Chevron Left
Back to Usable Security

Learner Reviews & Feedback for Usable Security by University of Maryland, College Park

4.5
stars
2,144 ratings
514 reviews

About the Course

This course focuses on how to design and build secure systems with a human-centric focus. We will look at basic principles of human-computer interaction, and apply these insights to the design of secure systems with the goal of developing security measures that respect human performance and their goals within a system....

Top reviews

IR

Jun 21, 2016

I like how in depth this gets. it explains it very well an in ways for people who are starting off in this field to get a basic understanding in exactly what we are learning. very well put together!

DG

Jun 29, 2016

Despite not being very fond of areas such as human-computer interaction, I found this course to be well-presented and useful. Definitely a necessity for anyone planning on building secure software.

Filter by:

451 - 475 of 503 Reviews for Usable Security

By heer v

Mar 24, 2019

grate eaxplanation...

By Mohanad E

May 21, 2017

It's a good course

By Oladapo O A

Dec 11, 2016

Very Good course

By Netho J K L

Jul 23, 2020

It's verry good

By Aritra C

Apr 11, 2020

Greate to learn

By Morten V C

Oct 20, 2019

Very usefull.

By Rishi P T

Mar 03, 2020

Basic things

By ikwak

Oct 03, 2017

Thanks! :)

By Ajay

May 23, 2020

good

By Shriram

Mar 23, 2020

good

By Inna T

Apr 18, 2020

This course does not cover a lot of content and has more connection do design and HCI rather than security. There is no support in discussions, no discussions. There is only one assignment and it says in the instructions you will be able to upload a screenshot. Apparently that feature was forgotten because you can’t, you need to use an outside service and paste a link. There are words in reading that were supposed to be URLs but don’t work (like it says “click here” but “here” is not a link). The course feels sloppy and not very useful.

By Ricardo L C T

Aug 07, 2018

confusing, low quality of video discussions, low quality of presenters on the felling they are not prepared to discuss in the panel. low quality of quiz with question not covered. asked to read a very long paper about SSL that is a research of a class study not relevant for the informative intent of the course. took me too much time for me to read and I gave up the SSL paper.

By Amarender B

Jun 17, 2017

Contents seems repeatative . Also When you already discussing the PDF contents in video lecture, I don't see asking to complete PDF reading before video lecture. I have spent reading the doc and felt I could complete the course much faster if i could skip reading some big PDFs. Otherwise it is good.

By Rob C

Jan 23, 2018

There are some questions that can be debated for clarity. Example: A company creates a password V^$5t.b2. Is this easy to crack no. But the question ALSO says it's given to the employee on a piece of paper. Is this easy? Yes, there's paper laying around with passwords on them.

By Burak İ

Aug 08, 2020

The course is so old. Even the concept is still the same, the versions of applications that takes part in the videos are really old. The versions of gmail that took part in some week's lecture seems at least 3-4 years old.

By Jacek E

Nov 01, 2019

Well prepared and interesting lectures. However, for a intermediate course, I've expected more comprehensive content. Let's see what the next courses for the cybersecurity specialization have to offer.

By Johnny O

May 13, 2016

Videos with guest speakers were unhelpful. Also, quizzes were not accurate and poorly written questions.

By Jeroen R

Apr 24, 2016

OK, but not really in-depth. Still has useful pointers, but they could be summarized on an A4 sheet.

By Piotr M

Nov 12, 2017

The course was really good when played at 1.5x speed, at the normal pace it was really too slow.

By Ivan

Sep 08, 2017

Good course, but not really what I expected.

All materials are common things and knowledge.

By Tom G

Jul 14, 2018

Some good info, but the course needs to be updated to correct long known mistakes.

By Mian A J

Aug 10, 2020

Content was a little boring. Secondly, Voice quality wasn't up to the mark.

By Daniel K P

Oct 20, 2019

Needs more content ; present course repeats

information, too often

By Giulio B

Jul 25, 2020

Very little useful information

By Alberto R

Nov 21, 2016

Useful concepts. Quite simple.