Diffstat (limited to 'wiki/src/blueprint/SponsorW/2017_12.mdwn')
1 files changed, 157 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/wiki/src/blueprint/SponsorW/2017_12.mdwn b/wiki/src/blueprint/SponsorW/2017_12.mdwn
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,157 @@
+[[!meta title="Tails $MONTH $YEAR report"]]
+This report covers the activity of Tails in $MONTH $YEAR.
+Everything in this report is public.
+# A. VeraCrypt support in GNOME
+## A.1 Research user needs and implementation costs
+We analyzed the results of our online survey. We got 1011 complete answers for
+a participation rate of 1.97%. We think it was a great success!
+The detailed results are in our [[blueprint|blueprint/veracrypt#survey]].
+### Summary of our findings on VeraCrypt usage
+Justification of our work:
+ - 40% of Tails users are also VeraCrypt users, both inside and outside
+ - 60% of Tails+VeraCrypt users only use VeraCrypt outside of Tails.
+ - Most of Tails+VeraCrypt users are regular users of VeraCrypt.
+ - VeraCrypt is of more interest to people who are not using Linux as
+ their primary operating system.
+ - VeraCrypt is still a reference when people think about encrypting
+ - Integrating VeraCrypt in Tails will prevent dangerous behaviors:
+ *« I need to be able to open TrueCrypt file containers in Tails in
+ order to move files securely between Tails and Windows. Right now, I
+ have to copy my files unencrypted between Tails and Windows and this
+ is quite dangerous. »*
+Definition of the scope of our work:
+ - 85% of Tails+VeraCrypt users mostly don't use the .TC or .HC file extension.
+ - 76% of Tails+VeraCrypt users use file containers.
+ - 65% of Tails+VeraCrypt users use partitions.
+ - 65% of Tails+VeraCrypt users use hidden volumes.
+ - 55% of Tails+VeraCrypt users have legacy TrueCrypt volumes.
+ - 42% of Tails+VeraCrypt users use keyfiles.
+## A.2 UX & UI design sprint
+The main developer and the UX designer working on this project gathered for
+three days of sprint in Berlin, at the Onion Space, a coworking space of
+Internet freedom technologists, on December 8, 9, and 10.
+### Definition of the scope of our work
+We started by better defining the scope of our work based on the
+(through the survey) and technical feasibility (through the
+backend code written until now).
+The details is in our [[blueprint|blueprint/veracrypt#scope]] and here is a
+### Paper prototyping
+We created paper prototypes of the interactions that we designed for two key
+ - Scenario A: Unlocking a file container.
+ - Scenario B: Creating a new partition.
+Paper prototypes allowed us to
+ - make our ideas come to life without having to write a single line of code,
+ - create a shared understanding between designer and developer,
+ - and identify issues what we overlooked so far.
+Example of a paper prototype showing steps of scenario A, locating the file
+container and opening it using *VeraCrypt Mounter*:
+We created our prototypes using
+[WireframeSketcher](https://wireframesketcher.com/). WireframeSketcher is
+proprietary software but can be installed in Tails easily. It includes sketchy
+templates of all common user interface elements so you can create and modify
+sketches very rapidly.
+Paper prototyping was especially useful as our work modifies many bits and
+pieces of existing GNOME utilities. It wouldn't have been possible to create
+even a rough code prototype.
+### Formative testing with users
+At the end of the first day, we started testing our prototypes with users.
+During the sprint, we had seven people come over for sessions of one hour each.
+After each test we debriefed our findings and improved our design.
+We recruited the participants through a [blog post on our
+website](news/veracrypt_ux_design) and contacts we had in Berlin. We selected
+people who were users of both Tails and VeraCrypt and gave priority to people
+who were not using GNOME as their primary desktop environment.
+Since our work is meant to integrate VeraCrypt volumes in the native GNOME
+utilities, we actually didn't design a lot of new interfaces. We modified two
+existing dialogs of GNOME Disks for the creating of a new partition. Our
+changes are circled in blue:
+We designed a variant of the [GVfs](https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/gvfs)
+dialog for the opening of encrypted volumes to include the additional options
+required by VeraCrypt volumes:
+We designed *VeraCrypt Mounter*, a very simple application wrapper that makes
+it easier for users to learn how to use VeraCrypt in Tails and makes it faster
+to open file containers:
+The need for *VeraCrypt Mounter* arose as people *all* looked for *something
+called VeraCrypt* in the menus because this it how they use VeraCrypt in other
+operating systems. A paradox of our integration work is that it made using
+VeraCrypt volumes *too transparent* for people to learn about it easily.
+*VeraCrypt Mounter* would only be available in Tails. It's also optional in the
+scope of our work as it could be replaced with a launcher pointing to our
+documentation on VeraCrypt in Tails. Pointing to the documentation would lead
+to similar success rates and would teach people better how to use VeraCrypt in
+GNOME outside of Tails but it would be more time-consuming for first-time users
+and a bit more frustrating than having *VeraCrypt Mounter*.
+The most encouraging feedback that we got during the tests came from a digital
+security trainer. She came to the tests because she frequently teaches
+VeraCrypt but is very negative about the complexity and poor design of the
+native VeraCrypt interface. She ended up being extremely positive about our
+work as it finally looked like something she could teach people without too
+Having a better user experience than native VeraCrypt was not part of our
+objectives initially but we are know convinced that it will be a key outcome:
+our work will actually be much more usable than VeraCrypt itself.
+# B. Additional software
+# C. Deliver new features