Abstract
The complexity of privacy policies makes it difficult for users to understand its content. In order to solve this, tools exist that analyze and summarize those privacy policies, and present the results in a standardized visual format. The use of these tools can make it possible to analyze any privacy policy, that is, they have the advantage of scale, unlike processes that require manual classification. However, there is scarce research on their effectiveness and how users perceive them. In this paper, an experimental survey was conducted to evaluate whether one such tool, PrivacyGuide, could communicate risk and increase interest in the content of the privacy policy itself. The survey was conducted in Japan with Japanese participants, and considered two languages of the privacy policy, Japanese and English. The results show that interest in the privacy policy increased after viewing the privacy policy summary. On the other hand, risk communication was limited to the case of an English language privacy policy. In addition, survey participants also provided positive and negative feedback about the tool: there was interest in using the tool in a variety of scenarios, but there was also lack of trust in the results. The findings suggest that privacy policy summarization tools have potential to help users, but that there are barriers for adoption of the tool.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The explanation of the meaning of each of these privacy aspects is detailed in [20].
References
Alexa: Top Sites in Japan. https://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/JP
Benjamini, Y., Hochberg, Y.: Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodol.) 57(1), 289–300 (1995)
Bracamonte, V., Hidano, S., Tesfay, W.B., Kiyomoto, S.: Evaluating privacy policy summarization: an experimental study among Japanese users. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy, ICISSP, vol. 1, pp. 370–377. INSTICC, SciTePress (2019). https://doi.org/10.5220/0007378403700377
Curran, P.J., West, S.G., Finch, J.F.: The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol. Methods 1(1), 16–29 (1996)
European Parliament: Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46 (2016)
Gideon, J., Cranor, L., Egelman, S., Acquisti, A.: Power strips, prophylactics, and privacy, oh my! In: Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS 2006, pp. 133–144. ACM (2006). https://doi.org/10.1145/1143120.1143137
Gluck, J., et al.: How short is too short? Implications of length and framing on the effectiveness of privacy notices. In: Twelfth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2016), pp. 321–340. USENIX Association, Denver (2016)
Harkous, H., Fawaz, K., Lebret, R., Schaub, F., Shin, K.G., Aberer, K.: Polisis: automated analysis and presentation of privacy policies using deep learning. In: 27th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 18), pp. 531–548. USENIX Association, Baltimore (2018)
Kelley, P.G., Cesca, L., Bresee, J., Cranor, L.F.: Standardizing privacy notices: an online study of the nutrition label approach. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2010, pp. 1573–1582. ACM, New York (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753561
Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L., Rao, H.R.: A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 44(2), 544–564 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.07.001
Kizilcec, R.F.: How much information?: Effects of transparency on trust in an algorithmic interface. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2016, pp. 2390–2395. ACM, New York (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858402
Kline, R.B.: Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New York (2005)
Lee, J.D., See, K.A.: Trust in automation: designing for appropriate reliance. Hum. Factors 46(1), 50–80 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392
McDonald, A.M., Cranor, L.F.: The cost of reading privacy policies. I/S: J. Law Policy Inf. Soc. 4, 543 (2008)
Proctor, R.W., Ali, M.A., Vu, K.P.L.: Examining usability of web privacy policies. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 24(3), 307–328 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310801937999
Rosseel, Y.: Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 48(2), 1–36 (2012). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications: Population and Households of Japan 2010. Tech. rep
Steinfeld, N.: “I agree to the terms and conditions”: (How) do users read privacy policies online? An eye-tracking experiment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 55, 992–1000 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.038
Sunyaev, A., Dehling, T., Taylor, P.L., Mandl, K.D.: Availability and quality of mobile health app privacy policies. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 22(e1), e28–e33 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002605
Tesfay, W.B., Hofmann, P., Nakamura, T., Kiyomoto, S., Serna, J.: PrivacyGuide: towards an implementation of the EU GDPR on internet privacy policy evaluation. In: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Workshop on Security and Privacy Analytics, IWSPA 2018, pp. 15–21. ACM, New York (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3180445.3180447
ToSDR: Terms of Service; Didn’t Read(2019). https://tosdr.org/
Zaeem, R.N., German, R.L., Barber, K.S.: PrivacyCheck: automatic summarization of privacy policies using data mining. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 18(4), 53:1–53:18 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3127519
Zimmeck, S., Bellovin, S.M.: Privee: an architecture for automatically analyzing web privacy policies. In: 23rd USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 2014), pp. 1–16. USENIX Association, San Diego (August 2014)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bracamonte, V., Hidano, S., Tesfay, W.B., Kiyomoto, S. (2020). User Study of the Effectiveness of a Privacy Policy Summarization Tool. In: Mori, P., Furnell, S., Camp, O. (eds) Information Systems Security and Privacy. ICISSP 2019. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1221. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49443-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49443-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-49442-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-49443-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)