform. https://unity.com (Accessed on 06/01/2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Maria Virvou and George Katsionis. 2008. On the usability and likeability of virtual reality games for education: The case of VR-ENGAGE.computers & Education 50, 1 (2008), 154--178.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Gavin Watson, Andrew Mason, and Richard Ackroyd. 2014. Social engineering penetration testing: executing social engineering pen tests, assessments and defense. Syngress.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Alvin M Weinberg. 1966. Can technology replace social engineering? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 22, 10 (1966), 4--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Zikai Alex Wen, Zhiqiu Lin, Rowena Chen, and Erik Andersen. 2019. What. hack: engaging anti-phishing training through a role-playing phishing simulation game. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Michael Workman. 2007. Gaining access with social engineering: An empirical study of the threat. Information Systems Security 16, 6 (2007), 315--331.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Nima Zargham, Mehrdad Bahrini, Georg Volkmar, Dirk Wenig, Karsten Sohr, and Rainer Malaka. 2019. What Could Go Wrong? Raising Mobile Privacy and Security Awareness Through a Decision-Making Game. In Extended Abstracts of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play Companion Extended Abstracts. 805--812.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Social Engineer: An Immersive Virtual Reality Educational Game to Raise Social Engineering Awareness

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CHI PLAY '20: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
            November 2020
            435 pages
            ISBN:9781450375870
            DOI:10.1145/3383668

            Copyright © 2020 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 3 November 2020

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • short-paper

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate421of1,386submissions,30%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader