Usable and secure? User perception of four authentication methods for mobile banking
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2022 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Computers & Security |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2022.102603 |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2022.102603 |
| Keywords | authentication; fingerprint; PIN; token; card reader; usable security; user study; online banking |
| Description | Smartphone authentication is becoming a cornerstone security component, so it is necessary to have methods that are usable and secure to ensure adequate protection, especially for mobile banking. Though biometric authentication seems to be perceived as very usable by users, there is a lack of research to compare smartphone-based fingerprint verification to other authentication methods for mobile banking in terms of usability and perceived security. Using two independent samples, we conducted a study for a younger group aged 26-54 (N?=?229) and an older group aged 55+ (N?=?239) about their perceptions of the usability and security of four authentication methods: fingerprint, PIN, token, and card reader. All four methods were evaluated positively for both usability and security, with fingerprint verification evaluated as the most usable and the most secure method for mobile banking. Interestingly, none of our hypothesized predictors (i.e., age, gender, education, smartphone self-efficacy, smartphone security behaviour, knowledge of secure smartphone behaviour) was consistently related to how users perceive the usability and security of the examined methods. This suggests that smartphone users would be able to successfully adopt, and be quite satisfied with, any of the tested methods, regardless of demography or smartphone skills. |
| Related projects: |