@ei8fdb @belenbarrospena thanks for suggesting this as a potential way to collect data from the user interviews we have in store 
I’ll read it and ask questions. Hopefully not all entirely off-topic!
@xavier it looks like something you may have heard about in the context of your work with OpenEdx? Or maybe it does not fit any MOOC activity? I’m curious to hear your thoughts on the matter
@ei8fdb @belenbarrospena that sounds simple and likely to work well When do we try that? I can research a Free Software alternative to mural.
@dachary: I don’t want to speak for @belenbarrospena, but my first thought would be we try it, or a modifcation of the method, with 1, 2 transcripts, then evaluate.
If it works well we continue, otherwise we make changes and try again.
@belenbarrospena What do you think?
@ei8fdb sounds good to me
@dachary Let us know if you find a free software alternative to Mural, but there is a possibility there isn’t one 
There here are some similarities with the peer instruction technique. It’s not the same, as the goal is learning more than brainstorming, and it’s only 2 iterations rather than going all the way to consensus, but some of the principles are alike:
It is originally meant to be done in a “real” classroom setting, but it has actually been adapted to MOOC and online learning via a LTI tool:
Xavier.
@ei8fdb @belenbarrospena and anyone willing to participate, we can try a first session at a date of your chosing in the next 10 days, using https://framemo.org/SecureDropUX . My schedule is not really busy: if you propose two time/dates that are good for you chances are one of them will be good.
My first week of April is wonderfully empty right now. What about Wednesday 4th? I know @ei8fdb still has some interviews to transcribe though, so that might be too early. I might be able to help a bit with those, btw.
Also, here is the protocol for the KJ workshop:
Step 1: Create post it notes from interview notes. It might be good to do this in advance. We split the interview transcripts between the 3 of us, and we transfer each observation / insight from the notes to its own post it. The only rule is to be descriptive: someone who has not been at the interview or read the transcript needs to understand what the obsevation / insight is about.
Step 2: Start grouping post it notes that belong together. This is done by the 3 of us. There are no rules to this: we can talk and discuss, we can also move things to other groups, we can split the groups, etc, without asking others for permission. The process happens organically. Warning: it takes time!
Step 3: Once all post it notes are in a group, we give each group a name. Again, you can take the initiative and name a group as you see fit, although we will review the names together at the end.
Step 4: Export the board.
Step 5: Write a document that summarises the findings to be shared with the community. In the process of writing the document, groups might change slightly, but that’s normally fine. We will once again review the report as a group to accomodate suggestions and changes before it’s released.
Any questions, let me know.
Works for me 
What time is more convenient?
Great! Out of the 13 interviews we conducted and according to the corresponding confidential notes I just looked at:
- 4 transcribed and approved (1 journalist, 3 journalist SecureDrop user) we can work on
- 2 sent and waiting for approval (1 journalist SecureDrop user, 1 SecureDrop admin)
- 7 being transcribed (2 securedrop contributor, 2 journalist SecureDrop user, 1 journalist, 1 SecureDrop admin)
I suspect @ei8fdb made more progress than what the confidential notes reflect though 
Just to make sure I understand, I divided the whiteboard in three columns. And we would populate the columns with our own postits. We could look at the other postits but the goal really is to make our own pile of postits. Is that what you have in mind?
Thanks for the summary, @dachary
From it, it doesn’t look like we’ll be ready for Wednesday though. What about Saturday 7th instead?
Just to make sure I understand, I divided the whiteboard in three columns. And we would populate the columns with our own postits. We could look at the other postits but the goal really is to make our own pile of postits. Is that what you have in mind?
I am not sure I’ve explained this very well. The idea is all the post its go into the wall first, without any ordering. There is no need to identify who wrote them either, although some times is good to indicate which interview they originate from, either by colour-coding them (one colour per interview) or adding an interview code to the post it (a number will do).
Then we work on grouping the post its. This is done by their content: post its that have similar meaning, related content or theme go together. Once we are done, we’ll end up with a set of groups, with each including a set of post its about a certain theme.
We can explain further on the day. It’s a very simple process really
Noted, what Saturday 7th, 11:00am Paris/Berlin time? Or any other hour during the day really.
Ah, that makes sense. So… Alternatives to is now a single board with no column, a bunch of postits at the bottom. Is that a good start?
A transcript was approved today and another yesterday
- 6 transcribed and approved (1 journalist, 4 journalist SecureDrop user, 1 SecureDrop admin) we can work on
- 7 being transcribed (2 securedrop contributor, 2 journalist SecureDrop user, 1 journalist, 1 SecureDrop admin)
As suggested by @eloquence Diceware IDs were assigned for public reference. Sine we have six transcripts and only four post it colors, I assigned dot colors to each Diceware IDs.
@ei8fdb your diligent manual ordering of the postits made it super simple to write a script to group them together 
The json file can be imported into framemo for editing.
import json
import sys
groups = {
'SECUREDROP PERCEPTIONS./ ASSUMPTIONS': [],
'SD INSTALLATIONS': [],
'EXPECTATIONS ABOUT SOURCES': [],
'SOURCES WORKFLOW': [],
'WHAT MY JOB ENTAILS': [],
'FREQUENCY OF JOURNOS CHECKING SECUREDROP': [],
'SECUREDROP DEFINITIONS': [],
'WORKFLOW / SPAM FILTERING': [],
'WORKFLOW / AIRGAP OR NOT': [],
'WORKFLOW / USING THE DOCUMENTS': [],
"""COMMUNICATING WITH SOURCES/
LANDING PAGE""": [],
'ORGANIZING DOCUMENTS': [],
'BAD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'GOOD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'ORGANISATIONAL SD WORKFLOW': [],
'WHERE DID YOU HEAR ABOUT SD?': [],
'GIVING / GETTING HELP': [],
'UNSURE / I HAVE NO HOME': [],
'COMPLAINTS / FEATURE REQUESTS': [],
"""JOURNALIST
ACTIONS""": [],
}
d = json.load(open(sys.argv[1]))
for group in d['cards']:
if group['text'] in groups:
x = group['x']
y = group['y'] + 140
group['colour'] = 'green'
for card in d['cards']:
if ((x - 40 < card['x'] < x + 40) and
(y - 40 < card['y'] < y + 40)):
card['x'] = x
card['y'] = y
card['colour'] = 'white'
print json.dumps(d)
Here is another transformation to see all postits
import json
import sys
groups = {
'SECUREDROP PERCEPTIONS./ ASSUMPTIONS': [],
'SD INSTALLATIONS': [],
'EXPECTATIONS ABOUT SOURCES': [],
'SOURCES WORKFLOW': [],
'WHAT MY JOB ENTAILS': [],
'FREQUENCY OF JOURNOS CHECKING SECUREDROP': [],
'SECUREDROP DEFINITIONS': [],
'WORKFLOW / SPAM FILTERING': [],
'WORKFLOW / AIRGAP OR NOT': [],
'WORKFLOW / USING THE DOCUMENTS': [],
"""COMMUNICATING WITH SOURCES/
LANDING PAGE""": [],
'ORGANIZING DOCUMENTS': [],
'BAD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'GOOD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'ORGANISATIONAL SD WORKFLOW': [],
'WHERE DID YOU HEAR ABOUT SD?': [],
'GIVING / GETTING HELP': [],
'UNSURE / I HAVE NO HOME': [],
'COMPLAINTS / FEATURE REQUESTS': [],
"""JOURNALIST
ACTIONS""": [],
}
d = json.load(open(sys.argv[1]))
for group_card in d['cards']:
if group_card['text'] in groups:
group = groups[group_card['text']]
x = group_card['x']
y = group_card['y'] + 140
group_card['colour'] = 'green'
for card in d['cards']:
if ((x - 40 < card['x'] < x + 40) and
(y - 40 < card['y'] < y + 40)):
card['x'] = x
card['y'] = y
card['colour'] = 'white'
group.append(card)
#print json.dumps(d)
i = 0
all_cards = []
for (group, cards) in groups.items():
all_cards.append({
"id": "card%05d" % i,
"colour": "green",
"rot": "0.0",
"x": 0,
"y": i * 140,
"text": group,
"sticker": None,
})
for j in xrange(len(cards)):
card = cards[j]
card['x'] = 200 + j * 190
card['y'] = i * 140
card['rot'] = "0.0"
all_cards.append(card)
i += 1
d['cards'] = all_cards
d['size'] = {
'height': '3200',
'width': '5000',
}
print json.dumps(d)
And a final hack to prepare the board for the next session, with blank postits and existing groups. And space to create new groups.
import json
import sys
groups = {
'SECUREDROP PERCEPTIONS./ ASSUMPTIONS': [],
'SD INSTALLATIONS': [],
'EXPECTATIONS ABOUT SOURCES': [],
'SOURCES WORKFLOW': [],
'WHAT MY JOB ENTAILS': [],
'FREQUENCY OF JOURNOS CHECKING SECUREDROP': [],
'SECUREDROP DEFINITIONS': [],
'WORKFLOW / SPAM FILTERING': [],
'WORKFLOW / AIRGAP OR NOT': [],
'WORKFLOW / USING THE DOCUMENTS': [],
"""COMMUNICATING WITH SOURCES/
LANDING PAGE""": [],
'ORGANIZING DOCUMENTS': [],
'BAD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'GOOD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'ORGANISATIONAL SD WORKFLOW': [],
'WHERE DID YOU HEAR ABOUT SD?': [],
'GIVING / GETTING HELP': [],
'UNSURE / I HAVE NO HOME': [],
'COMPLAINTS / FEATURE REQUESTS': [],
"""JOURNALIST
ACTIONS""": [],
}
d = json.load(open(sys.argv[1]))
for group_card in d['cards']:
if group_card['text'] in groups:
group = groups[group_card['text']]
x = group_card['x']
y = group_card['y'] + 140
group_card['colour'] = 'green'
for card in d['cards']:
if ((x - 40 < card['x'] < x + 40) and
(y - 40 < card['y'] < y + 40)):
card['x'] = x
card['y'] = y
card['colour'] = 'white'
group.append(card)
#print json.dumps(d)
i = 0
all_cards = []
for (group, cards) in groups.items():
all_cards.append({
"id": "card%05d" % i,
"colour": "green",
"rot": "0.0",
"x": 0,
"y": i * 140,
"text": group,
"sticker": None,
})
for j in xrange(len(cards)):
card = cards[j]
card['x'] = 200 + j * 190
card['y'] = i * 140
card['rot'] = "0.0"
all_cards.append(card)
i += 1
d['cards'] = all_cards
d['size'] = {
'height': '5000',
'width': '5000',
}
#print json.dumps(d)
i = 0
all_cards = []
for (group, cards) in groups.items():
all_cards.append({
"id": "card%08d" % (1000 * i),
"colour": "green",
"rot": "0.0",
"x": 0,
"y": 800 + i * 140,
"text": group,
"sticker": None,
})
for j in xrange(25):
all_cards.append({
"id": "card%08d" % ((1000 * i) + j),
"colour": "white",
"rot": "0.0",
"x": 200 + j * 190,
"y": 800 + i * 140,
"text": "EMPTY",
"sticker": None,
})
all_cards.append(card)
i += 1
d['cards'] = all_cards
print json.dumps(d)
import json
import sys
groups = {
'SECUREDROP PERCEPTIONS./ ASSUMPTIONS': [],
'SD INSTALLATIONS': [],
'EXPECTATIONS ABOUT SOURCES': [],
'SOURCES WORKFLOW': [],
'WHAT MY JOB ENTAILS': [],
'FREQUENCY OF JOURNOS CHECKING SECUREDROP': [],
'SECUREDROP DEFINITIONS': [],
'WORKFLOW / SPAM FILTERING': [],
'WORKFLOW / AIRGAP OR NOT': [],
'WORKFLOW / USING THE DOCUMENTS': [],
"""COMMUNICATING WITH SOURCES/
LANDING PAGE""": [],
'ORGANIZING DOCUMENTS': [],
'BAD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'GOOD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS': [],
'ORGANISATIONAL SD WORKFLOW': [],
'WHERE DID YOU HEAR ABOUT SD?': [],
'GIVING / GETTING HELP': [],
'UNSURE / I HAVE NO HOME': [],
'COMPLAINTS / FEATURE REQUESTS': [],
"""JOURNALIST
ACTIONS""": [],
}
d = json.load(open(sys.argv[1]))
for group_card in d['cards']:
if group_card['text'] in groups:
group = groups[group_card['text']]
x = group_card['x']
y = group_card['y'] + 140
group_card['colour'] = 'green'
for card in d['cards']:
if ((x - 40 < card['x'] < x + 40) and
(y - 40 < card['y'] < y + 40)):
card['x'] = x
card['y'] = y
card['colour'] = 'white'
group.append(card)
#print json.dumps(d)
for (group, cards) in groups.items():
print("## " + group.replace('\n', ' '))
for card in cards:
print('* ' + card['text'])
GOOD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS
- p8 I’ve seen other journalists do things that get me excited
- p8 Good journo practice: Using mutt as a .inbox mailbox reader
- p8 Good journalist proactice: take screenshot of photo received via SD
EXPECTATIONS ABOUT SOURCES
- p12 sometimes sources are hesitant: want to get journos trust
- p12 some threads lasted over a year, sending msgs back & forth
- p8 Sources need to go to a cafe or library (not their work/home) to use SD
- p10: SD is a statement to reassure the sources
- p10: I am stressed that sources make mistake
- p12 sources interface is very simple and easy to use
- p8 It is relatively easy for sources to understand how SD works
- p12 long conversations common in sources that are real sources
- p12 respond time can be longer than expeceted by sources
- p8 Sources need to use TAILS rather than orfox (mobile Tor browser)
- p10: You need to assist the source using SD
- p12 sometimes sources send more info after we publish 1st story
- p12 If we don’t respond straight away, some sources never reply
- p12 some sources never check back for their submissions
UNSURE / I HAVE NO HOME
- p8 There is a lot of opsec involved in SD
- p13: SD is expensive. A few hundred euros.
- p12 (Working in SD…) is not about researching a document set
- p8 There are a lot of “gotchas” on the journalist side with SD
- p12 a lot of hoops you have to jump through for security reasons
SECUREDROP DEFINITIONS
- p12 Sources can upload documents via SD
- p12 SD allows sources to communicate with news orgs securely
- p10: SecureDrop is described to allow anonymous and secure communication
- p8 SD is a platform that connects sources and journalists
- p12 sources connect to SD using tor browser over a tor onion service
- p8 SD is a platform that connects sources and journalists
- p12 sources create an account or log in with an existing one
- p12 Journalists have their own SD interface
- p12 sources can send & receive messages via SD
- p12 SD allows sources to send docs to news orgs securely
BAD THINGS ABOUT JOURNALISTS
- p13: I keep all documents in the journalist tails
- p13: I do not use a SD airgap machine, nor 2FA.
- p8 People should take care on how they use SD
- p13: journo/admin saYs: I am not familiar with the term “private key”
- p8 Bad journo practice: copy photo from SD to corporate network
- p8 I’ve seen a lot of jouanlists do bad things
COMPLAINTS / FEATURE REQUESTS
- p8 MAGIC WAND: I want us to train journos on QUBES
- p10: something simpler and more secure for the source
- p12 I want a list of sources organised by who sent most recent message
- p12 I want to get SD notifications when new stuff comes in
- p8 we need a suite of tools to clean metadata from files
- p12 difficult to have real time communication with SD
- p12 I would like to use my PC to check SD, not a different one
- p12 I want to use my normal PC to check SD but still securely
- p12 in SD I want to select a source to send msgs to
- p12 I want to click no a source see the history and open some files
- p12 I want each journo to have her own SD account
- p8 What we need is a one stop shop on 1 machine
- p13: Magic wand: the installation must be simpler.
- p12 I want to send msgs to other journos via SD
- p8 Cubes is really difficult to update and maintain
WORKFLOW / SPAM FILTERING
- p13: We received about 12 non spam in 18 months
- p12 a minority of SD things turn out to be stories
- p12 A group of people take daily turns to check SD
- p12 We sometime receive large PDF documents
- p12 checking sd and decide if spam takes 30 mins minimum
- p12 it is difficult to store malware in a text file SQL dump
- p13: We believe malware was sent via SD intentionally
- p13: I rarely answer to sources: most are spam
- p12 eg. hackers send us SQL db dump, without any info
- p12 eg. lots of PDFs documentation to support conspiracy theories.
- p12 95% in SD is spam from crazy paranoid people
FREQUENCY OF JOURNOS CHECKING SECUREDROP
- p12 now I use SD rarely, maybe once or twice a month
- p12 Now I use SD less frequently, when other colleagues can’t use it
- p10: Checking the SecureDrop is not done on a daily basis
- p8 I dont use SD regularly
- p12 I’d check SD about 3 times a week, but daily sometimes
- p12 also remember checking SD just once a week
- p13: I connect to SD twice a month.
ORGANIZING DOCUMENTS
- p12 SD does not organise submitted files in anyway at all
- p12 If you want to organise files you have to do it yourself
- p12 I want journos to just import the files. (no “tech” work needed)
- p12 A: click import, browse for file you exported from the journo UI, and the nice window where everything is organised
- p12 You can make dated folders, but it is no help at all
- p12 In training we say “this is where we stop” (organising files)
- p12 We can’t regulate how people will organise message
- p12 if there was some way I could have an inbox
- p12: sorting messages by date is useful
- p12 (Working in SD…) is about having something like an inbox
- p12 i would love to have SD program to organise all files
- p12 It would be great if SD did all the file organising for you
- p12: the incoming files are extracted in unorganized folders
- p12 You can’t sort by date, only alphabetically because it is a FS
- p12 biggest problem: SD not managing file system in airgap
- p12 SD does the job of putting messages in files really well
- p12: mapping SD file organization with what we want is difficult
SOURCES WORKFLOW
- p12 custom msg said we might not respond if you don’t send a tip
- p12 When a source submission theres no message telling them what happens next
- p12 news orgs have a web page with instructions for sourees
- p8 there is a lot of opsec involved in SD (for sourees)
- p12 nothing to tell source what will happen after submit
SD INSTALLATIONS
- p8 SD installs in a news org are done by a trainer and engineer
- p12 I installed SD myself
- p8 I have done a number of SD installs since I started with my org
WORKFLOW / AIRGAP OR NOT
- p12 content e.g. sources related to US national security
- p12 we decide (on content) always on a case by case basis
- p12 airgap based on content, not whether source sent malware
- p12 we decide to keep data airgap or not based on sensitivity
- p12 We make a decision based on the sensitivity of the data
- p12 Normally if it is classified we keep it airgapped
- p12 Most of the time it is safe to not keep data airgapped.
JOURNALIST ACTIONS
- p10: Learning and remembering how to boot tails is difficult
- p8 Some journalist users invent ways to stay “inside the secure airgap”
- p12 Journalists cand send & read messages from sources via SD
- p10: A journalist able to write infosec articles is in charge of the SD
- p12 SD can be used as a kind of anonymous email system
- p10: Journalists use the source interface to send documents to their organization
- p12 Journalists can read documents via SD
- p12 every journalist has their own PGP key for communicatione
COMMUNICATING WITH SOURCES/ LANDING PAGE
- p12 for contacting the org we have Signal and SecureDrop
- p12 there is no way to customise SD home page messages
- p12 our custom msg for sources on homepage overriden by updates
- p12 we suggest to contact journos individually
- p12 custom msg said SD is for news stories
- p12 as tipline we use Signal and PGP with email
- p12 custom msg said SD was for sending docs
- p12 custom msg said to use email for asking questions
- p12 news orgs have a web page with instructions for sourees
- p10: SD is not used much: people think it is only for high risk
WHAT MY JOB ENTAILS
- p8 I work at a 21st century org for 21st century journalists
- p8 I use tools to understand them from the users viewpoint
- p12 I live in the USA
- P12 I am a reporter and also on the security team
- P12 I work for [an online adversarial journalism organisation]
- p8 I know when tools are relevant in US law context
- P12 I work on analyzing [leaked] documents
- p8 I work in the US.
- p8 I make recommendations to the users about software tools
- p8 My work is sometimes writing recommendations
- p8 I dig deep to find tools that help journalists
- p12 I was admin and only user for first couple of years
- P12 I make security decisions
- p13: I am part of a collective of journalists
- p8 I frequently connect different people so they can get advice from others
- P12 I advice journalists from other orgs when they ask for help
- p8 I amend and provide my experience for foreign countries
- p8 I have done a lot of hacking with news org
- p8 I consult with organizations and individual journalists
- P12 I help journalists with security related to sources protection
- p8 I research contemporary tools and techniques to protect them from vulnerabilities
- P12 I write software that we use in our news organisation
- p8 My work is sometimes just discussions (journos/news orgs)
- p8 My work focuses on the US because I am familiar with the laws work
- p8 I work with journalists outside my organisation
- p8 I do basic infosec training in newsrooms
- p13: : We work on trans-border topics (smuggling, migrants…)
- p12: now I use SD more for admin tasks, not as journalist
WORKFLOW / USING THE DOCUMENTS
- p10: We don’t have an established pattern to share documents
- p12 sometimes I must relay SD msgs between source and journo
GIVING / GETTING HELP
- p8 I answer users questions about established workflows
- p12 There was no help with SD when I first started
- p12 I help other SD users in my org, but not outsiders
- p8 I got help with, and installed SD as part of my job onboarding
- p8 Sometimes journalists contact me on my personal number for support
- p8 I do SD training with newsrooms
- p13: a hacker I know helped install SD
- p8 When journalists have propblems they contact us via support portal
- p13: FPF support is sometime not responsive
- p13: Journalists help each other with contacts, translations, documents
- p8 I ask questions about the software that the user would ask
- p12 SD support site seems to work pretty well
- p12 I submit my tickets to the SD support site
- p12 I wrote first documentation for SD with help from [person]
- p8 Our org has SD support contracts with news orgs
- p10: Setting up or maintaining SD required help from expert
- p8 I help new orgs who use SD frequently
- p10: I get help from doc, contractor, FPF support (in that order)
- p10: I help my colleagues with SD
SECUREDROP PERCEPTIONS./ ASSUMPTIONS
- p8 SD has already helped a lot of newsrooms
- p8 I feel bad that we go away from the TAILS team
- p8 SD does a lot of good
- p8 SD provides a high level of anonymity
- p10: The documentation is very good
- p8 SD is a very elegant solution to a very difficult problem
- p8 I think journalists will like the Qubes workstation
- p8 SD provides sources and journalists a high level of anonymity
- p10: the building blocks composing SD are reassuring
- p8 I believ in SD mission
- p12 I wanted an SD instanee ready for my news org launch
WHERE DID YOU HEAR ABOUT SD?
- p10: I got interested in SD when FPF took over
- p8 I started using SD when my org hired me as a digital trainer
- p8 I first heard about SD in 2014
- p12 first heard abt SD when FoP wanted to rename it
- p13: I first heard about SD by looking on the net
- p12 first heard abt DD when NewYorker started using it
- p12 heard about when when K. Poulsen published the code
ORGANISATIONAL SD WORKFLOW
- p12 deciding if worth it involves several people: takes time (eg 2 wks)
- p12 respond time long bc SD is hard to use & can’t check all the time
- p12 we discuss SD daily content on internal mailing list
- p12 people on rotation in my org: important to have coverage
- p12 small no. of users checking SD vs total no. of journos in org
- p12 sd users become interface between source & non-SD user j ourno
- p12 before responding we must decide if it’s worth it
- p12 2 journos check Signal no. using Desktop app in Qubes
- p12 editors need to know about sources, but don’t use SD
- p10: A rotation is organized to check the SecureDrop
- p12 we send summary of SD daily content to internal mailing list
- p10 editors must know SD content to assign stories to journos
- p12 Our current system involves an encrypted mailing list
- p12 other people must know what’s happening but don’t use SD