research-article

Free to Fly in Public Spaces: Drone Controllers' Privacy Perceptions and Practices

Authors:

Yang WangAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Pages 6789 - 6793

https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3026049

Published: 02 May 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Prior research has discovered various privacy concerns that bystanders have about drones. However, little is known about drone controllers' privacy perceptions and practices of drones. Understanding controllers' perspective is important because it will inform whether controllers' current practices protect or infringe on bystanders' privacy and what mechanisms could be designed to better address the potential privacy issues of drones. In this paper, we report results from interviews of 12 drone controllers in the US. Our interviewees treated safety as their top priority but considered privacy issues of drones exaggerated. Our results also highlight many significant differences in how controllers and bystanders think about drone privacy, for instance, how they determine public vs. private spaces and whether notice and consent of bystanders are needed.

Supplementary Material

suppl.mov (pn4937p.mp4)

Supplemental video

Download
1.02 MB

References

[1]

2016. FAA Drone Registration. (2016). https://registermyuas.faa.gov/

[2]

Rebecca Angeles. 2007. An empirical study of the anticipated consumer response to RFID product item tagging. Industrial Management & Data Systems 107, 4 (2007), 461--483.

[3]

M. Ryan Calo. 2011. The Drone as Privacy Catalyst. Stanford Law Review Online 64 (Dec. 2011), 29. http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/ drone-privacy-catalyst?utm_source=publish2&utm_ medium=referral&utm_campaign=www.kpbs.org

[4]

Reece A Clothier, Dominique A Greer, Duncan G Greer, and Amisha M Mehta. 2015. Risk perception and the public acceptance of drones. Risk analysis (2015).

[5]

Tamara Denning, Zakariya Dehlawi, and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2014. In situ with bystanders of augmented reality glasses: Perspectives on recording and privacy-mediating technologies. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 2377--2386.

Digital Library

[6]

Travis Dunlap. 2009. We've got our eyes on you: When surveillance by unmanned aircraft systems constitutes a Fourth Amendment search. S. Tex. L. Rev. 51 (2009), 173.

[7]

Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). 2016. EPIC Domestic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones. (2016). https://epic.org/privacy/drones/

[8]

FAA. 2016. Summary of the Small UAS Rule. Technical Report. https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf

[9]

Jason Hong. 2013. Considering privacy issues in the context of Google glass. Commun. ACM 56, 11 (2013), 10--11.

Digital Library

[10]

Roberto Hoyle, Robert Templeman, Denise Anthony, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2015. Sensitive Lifelogs: A Privacy Analysis of Photos from Wearable Cameras. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1645--1648.

Digital Library

[11]

Roberto Hoyle, Robert Templeman, Steven Armes, Denise Anthony, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2014. Privacy behaviors of lifeloggers using wearable cameras. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, 571--582.

Digital Library

[12]

Jeremy Diamond. 2015. Obama: We need more drone regulations. (2015). http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/27/ politics/obama-drones-fareed/

[13]

National Telecommunications and Information Administration. 2016. Voluntary Best Practices for UAS Privacy, Transparency, and Accountability. Technical Report. https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/ publications/voluntary_best_practices_for_uas_privacy_ transparency_and_accountability_0.pdf

[14]

Sarah Spiekermann, Jens Grossklags, and Bettina Berendt. 2001. E-privacy in 2Nd Generation E-commerce: Privacy Preferences Versus Actual Behavior. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC '01). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 38--47.

Digital Library

[15]

Alan F. Westin. 2003. Social and Political Dimensions of Privacy. Journal of Social Issues 59, 2 (July 2003), 431--453.

[16]

Yang Wang, Huichuan Xia, Yaxing Yao, and Yun Huang. 2016. Flying Eyes and Hidden Controllers: A Qualitative Study of People's Privacy Perceptions of Civilian Drones in the US. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PoPETS) 3 (2016), 172--190.

Cited By

Betti Sorbelli F(2024)UAV-Based Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review, Current Trends, and Research ChallengesACM Journal on Autonomous Transportation Systems10.1145/36492241:3(1-40)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649224
Komasová S(2024)Czech society and drones: experience, norms, and concernsDrone Systems and Applications10.1139/dsa-2023-006512(1-14)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1139/dsa-2023-0065
Lingam SFranssen MPetermeijer SMartens M(2024)Challenges and Future Directions for Human-Drone Interaction Research: An Expert PerspectiveInternational Journal of Human–Computer Interaction10.1080/10447318.2024.2400756(1-17)Online publication date: 12-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2400756
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Free to Fly in Public Spaces: Drone Controllers' Privacy Perceptions and Practices
1. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

Privacy Mechanisms for Drones: Perceptions of Drone Controllers and Bystanders
CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Drones pose privacy concerns such as surveillance and stalking. Many technology-based or policy-based mechanisms have been proposed to mitigate these concerns. However, it is unclear how drone controllers and bystanders perceive these mechanisms and ...
Concepts and Validation of a Small-Scale Rotorcraft Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) Controller in a Unique Simulation Environment

At the current time, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory's (ARL's) Vehicle Technology Directorate is interested in expanding its Unmanned Vehicles Division to include rotary wing and micro-systems control. The intent is to research unmanned aircraft ...
Demonstration of wireless synchronisation methods in autonomously controlled fleet of drones

This paper describes methods used in synchronising the behaviour of multiple autonomous flight vehicles utilising custom external hardware and firmware injected into current aviation flight systems. To prove the reliability and consistency of an ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 2017

7138 pages

ISBN:9781450346559

DOI:10.1145/3025453

General Chairs:
Gloria Mark
University of California Irvine
,
Susan Fussell
Cornell University
,
Program Chairs:
Cliff Lampe
University of Michigan
,
m.c. schraefel
University of Southampton
,
Juan Pablo Hourcade
University of Iowa
,
Caroline Appert
Université Paris-Sud
,
Daniel Wigdor
University of Toronto

Copyright © 2017 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 02 May 2017

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CHI '17

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI '17: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 6 - 11, 2017

Colorado, Denver, USA

Acceptance Rates

CHI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate 600 of 2,400 submissions, 25%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

19
Total Citations
View Citations
749
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)49
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8

Reflects downloads up to 01 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Betti Sorbelli F(2024)UAV-Based Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review, Current Trends, and Research ChallengesACM Journal on Autonomous Transportation Systems10.1145/36492241:3(1-40)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649224
Komasová S(2024)Czech society and drones: experience, norms, and concernsDrone Systems and Applications10.1139/dsa-2023-006512(1-14)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1139/dsa-2023-0065
Lingam SFranssen MPetermeijer SMartens M(2024)Challenges and Future Directions for Human-Drone Interaction Research: An Expert PerspectiveInternational Journal of Human–Computer Interaction10.1080/10447318.2024.2400756(1-17)Online publication date: 12-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2400756
Wu YGui XWisniewski PLi Y(2023)Do Streamers Care about Bystanders' Privacy? An Examination of Live Streamers' Considerations and Strategies for Bystanders' Privacy ManagementProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35796037:CSCW1(1-29)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3579603
Bernd JAbu-Salma RChoy JFrik AChiasson SKapadia A(2022)Balancing power dynamics in smart homesProceedings of the Eighteenth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3563609.3563646(687-706)Online publication date: 8-Aug-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3563609.3563646
Windl MMayer S(2022)The Skewed Privacy Concerns of Bystanders in Smart EnvironmentsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35467196:MHCI(1-21)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3546719
Herdel VYamin LCauchard J(2022)Above and Beyond: A Scoping Review of Domains and Applications for Human-Drone InteractionProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3501881(1-22)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3501881
Sahoo LMiazi NShehab MAlt FAbdelrahman Y(2022)You Know Too Much: Investigating Users’ Perceptions and Privacy Concerns Towards Thermal ImagingPrivacy Symposium 202210.1007/978-3-031-09901-4_11(207-229)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09901-4_11
Eghtebas CKiss FKoelle MWoźniak P(2021)Advantage and Misuse of Vision Augmentation – Exploring User Perceptions and Attitudes using a Zoom PrototypeProceedings of the Augmented Humans International Conference 202110.1145/3458709.3458984(77-85)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3458709.3458984
Kolamunna HDahanayaka TLi JSeneviratne SThilakaratne KZomaya ASeneviratne A(2021)DronePrintProceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/34481155:1(1-31)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3448115
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents