There are some big problems with panic button:
- it is hard to click on it (you have to be accurate)
- it takes time to select it (and a huge amount of time if you are on laptop without a mouse)
- it saves you in history
- it is accessible via back button / backspace.
And how about the panicking random moves of a woman who is trying to quickly click on that button, when she was reading this. What if she will miss the button from the first attempt?
So if there are really human lives that could be saved, this is kind of bad idea.
The better way is to show them normal way of doing this (via some sort of help before you can possibly enter this site). It can be something like this:
Depending on the browser of a user you give them a list of steps to do which use only keyboard (no mouse at all). For example if she is on chrome.
- open a website you like (FB, twitter, funny bunnies and pretend like you are doing something).
- Press CRTL+SHIFT+N (opens incognito window) which will not allow backspace / history tricks
- enter our site there (no copypasting to prevent checking what is inside of your buffer)
- Read the stuff and always keep your hands on the keyboard close to CRTL and W
- In case of emergency press CRTL+W
- Continue starring at your FB, twitter, funny bunny
Surely you have to modify your explanation in appropriate language. But this way it is really hard to get caught. Also tell about sitting next to mirrors and other reflection surfaces like windows, glasses and other things. Ask them to try using these combination for some time to be familiar.
If human lives are involved, you have to be professional and do not use these panic buttons. Especially if it is so easy to teach people how to do it quicker and more secure.
Answer to Nobius
I got you point, thank you. But I disagree with your point.
After a lot of campaign for it to be put on FB, have you actually seen it on FB? I have not. Nontechnical people are notorious for coming up with ridiculously bad ideas, some of which you might have experienced (preventing right click on banks' pages to improve security, 4 digit passwords to be easier to type from mobile phones). Pressing a button sounds easier, but look at my list of steps - the only thing you need to do in a stressful situation is pressing CTRL+W. You do not need to think in terms of tabs, modes and other things. This comes up to basic pattern - see someone, press CTRL+W. In my opinion this is not difficult at all and easy to remember. It is by far not harder than to remember to click on the button. Everything else you have to read in a normal atmosphere.
Pressing 2 buttons is MUCH faster than moving mouse, and it is really hard to miss them when your fingers are on them (do an experiment and put yourself in stress full situation and try to quickly click on that button). Also as I mentioned - I see at least four reasons how something can go wrong in panic button situation, whereas I see much less in reasons in CRTL+W. If humans lives are involve - you need to be professional.
Answer to NicolasMoise. Why people keep saying that you need to be tech savvy for pressing CTRL+W? I am not trying to show people how to use TOR, VPN, setting up encryption channel. This is just CTRL+W. People learned how to play angry birds to waist their time (which is much harder than to remember 2 buttons), so people can learn CRTL+W to save their lives. Tutorial can be shown in such a way that observer can not understand why you are reading this (when you see my list of steps, I do not believe that the first guess would be - ah this is for women abuse site).
But most probably giving people perception of false safety is much better. The answer is not off-topic. The person is asking how to implement panic button - and I am explaining why is the current way flawed and what can he do to do it better. It is on the same level as 'I want to make communication secure and I am using substitution cypher', yes you can improve the speed of his cypher and pretend that everything is OK, or you can show another way.
One last attempt to explain my additional point: you have to properly explain people the risks behind your approach. A good example when people suffered from not explaining problems properly was the issue with Belorussian bloggers, who thought that posting anonymously on the internet will make them untraceable from governmental repressions. The resource gave them false belief that they are save if they do not provide their real identity. They learned that this is not true in the hard way (when they were jailed for few years).
If someone would explain them the risk I think some of them would be happy to learn how to use any tool to save their next five years.
So why not to give women few options:
- you can use approach A right away, and here are the list of problems you can encounter.
- you can use approach B, which requires X minutes during the first time to read and to understand something. And then your list of possible problems decreases to a smaller list.
And let them decide what they want to do. This way they know the risks.
