research-article

“You just can’t know about everything”: Privacy Perceptions of Smart Home Visitors

Authors:

Max Mühlhäuser,

Florian AltAuthors Info & Claims

MUM '20: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia

Pages 83 - 95

https://doi.org/10.1145/3428361.3428464

Published: 22 November 2020 Publication History

Abstract

IoT devices can harvest personal information of any person in their surroundings and this includes data from visitors. Visitors often cannot protect their privacy in a foreign smart environment. This might be rooted in a poor awareness of privacy violations by IoT devices, a lack of knowledge, or a lack of coping strategies. Thus, visitors are typically unaware of being tracked by IoT devices or lack means to influence which data is collected about them. We interviewed 21 young adults to investigate which knowledge visitors of smart environments need and wish to be able and protect their privacy. We found that visitors consider their relation to the IoT device owner and familiarity with the environment and IoT devices when making decisions about data sharing that affect their privacy. Overall, the visitors of smart environments demonstrated similar privacy preferences like the owners of IoT devices but lacked means to judge consequences of data collection and means to express their privacy preferences. Based on our results, we discuss prerequisites for enabling visitor privacy in smart environments, demonstrate gaps in existing solutions and provide several methods to improve the awareness of smart environment visitors.

References

[1]

Noura Abdi, Kopo M. Ramokapane, and Jose M. Such. 2019. More than Smart Speakers: Security and Privacy Perceptions of Smart Home Personal Assistants. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security(SOUPS ’19). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 1–16.

[2]

Tousif Ahmed, Roberto Hoyle, Patrick Shaffer, Kay Connelly, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2017. Understanding Physical Safety, Security, and Privacy Concerns of People with Visual Impairments. IEEE Internet Computing 21, 3 (May/June 2017), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2017.77

Digital Library

[3]

Rawan Alharbi, Mariam Tolba, Lucia C. Petito, Josiah Hester, and Nabil Alshurafa. 2019. To Mask or Not to Mask? Balancing Privacy with Visual Confirmation Utility in Activity-Oriented Wearable Cameras. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3, 3, Article 72 (Sept. 2019), 29 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351230

Digital Library

[4]

Florian Alt and Emanuel von Zezschwitz (Eds.). 2019. Special Issue: Emerging Trends in Usable Security and Privacy. Journal of Interactive Media (icom) 18, 3 (Dec. 2019).

[5]

Noah Apthorpe, Yan Shvartzshnaider, Arunesh Mathur, Dillon Reisman, and Nick Feamster. 2018. Discovering Smart Home Internet of Things Privacy Norms Using Contextual Integrity. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2, 2 (2018), 59. https://doi.org/10.1145/3214262

Digital Library

[6]

Ann Blandford, Dominic Furniss, and Stephann Makri. 2016. Qualitative HCI Research: Going Behind the Scenes. Vol. 9. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. 1–115 pages.

[7]

Denys Brand, Florence D. DiGennaro Reed, Mariah D. Morley, Tyler G. Erath, and Matthew D. Novak. 2019. A Survey Assessing Privacy Concerns of Smart-Home Services Provided to Individuals with Disabilities. Behavior Analysis in Practice(2019), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00329-y

[8]

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 Conference on Ubiquitous Computing(UbiComp ’12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1145/2370216.2370226

Digital Library

[9]

Soumyadeb Chowdhury, Md Sadek Ferdous, and Joemon M. Jose. 2016. Bystander Privacy in Lifelogging. In Proceedings of the International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference: Companion Volume (Poole, United Kingdom) (HCI ’16). BCS Learning & Development Ltd., Swindon, UK, Article 15, 3 pages. https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2016.62

[10]

Hyunji Chung, Michaela Iorga, Jeffrey Voas, and Sangjin Lee. 2017. Alexa, Can I Trust You?Computer 50, 9 (2017), 100–104. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2017.3571053

Digital Library

[11]

Jessica Colnago, Yuanyuan Feng, Tharangini Palanivel, Sarah Pearman, Megan Ung, Alessandro Acquisti, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Norman Sadeh. 2020. Informing the Design of a Personalized Privacy Assistant for the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376389

Digital Library

[12]

Mary J. Culnan and Pamela K. Armstrong. 1999. Information Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation. Organization Science 10, 1 (1999), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.1.104

Digital Library

[13]

A. Das, M. Degeling, D. Smullen, and N. Sadeh. 2018. Personalized Privacy Assistants for the Internet of Things: Providing Users with Notice and Choice. IEEE Pervasive Computing 17, 3 (Jul 2018), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2018.03367733

Digital Library

[14]

Anupam Das, Martin Degeling, Daniel Smullen, and Norman Sadeh. 2018. Personalized Privacy Assistants for the Internet of Things: Providing Users with Notice and Choice. IEEE Pervasive Computing 17, 3 (Jul 2018), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2018.03367733

Digital Library

[15]

Jaybie A. de Guzman, Kanchana Thilakarathna, and Aruna Seneviratne. 2018. Security and Privacy Approaches in Mixed Reality: A Literature Survey. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 1802.05797. (2018), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359626 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.05797.pdf.

Digital Library

[16]

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 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’14). ACM, 2377–2386. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557352

Digital Library

[17]

Mariella Dimiccoli, Juan Marín, and Edison Thomaz. 2018. Mitigating Bystander Privacy Concerns in Egocentric Activity Recognition with Deep Learning and Intentional Image Degradation. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 1, 4, Article 132 (Jan. 2018), 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3161190

Digital Library

[18]

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?arxiv:cs.CY/2002.04631

[19]

Pardis Emami-Naeini, Sruti Bhagavatula, Hana Habib, Martin Degeling, Lujo Bauer, Lorrie Cranor, and Norman Sadeh. 2017. Privacy Expectations and Preferences in an IoT World. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security(SOUPS ’17). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 399–412.

[20]

Pardis Emami-Naeini, Henry Dixon, Yuvraj Agarwal, and Lorrie Faith Cranor. 2019. Exploring How Privacy and Security Factor into IoT Device Purchase Behavior. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 534, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300764

Digital Library

[21]

Md Sadek Ferdous, Soumyadeb Chowdhury, and Joemon M. Jose. 2017. Analysing privacy in visual lifelogging. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 40 (2017), 430–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmcj.2017.03.003

Digital Library

[22]

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 35, 6(2019), 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150

[23]

Christine Geeng and Franziska Roesner. 2019. Who’s In Control?: Interactions In Multi-User Smart Homes. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’19). ACM, 268. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300498

Digital Library

[24]

Philippe Golle and Kurt Partridge. 2009. On the Anonymity of Home/Work Location Pairs. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Pervasive Computing (Nara, Japan) (Pervasive ’09). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 390–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01516-8_26

Digital Library

[25]

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 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (Seattle, Washington) (UbiComp ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 571–582. https://doi.org/10.1145/2632048.2632079

Digital Library

[26]

Timo Jakobi, Corinna Ogonowski, Nico Castelli, Gunnar Stevens, and Volker Wulf. 2017. The Catch(Es) with Smart Home: Experiences of a Living Lab Field Study. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI ’17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1620–1633. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025799

Digital Library

[27]

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. 1–12.

Digital Library

[28]

Marion Koelle, Matthias Kranz, and Andreas Möller. 2015. Don’T Look at Me That Way!: Understanding User Attitudes Towards Data Glasses Usage. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (Copenhagen, Denmark) (MobileHCI ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 362–372. https://doi.org/10.1145/2785830.2785842

Digital Library

[29]

Marion Koelle, Katrin Wolf, and Susanne Boll. 2018. Beyond LED Status Lights-Design Requirements of Privacy Notices for Body-Worn Cameras. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction(TEI ’18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173225.3173234

Digital Library

[30]

Marc Langheinrich. 2002. A privacy awareness system for ubiquitous computing environments. In international conference on Ubiquitous Computing. Springer, 237–245.

[31]

Josephine Lau, Benjamin Zimmerman, and Florian Schaub. 2018. Alexa, Are You Listening?: Privacy Perceptions, Concerns and Privacy-Seeking Behaviors With Smart Speakers. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW(2018), 102. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274371

Digital Library

[32]

Scott Lederer, Jennifer Mankoff, and Anind K. Dey. 2003. Who Wants to Know What When? Privacy Preference Determinants in Ubiquitous Computing. In CHI ’03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA) (CHI EA ’03). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 724–725. https://doi.org/10.1145/765891.765952

Digital Library

[33]

Shrirang Mare, Franziska Roesner, and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2020. Smart Devices in Airbnbs: Considering Privacy and Security for both Guests and Hosts. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 2020, 2(2020), 436–458.

[34]

Karola Marky, Alexandra Voit, Alina Stöver, Kai Kunze, Svenja Schröder, and Max Mühläuser. 2020. “I don’t know how to protect myself”: Understanding Privacy Perceptions Resulting from the Presence of Bystanders in Smart Environments. In Proceedings of the NordiCHI Nordic conference on Human-computer Interaction(NordiCHI ’20). ACM, New York, USA.

Digital Library

[35]

Terence V. McCann and Eileen Clark. 2003. Grounded Theory in Nursing Research: Part 1 – Methodology. (2003).

[36]

Emily McReynolds, Sarah Hubbard, Timothy Lau, Aditya Saraf, Maya Cakmak, and Franziska Roesner. 2017. Toys That Listen: A Study of Parents, Children, and Internet-Connected Toys. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5197–5207. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025735

Digital Library

[37]

Mateusz Mikusz, Steven Houben, Nigel Davies, Klaus Moessner, and Marc Langheinrich. 2018. Raising Awareness of IoT Sensor Deployments. In Proceedings of the Living in the Internet of Things: Cybersecurity of the IoT. IET. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2018.0009

[38]

Vivian Genaro Motti and Kelly Caine. 2015. Users’ Privacy Concerns About Wearables. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security(FC ’15). Springer, 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48051-9_17

[39]

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 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

Digital Library

[40]

Briony J. Oates. 2005. Researching Information Systems and Computing. Sage.

Digital Library

[41]

Alfredo Perez, Sherali Zeadally, Luis Matos Garcia, Jaouad Mouloud, and Scott Griffith. 2018. FacePET: Enhancing Bystanders’ Facial Privacy with Smart Wearables/Internet of Things. Electronics 7, 12 (2018), 379. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics7120379

[42]

Sarah Pidcock, Rob Smits, Urs Hengartner, and Ian Goldberg. 2011. Notisense: An Urban Sensing Notification System to Improve Bystander Privacy. In Proceedings of the International Workshop Sensing Applications on Mobile Phones(PhoneSense ’11). 1–5.

[43]

Rebecca S Portnoff, Linda N Lee, Serge Egelman, Pratyush Mishra, Derek Leung, and David Wagner. 2015. Somebody’s watching me? assessing the effectiveness of webcam indicator lights. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1649–1658.

[44]

Stefanie Pötzsch. 2008. Privacy awareness: A means to solve the privacy paradox?. In IFIP Summer School on the Future of Identity in the Information Society. Springer, 226–236.

[45]

Olivia K. Richards. 2019. Family-Centered Exploration of the Benefits and Burdens of Digital Home Assistants. In Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’19). ACM, SRC11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3308458

Digital Library

[46]

Tom A. Rodden, Joel E. Fischer, Nadia Pantidi, Khaled Bachour, and Stuart Moran. 2013. At Home with Agents: Exploring Attitudes Towards Future Smart Energy Infrastructures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Paris, France) (CHI ’13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466152

Digital Library

[47]

Yunpeng Song, Yun Huang, Zhongmin Cai, and Jason I. Hong. 2020. I’m All Eyes and Ears: Exploring Effective Locators for Privacy Awareness in IoT Scenarios. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376585

Digital Library

[48]

Statista. 2019. Smart Home Worldwirde. https://www.statista.com/outlook/279/100/smart-home/worldwide(Accessed January 2020).

[49]

Madiha Tabassum, Tomasz Kosinski, and Heather Richter Lipford. 2019. I Don’t Own the Data”: End User Perceptions of Smart Home Device Data Practices and Risks. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security(SOUPS ’19).

[50]

Christian Tiefenau, Maximilian Häring, Eva Gerlitz, and Emanuel von Zezschwitz. 2019. Making Privacy Graspable: Can we Nudge Users to use Privacy Enhancing Techniques?arxiv:cs.HC/1911.07701

[51]

Blase Ur, Jaeyeon Jung, and Stuart Schechter. 2014. Intruders Versus Intrusiveness: Teens’ and Parents’ Perspectives on Home-entryway Surveillance. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (Seattle, Washington) (UbiComp ’14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1145/2632048.2632107

Digital Library

[52]

E. J. Williams. 1949. Experimental designs balanced for the estimation of residual effects of treatments. Australian Journal of Chemistry 2, 2 (1949), 149–168.

[53]

Katrin Wolf, Karola Marky, and Markus Funk. 2018. We should start thinking about Privacy Implications of Sonic Input in Everyday Augmented Reality!Mensch und Computer 2018-Workshopband(2018). https://doi.org/10.18420/muc2018-ws07-0466

[54]

Peter Worthy, Ben Matthews, and Stephen Viller. 2016. Trust Me: Doubts and Concerns Living With the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems(DIS ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 427–434. https://doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901890

Digital Library

[55]

Yaxing Yao, Justin Reed Basdeo, Smirity Kaushik, and Yang Wang. 2019. Defending My Castle: A Co-Design Study of Privacy Mechanisms for Smart Homes. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’19). ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300428

Digital Library

[56]

Yaxing Yao, Justin Reed Basdeo, Oriana Rosata Mcdonough, and Yang Wang. 2019. Privacy Perceptions and Designs of Bystanders in Smart Homes. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW(2019), 1–24.

Digital Library

[57]

Eric Zeng, Shrirang Mare, and Franziska Roesner. 2017. End User Security & Privacy Concerns with Smart Homes. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security(SOUPS ’17). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 65–80.

[58]

Eric Zeng and Franziska Roesner. 2019. Understanding and Improving Security and Privacy in Multi-User Smart Homes: A Design Exploration and In-Home User Study. In Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium(USENIX Security ’19). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 159–176.

[59]

Yu Zhai, Yan Liu, Minghao Yang, Feiyuan Long, and Johanna Virkki. 2014. A Survey Study of the Usefulness and Concerns About Smart Home Applications From the Human Perspective. Open Journal of Social Sciences 2, 11 (2014), 119. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2014.211017

[60]

Serena Zheng, Noah Apthorpe, Marshini Chetty, and Nick Feamster. 2018. User Perceptions of Smart Home IoT Privacy. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW(2018), 200. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274469

Digital Library

[61]

Verena Zimmermann, Paul Gerber, Karola Marky, Leon Böck, and Florian Kirchbuchner. 2019. Assessing Users’ Privacy and Security Concerns of Smart Home Technologies. i-com 18, 3 (2019), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2019-0015

Cited By

Shaheen YHornos MRodríguez-Domínguez C(2025)Addressing Privacy Challenges in Internet of Things (IoT) ApplicationsAmbient Intelligence – Software and Applications – 15th International Symposium on Ambient Intelligence10.1007/978-3-031-83117-1_5(45-54)Online publication date: 27-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83117-1_5
Bos BCalzada VPuri RMare SFawaz KAlmgren M(2024)Exploring Usability of Data Flow Visualizations in a Privacy-focused Smart Home DashboardProceedings of the Sixth Workshop on CPS&IoT Security and Privacy10.1145/3690134.3694823(111-117)Online publication date: 19-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3690134.3694823
Pattnaik NLi SNurse J(2024)Security and Privacy Perspectives of People Living in Shared Home EnvironmentsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869078:CSCW2(1-39)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686907
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

User Perceptions of Smart Home IoT Privacy

Smart home Internet of Things (IoT) devices are rapidly increasing in popularity, with more households including Internet-connected devices that continuously monitor user activities. In this study, we conduct eleven semi-structured interviews with smart ...
Roles Matter! Understanding Differences in the Privacy Mental Models of Smart Home Visitors and Residents
MUM '21: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia

In this paper, we contribute an in-depth study of the mental models of various roles in smart home ecosystems. In particular, we compared mental models regarding data collection among residents (primary users) and visitors of a smart home in a ...
Privacy Perceptions and Designs of Bystanders in Smart Homes

As the Internet of Things (IoT) devices make their ways into people's homes, traditional dwellings are turning into smart homes. While prior empirical studies have examined people's privacy concerns of smart homes and their desired ways of mitigating ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

MUM '20: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia

November 2020

353 pages

ISBN:9781450388702

DOI:10.1145/3428361

Copyright © 2020 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: 22 November 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Funding Sources

German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

Conference

MUM 2020

MUM 2020: 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia

November 22 - 25, 2020

Essen, Germany

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 190 of 465 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

33
Total Citations
View Citations
608
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)95
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Shaheen YHornos MRodríguez-Domínguez C(2025)Addressing Privacy Challenges in Internet of Things (IoT) ApplicationsAmbient Intelligence – Software and Applications – 15th International Symposium on Ambient Intelligence10.1007/978-3-031-83117-1_5(45-54)Online publication date: 27-Feb-2025
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83117-1_5
Bos BCalzada VPuri RMare SFawaz KAlmgren M(2024)Exploring Usability of Data Flow Visualizations in a Privacy-focused Smart Home DashboardProceedings of the Sixth Workshop on CPS&IoT Security and Privacy10.1145/3690134.3694823(111-117)Online publication date: 19-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3690134.3694823
Pattnaik NLi SNurse J(2024)Security and Privacy Perspectives of People Living in Shared Home EnvironmentsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869078:CSCW2(1-39)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686907
Shalawadi SEchtler FRaptis D(2024)Dr. Convenience Love or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love my Voice Assistant✱Proceedings of the 13th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/3679318.3685364(1-14)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3679318.3685364
Hahn SAl-Amrani NAllagah SHuang HKircher ERehs CVogt JMarky KGerber N(2024)How to Respect Bystanders' Privacy in Smart Homes - A Co-Creation StudyProceedings of the 13th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/3679318.3685340(1-19)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3679318.3685340
An JChuang YSu YOogjes DFeng AEggen B(2024)Airbnb Digital Concierges: Designing Interactions for Authentic Guest ExperienceProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661582(3419-3434)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643834.3661582
Shalawadi SGetschmann Cvan Berkel NEchtler F(2024)Manual, Hybrid, and Automatic Privacy Covers for Smart Home CamerasProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661569(3453-3470)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643834.3661569
Jain PXu ADownes TKim IKhan TBiehl JLee A(2024)Understanding Perceived Utility and Comfort of In-Home General-Purpose Sensing through Progressive ExposureProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36374328:CSCW1(1-32)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637432
Zhou HGoel MAgarwal Y(2024)Bring Privacy To The Table: Interactive Negotiation for Privacy Settings of Shared Sensing DevicesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642897(1-22)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642897
Marky KStöver APrange SBleck KGerber PZimmermann VMüller FAlt FMühlhäuser M(2024)Decide Yourself or Delegate - User Preferences Regarding the Autonomy of Personal Privacy Assistants in Private IoT-Equipped EnvironmentsProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642591(1-20)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642591
Show More Cited By

View Options

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.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten