Exploring Users' Mental Models and Privacy Concerns During Interconnected Interactions
Article No.: 259, Pages 1 - 23
Abstract
Users frequently use their smartphones in combination with other smart devices, for example, when streaming music to smart speakers or controlling smart appliances. During these interconnected interactions, user data gets handled and processed by several entities that employ different data protection practices or are subject to different regulations. Users need to understand these processes to inform themselves in the right places and make informed privacy decisions. We conducted an online survey (N=120) to investigate whether users have accurate mental models about interconnected interactions. We found that users consider scenarios more privacy-concerning when multiple devices are involved. Yet, we also found that most users do not fully comprehend the privacy-relevant processes in interconnected interactions. Our results show that current privacy information methods are insufficient and that users must be better educated to make informed privacy decisions. Finally, we advocate for restricting data processing to the app layer and better encryption to reduce users' data protection responsibilities.
References
[1]
Tanisha Afnan, Yixin Zou, Maryam Mustafa, Mustafa Naseem, and Florian Schaub. 2022. Aunties, Strangers, and the FBI: Online Privacy Concerns and Experiences of Muslim-American Women. In Eighteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2022). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 387--406. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/soups2022-afnan.pdf
[2]
Imtiaz Ahmad, Rosta Farzan, Apu Kapadia, and Adam J. Lee. 2020. Tangible Privacy: Towards User-Centric Sensor Designs for Bystander Privacy. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 4, CSCW2, Article 116 (oct 2020), 28 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3415187
[3]
Noah Apthorpe, Dillon Reisman, and Nick Feamster. 2017. A Smart Home is No Castle: Privacy Vulnerabilities of Encrypted IoT Traffic. In Workshop on Data and Algorithmic Transparency. arXiv, 6 pages. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1705.06805
[4]
Noah Apthorpe, Yan Shvartzshnaider, Arunesh Mathur, Dillon Reisman, and Nick Feamster. 2018. Discovering Smart Home Internet of Things Privacy Norms Using Contextual Integrity. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., Vol. 2, 2, Article 59 (jul 2018), 23 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3214262
[5]
Rebecca Balebako, Florian Schaub, Idris Adjerid, Alessandro Acquisti, and Lorrie Cranor. 2015. The Impact of Timing on the Salience of Smartphone App Privacy Notices. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM CCS Workshop on Security and Privacy in Smartphones and Mobile Devices (Denver, Colorado, USA) (SPSM '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 63--74. https://doi.org/10.1145/2808117.2808119
[6]
Nat a M Barbosa, Joon S Park, Yaxing Yao, and Yang Wang. 2019. 'What if'? Predicting Individual Users? Smart Home Privacy Preferences and Their Changes. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, Vol. 2019, 4 (2019), 211--231. https://doi.org/10.2478/popets-2019-0066
[7]
Florian Bemmann, Maximiliane Windl, Jonas Erbe, Sven Mayer, and Heinrich Hussmann. 2022. The Influence of Transparency and Control on the Willingness of Data Sharing in Adaptive Mobile Apps. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 6, MHCI, Article 189 (sep 2022), 26 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3546724
[8]
Ann Blandford, Dominic Furniss, and Stephann Makri. 2016. Qualitative HCI Research: Going Behind the Scenes. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San Rafael, CA, USA, 51--60. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00706ED1V01Y201602HCI034
[9]
Joseph Bugeja, Andreas Jacobsson, and Paul Davidsson. 2016. On privacy and security challenges in smart connected homes. In 2016 European Intelligence and Security Informatics Conference (EISIC, 16). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 172--175. https://doi.org/10.1109/EISIC.2016.044
[10]
Luigi Catuogno and Stefano Turchi. 2015. The Dark Side of the Interconnection: Security and Privacy in the Web of Things. In 2015 9th International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing (Santa Catarina, Brazil). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 205--212. https://doi.org/10.1109/IMIS.2015.86
[11]
George Chalhoub, Martin J Kraemer, Norbert Nthala, and Ivan Flechais. 2021. ?It did not give me an option to decline?: A Longitudinal Analysis of the User Experience of Security and Privacy in Smart Home Products. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 555, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445691
[12]
Erika Chin, Adrienne Porter Felt, Kate Greenwood, and David Wagner. 2011. Analyzing inter-application communication in Android. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services (Bethesda, Maryland, USA) (MobiSys '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 239--252. https://doi.org/10.1145/1999995.2000018
[13]
Erika Chin, Adrienne Porter Felt, Vyas Sekar, and David Wagner. 2012. Measuring User Confidence in Smartphone Security and Privacy. In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (Washington, D.C., USA) (SOUPS '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 1, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2335356.2335358
[14]
Eun Kyoung Choe, Sunny Consolvo, Jaeyeon Jung, Beverly Harrison, Shwetak N. Patel, and Julie A. Kientz. 2012. Investigating Receptiveness to Sensing and Inference in the Home Using Sensor Proxies. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (UbiComp '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 61--70. https://doi.org/10.1145/2370216.2370226
[15]
Sarah Delgado Rodriguez, Sarah Prange, and Florian Alt. 2021. Take Your Security and Privacy Into Your Own Hands! Why Security and Privacy Assistants Should be Tangible. In Mensch und Computer 2021 - Workshopband. Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V., Bonn, Germany, 2 pages. https://doi.org/10.18420/muc2021-mci-ws09--393
[16]
Tamara Dinev and Paul Hart. 2006. An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information systems research, Vol. 17, 1 (2006), 61--80. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1060.0080
[17]
Aarthi Easwara Moorthy and Kim-Phuong L Vu. 2015. Privacy concerns for use of voice activated personal assistant in the public space. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 31, 4 (2015), 307--335. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2014.986642
[18]
Serge Egelman, Adrienne Porter Felt, and David Wagner. 2013. Choice architecture and smartphone privacy: Theresa price for that. The economics of information security and privacy (2013), 211--236. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642--39498-0_10
[19]
Pardis Emami-Naeini, Yuvraj Agarwal, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Hanan Hibshi. 2020. Ask the Experts: What Should Be on an IoT Privacy and Security Label?. In 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 447--464. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP40000.2020.00043
[20]
William Enck, Damien Octeau, Patrick McDaniel, and Swarat Chaudhuri. 2011. A Study of Android Application Security. In Proceedings of the 20th USENIX Conference on Security (San Francisco, CA) (SEC'11). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 21. https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/sec11/tech/slides/enck.pdf
[21]
Adrienne Porter Felt, Erika Chin, Steve Hanna, Dawn Song, and David Wagner. 2011. Android Permissions Demystified. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (Chicago, Illinois, USA) (CCS '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 627--638. https://doi.org/10.1145/2046707.2046779
[22]
Adrienne Porter Felt, Elizabeth Ha, Serge Egelman, Ariel Haney, Erika Chin, and David Wagner. 2012. Android Permissions: User Attention, Comprehension, and Behavior. In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (Washington, D.C., USA) (SOUPS '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 3, 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2335356.2335360
[23]
Adrienne Porter Felt, Helen J. Wang, Alexander Moshchuk, Steve Hanna, and Erika Chin. 2011. Permission Re-Delegation: Attacks and Defenses. In 20th USENIX Security Symposium (San Francisco, CA) (USENIX Security 11). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 16 pages. https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity11/permission-re-delegation-attacks-and-defenses
[24]
Thomas Franke, Christiane Attig, and Daniel Wessel. 2019. A personal resource for technology interaction: development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ATI) scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 35, 6 (2019), 456--467. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150
[25]
Alisa Frik, Juliann Kim, Joshua Rafael Sanchez, and Joanne Ma. 2022. Users? Expectations About and Use of Smartphone Privacy and Security Settings. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 407, 24 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517504
[26]
Carol Fung, Vivian Motti, Katie Zhang, and Yanjun Qian. 2022. A Study of User Concerns about Smartphone Privacy. In 2022 6th Cyber Security in Networking Conference (CSNet). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 1--8. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSNet56116.2022.9955623
[27]
Frederik Funke and Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2012. Why Semantic Differentials in Web-Based Research Should Be Made from Visual Analogue Scales and Not from 5-Point Scales. Field Methods, Vol. 24, 3 (2012), 310--327. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X12444061
[28]
Nina Gerber, Benjamin Reinheimer, and Melanie Volkamer. 2018. Home Sweet Home? Investigating Users? Awareness of Smart Home Privacy Threats. In Proceedings of An Interactive Workshop on the Human aspects of Smarthome Security and Privacy (WSSP). USENIX, Baltimore, MD, USA, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.5445/IR/1000083578
[29]
Michael C. Grace, Wu Zhou, Xuxian Jiang, and Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi. 2012. Unsafe Exposure Analysis of Mobile In-App Advertisements. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM Conference on Security and Privacy in Wireless and Mobile Networks (Tucson, Arizona, USA) (WISEC '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 101--112. https://doi.org/10.1145/2185448.2185464
[30]
Gunnar Harboe and Elaine M. Huang. 2015. Real-World Affinity Diagramming Practices: Bridging the Paper-Digital Gap. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (CHI '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 95--104. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702561
[31]
Roberto Hoyle, Luke Stark, Qatrunnada Ismail, David Crandall, Apu Kapadia, and Denise Anthony. 2020. Privacy Norms and Preferences for Photos Posted Online. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., Vol. 27, 4, Article 30 (aug 2020), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3380960
[32]
Tun-Min Catherine Jai and Nancy J King. 2016. Privacy versus reward: Do loyalty programs increase consumers' willingness to share personal information with third-party advertisers and data brokers? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 28 (2016), 296--303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.01.005
[33]
Patrick Gage Kelley, Joanna Bresee, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Robert W. Reeder. 2009. A "Nutrition Label" for Privacy. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (Mountain View, California, USA) (SOUPS '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/1572532.1572538
[34]
Patrick Gage Kelley, Sunny Consolvo, Lorrie Faith Cranor, Jaeyeon Jung, Norman Sadeh, and David Wetherall. 2012. A Conundrum of Permissions: Installing Applications on an Android Smartphone. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 68--79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642--34638--5_6
[35]
Predrag Klasnja, Sunny Consolvo, Tanzeem Choudhury, Richard Beckwith, and Jeffrey Hightower. 2009. Exploring privacy concerns about personal sensing. In International Conference on Pervasive Computing. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 176--183. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--642-01516--8_13
[36]
Spyros Kokolakis. 2017. Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, Vol. 64 (2017), 122--134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
[37]
Hyosun Kwon, Joel E. Fischer, Martin Flintham, and James Colley. 2018. The Connected Shower: Studying Intimate Data in Everyday Life. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol., Vol. 2, 4, Article 176 (dec 2018), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287054
[38]
Evan Lafontaine, Aafaq Sabir, and Anupam Das. 2021. Understanding People?s Attitude and Concerns towards Adopting IoT Devices. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 307, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3451633
[39]
Josephine Lau, Benjamin Zimmerman, and Florian Schaub. 2018. Alexa, Are You Listening? Privacy Perceptions, Concerns and Privacy-Seeking Behaviors with Smart Speakers. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 2, CSCW, Article 102 (nov 2018), 31 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274371
[40]
Christoph Lutz and Aurelia Tamó-Larrieux. 2020. The robot privacy paradox: Understanding how privacy concerns shape intentions to use social robots. Human-Machine Communication, Vol. 1 (2020), 87--111.
[41]
Naresh K Malhotra, Sung S Kim, and James Agarwal. 2004. Internet users' information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information systems research, Vol. 15, 4 (2004), 336--355. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0032
[42]
Nathan Malkin, Julia Bernd, Maritza Johnson, and Serge Egelman. 2018. 'What Can't Data Be Used For'? Privacy Expectations about Smart TVs in the US. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Workshop on Usable Security (London, UK) (EuroUSEC). Distributed System Security Symposium, Reston, VA, USA, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.14722/eurousec.2018.23016
[43]
Nathan Malkin, Joe Deatrick, Allen Tong, Primal Wijesekera, Serge Egelman, and David Wagner. 2019. Privacy attitudes of smart speaker users. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, Vol. 2019, 4 (2019), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.2478/popets-2019-0068
[44]
Elena Maris, Timothy Libert, and Jennifer R Henrichsen. 2020. Tracking sex: The implications of widespread sexual data leakage and tracking on porn websites. New Media & Society, Vol. 22, 11 (2020), 2018--2038. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820924632
[45]
Justin Matejka, Michael Glueck, Tovi Grossman, and George Fitzmaurice. 2016. The Effect of Visual Appearance on the Performance of Continuous Sliders and Visual Analogue Scales. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5421--5432. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858063
[46]
Aleecia M McDonald and Lorrie Faith Cranor. 2008. The cost of reading privacy policies. I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, Vol. 4 (2008), 543--568. http://hdl.handle.net/1811/72839
[47]
Vikram Mehta, Daniel Gooch, Arosha Bandara, Blaine Price, and Bashar Nuseibeh. 2021. Privacy Care: A Tangible Interaction Framework for Privacy Management. ACM Trans. Internet Technol., Vol. 21, 1, Article 25 (feb 2021), 32 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430506
[48]
Sophia Moganedi and Jabu Mtsweni. 2017. Beyond the convenience of the internet of things: Security and privacy concerns. In 2017 IST-Africa Week Conference (IST-Africa). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 1--10. https://doi.org/10.23919/ISTAFRICA.2017.8102372
[49]
Andrés Molina-Markham, Prashant Shenoy, Kevin Fu, Emmanuel Cecchet, and David Irwin. 2010. Private Memoirs of a Smart Meter. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Workshop on Embedded Sensing Systems for Energy-Efficiency in Building (Zurich, Switzerland) (BuildSys '10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 61--66. https://doi.org/10.1145/1878431.1878446
[50]
David H. Nguyen, Alfred Kobsa, and Gillian R. Hayes. 2008. An Empirical Investigation of Concerns of Everyday Tracking and Recording Technologies. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (Seoul, Korea) (UbiComp '08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 182--191. https://doi.org/10.1145/1409635.1409661
[51]
Johannes Obermaier and Martin Hutle. 2016. Analyzing the Security and Privacy of Cloud-Based Video Surveillance Systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on IoT Privacy, Trust, and Security (Xi'an, China) (IoTPTS '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 22--28. https://doi.org/10.1145/2899007.2899008
[52]
Anthony Peruma, Jeffrey Palmerino, and Daniel E. Krutz. 2018. Investigating User Perception and Comprehension of Android Permission Models. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Mobile Software Engineering and Systems (Gothenburg, Sweden) (MOBILESoft '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 56--66. https://doi.org/10.1145/3197231.3197246
[53]
Sarah Prange, Sven Mayer, Maria-Lena Bittl, Mariam Hassib, and Florian Alt. 2021. Investigating User Perceptions Towards Wearable Mobile Electromyography. In Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2021. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 339--360. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3-030--85610--6_20
[54]
Sarah Prange, Sarah Delgado Rodriguez, Lukas Mecke, and Florian Alt. 2022. ?I saw your partner naked?: Exploring Privacy Challenges During Video-based Online Meetings. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (Lisbon, Portugal) (MUM '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 71--82. https://doi.org/10.1145/3568444.3568468
[55]
Sarah Prange, Ahmed Shams, Robin Piening, Yomna Abdelrahman, and Florian Alt. 2021. PriView-- Exploring Visualisations to Support Users? Privacy Awareness. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 69, 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445067
[56]
Robert W. Proctor, M. Athar Ali, and Kim-Phuong L. Vu. 2008. Examining Usability of Web Privacy Policies. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 24, 3 (2008), 307--328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310801937999
[57]
Ismini Psychoula, Deepika Singh, Liming Chen, Feng Chen, Andreas Holzinger, and Huansheng Ning. 2018. Users' privacy concerns in IoT based applications. In 2018 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced & Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing & Communications, Cloud & Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 1887--1894. https://doi.org/10.1109/SmartWorld.2018.00317
[58]
Ulf-Dietrich Reips and Frederik Funke. 2008. Interval-level measurement with visual analogue scales in Internet-based research: VAS Generator. Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40, 3 (01 Aug 2008), 699--704. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.699
[59]
Bhaskar Pratim Sarma, Ninghui Li, Chris Gates, Rahul Potharaju, Cristina Nita-Rotaru, and Ian Molloy. 2012. Android Permissions: A Perspective Combining Risks and Benefits. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies (Newark, New Jersey, USA) (SACMAT '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 13--22. https://doi.org/10.1145/2295136.2295141
[60]
Janice C Sipior, Burke T Ward, and Linda Volonino. 2014. Privacy concerns associated with smartphone use. Journal of Internet Commerce, Vol. 13, 3--4 (2014), 177--193. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332861.2014.947902
[61]
Parth Kirankumar Thakkar, Shijing He, Shiyu Xu, Danny Yuxing Huang, and Yaxing Yao. 2022. 'It Would Probably Turn into a Social Faux-Pas': Users' and Bystanders? Preferences of Privacy Awareness Mechanisms in Smart Homes. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 404, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502137
[62]
Priyanka Verma and Sameer Patil. 2021. Exploring Privacy Aspects of Smartphone Notifications. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction (Toulouse & Virtual, France) (MobileHCI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 48, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447526.3472065
[63]
Maximiliane Windl and Sven Mayer. 2022. The Skewed Privacy Concerns of Bystanders in Smart Environments. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 6, MHCI, Article 184 (sep 2022), 21 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3546719
[64]
Maximiliane Windl, Albrecht Schmidt, and Sebastian S. Feger. 2023. Investigating Tangible Privacy-Preserving Mechanisms for Future Smart Homes. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 70, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581167
[65]
Maximiliane Windl, Verena Winterhalter, Albrecht Schmidt, and Sven Mayer. 2023. Understanding and Mitigating Technology-Facilitated Privacy Violations in the Physical World. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 585, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580909
[66]
Jacob O. Wobbrock, Leah Findlater, Darren Gergle, and James J. Higgins. 2011. The Aligned Rank Transform for Nonparametric Factorial Analyses Using Only Anova Procedures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 143--146. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978963
[67]
Serena Zheng, Noah Apthorpe, Marshini Chetty, and Nick Feamster. 2018. User Perceptions of Smart Home IoT Privacy. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., Vol. 2, CSCW, Article 200 (nov 2018), 20 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274469
[68]
Yajin Zhou and Xuxian Jiang. 2012. Dissecting Android Malware: Characterization and Evolution. In 2012 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 95--109. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2012.16
[69]
Jan Henrik Ziegeldorf, Oscar Garcia Morchon, and Klaus Wehrle. 2014. Privacy in the Internet of Things: threats and challenges. Security and Communication Networks, Vol. 7, 12 (2014), 2728--2742. https://doi.org/10.1002/sec.795
Index Terms
- Exploring Users' Mental Models and Privacy Concerns During Interconnected Interactions
Recommendations
Internet users' perceptions of 'privacy concerns' and 'privacy actions'
A consistent finding reported in online privacy research is that an overwhelming majority of people are 'concerned' about their privacy when they use the Internet. Therefore, it is important to understand the discourse of Internet users' privacy ...
“It would probably turn into a social faux-pas”: Users’ and Bystanders’ Preferences of Privacy Awareness Mechanisms in Smart Homes
CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThe opaque data practices in smart home devices have raised significant privacy concerns for smart home users and bystanders. One way to learn about the data practices is through privacy-related notifications. However, how to deliver these notifications ...
“It's a Fair Game”, or Is It? Examining How Users Navigate Disclosure Risks and Benefits When Using LLM-Based Conversational Agents
CHI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThe widespread use of Large Language Model (LLM)-based conversational agents (CAs), especially in high-stakes domains, raises many privacy concerns. Building ethical LLM-based CAs that respect user privacy requires an in-depth understanding of the ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
September 2024
1136 pages
Copyright © 2024 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].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 24 September 2024
Published in PACMHCI Volume 8, Issue MHCI
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 151Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)151
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)19
Reflects downloads up to 25 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in