<. Oakland 2012.
- M. Mazurek et al. [Measuring Password Guessability for an Entire University](https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~lbauer/papers/2013/ccs2013-real-passwords.pdf). CCS 2013.
- B. Ur et al. [Design and Evaluation of a Data-Driven Password Meter](https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3025453.3026050). CHI 2017.
- S. Pearman et al. [Why people (don’t) use password managers effectively](https://www.usenix.org/system/files/soups2019-pearman.pdf). SOUPS 2019.
For each paper you select, you should write a short (1-page) review containing
the following information:
1. Which paper you read and a 1-2 sentence summary of the paper.
2. A more in-depth outline of the main points of the paper, including the type
of study conducted, data collected, analysis methodology used, and conclusions
drawn.
3. Any limitations you see of this paper.
4. Possible extensions or follow-up projects relating to this work.
5. Your opinion of the paper, primarily, the quality of the ideas and its
potential impact.
Prior to reading your selected papers, I strongly recommend checking out [this
advice](https://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~michaelm/postscripts/ReadPaper.pdf) on
how to read a research paper.
**What to submit** A pdf entitled `r1.pdf` containing your two reviews to
assignment R1: Password Readings
### Part 2: IRB Proposal
Your second task is to submit an IRB proposal to the Pomona IRB through the
[Axiom Mentor IRB Management System](https://www.axiommentor.com/login/shibLogin.cfm?i=pomona). Only one person in your group should create and submit the
IRB proposal; other group members should be listed as co-PIs. Note this this
will involve several steps, and that the software is quite terrible.
I'd recommend that you start early. Required steps will include:
- Creating a new protocol in the Axiom Mentor system. Note that you must list
me as your Faculty Advisor, and you must ensure that the "Send Notification to
Faculty Advisor" box is checked. See the [Axiom Mentor Instructions](Student-NewIRBProtocol.pdf) for more details.
- Determining what sort of review is required. When you create a new protocol,
it will recommend that you take a survey to determine the correct level of
review. In most cases, your course project should be eligible for exempt
review. If you plan to include people under 18, then you will need to do a full
board review; you will also need to complete an additional [checklist](irb-children-investigator-checklist.doc) and attach it to your proposal. *If you are unsure what the right level of review is, check with
me as soon as possible!*
- Answering the required questions. The precise questions will depend on the
level of review selected. Some of them you may be able to use your answers from
A4 (incorporating any comments/feedback from me where appropriate). If you are
unsure how to answer some question, I recommend talking to me.
- Attaching additional protocol materials. This will include any interview
scripts/survey questions/etc that you will use for your course project. This
will also include a consent form that participants should complete (for online
studies, a checkbox on a survey is generally ok). I'd recommend starting with
this [consent form template](Consent-template.docx) and adjusting the details
to match your study.
- Approval from me. You will not be able to submit your proposal to the
actual IRB until I've approved it. Expect to need at least one round of revisions before I will do so.
**What to submit** No need to submit anything to Gradescope for this part,
just submit your protocol proposal on Axiom Mentor.
### Part 3: Feedback
Create a file named `feedback.txt` that answers the following questions:
1. How long did you spend on this assignment?
2. Any comments or feedback? Things you found interesting? Things you found challenging? Things you found boring?
**What to submit** Your file `feedback.txt`
]]>