skip to main content
10.1145/3490632.3490664acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmumConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Roles Matter! Understanding Differences in the Privacy Mental Models of Smart Home Visitors and Residents

Published: 25 February 2022 Publication History

Abstract

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 qualitative study (N=30) to better understand how their specific privacy needs can be addressed. Our results suggest that visitors have a limited understanding of how smart devices collect and store sensitive data about them. Misconceptions in visitors’ mental models result in missing awareness and ultimately limit their ability to protect their privacy. We discuss the limitations of existing solutions and challenges for the design of future smart home environments that reflect the privacy concerns of users and visitors alike, meant to inform the design of future privacy interfaces for IoT devices.

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
[3]
Tousif Ahmed, Apu Kapadia, Venkatesh Potluri, and Manohar Swaminathan. 2018. Up to a Limit? Privacy Concerns of Bystanders and Their Willingness to Share Additional Information with Visually Impaired Users of Assistive Technologies. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies (IMWUT) 2, 3, Article 89 (Sept. 2018), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3264899
[4]
Frances K. Aldrich. 2003. Smart Homes: Past, Present and Future. Springer London, London, 17–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-85233-854-7_2
[5]
Florian Alt and Emanuel von Zezschwitz. 2019. Emerging Trends in Usable Security and Privacy. Journal of Interactive Media (icom) 18, 3 (Dec. 2019), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2019-0019
[6]
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
[7]
Kang Bing, Liu Fu, Yun Zhuo, and Liang Yanlei. 2011. Design of an Internet of Things-Based Smart Home System. Proc. ICICIP 2011 2(2011), 921–924. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICIP.2011.6008384
[8]
Christine L. Borgman. 1986. The User’s Mental Model of an Information Retrieval System: An Experiment on a Prototype Online Catalog. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 24, 1 (1986), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(86)80039-6
[9]
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 13 (2019), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00329-y
[10]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2012. Thematic analysis.(2012).
[11]
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
[12]
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
[13]
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
[14]
Camille Cobb, Sruti Bhagavatula, Kalil Anderson Garrett, Alison Hoffman, Varun Rao, and Lujo Bauer. 2021. “I would have to evaluate their objections”: Privacy tensions between smart home device owners and incidental users. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 4 (2021), 54–75.
[15]
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
[16]
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
[17]
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., 40 pages. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.05797.pdf.
[18]
Malin Eiband, Hanna Schneider, Mark Bilandzic, Julian Fazekas-Con, Mareike Haug, and Heinrich Hussmann. 2018. Bringing Transparency Design into Practice. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (Tokyo, Japan) (IUI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1145/3172944.3172961
[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
[21]
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
[22]
Pranay P. Gaikwad, Jyotsna P. Gabhane, and Snehal S. Golait. 2015. A Survey Based on Smart Homes System Using Internet-of-Things. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computation of Power, Energy, Information and Communication(ICCPEIC ’15). IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 0330–0335. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCPEIC.2015.7259486
[23]
Radhika Garg and Christopher Moreno. 2019. Understanding Motivators, Constraints, and Practices of Sharing Internet of Things. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 3, 2, Article 44 (June 2019), 21 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328915
[24]
Christine Geeng and Franziska Roesner. 2019. Who’s In Control? Interactions In Multi-User Smart Homes. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300498
[25]
Jayavardhana Gubbi, Rajkumar Buyya, Slaven Marusic, and Marimuthu Palaniswami. 2013. Internet of Things (IoT): A Vision, Architectural Elements, and Future Directions. Future Generation Computer Systems 29, 7 (2013), 1645 – 1660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.01.010 Including Special sections: Cyber-enabled Distributed Computing for Ubiquitous Cloud and Network Services & Cloud Computing and Scientific Applications — Big Data, Scalable Analytics, and Beyond.
[26]
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
[27]
Yue Huang, Borke Obada-Obieh, and Konstantin (Kosta) Beznosov. 2020. Amazon vs. My Brother: How Users of Shared Smart Speakers Perceive and Cope with Privacy Risks. 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/10.1145/3313831.3376529
[28]
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
[29]
Philip N. Johnson-Laird. 1983. Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Number 6. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
[30]
Ruogu Kang, Laura Dabbish, Nathaniel Fruchter, and Sara Kiesler. 2015. “My Data Just Goes Everywhere:” User Mental Models of the Internet and Implications for Privacy and Security. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security(SOUPS ’15). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 39–52.
[31]
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
[32]
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
[33]
Vinay Koshy, Joon Sung Sung Park, Ti-Chung Cheng, and Karrie Karahalios. 2021. “We Just Use What They Give Us”: Understanding Passenger User Perspectives in Smart Homes. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445598
[34]
Todd Kulesza, Simone Stumpf, Margaret Burnett, Sherry Yang, Irwin Kwan, and Weng-Keen Wong. 2013. Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right? Ways Explanations Impact End Users’ Mental Models. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human Centric Computing(VL/HCC ’13). IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/VLHCC.2013.6645235
[35]
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. 2, 4, Article 176 (Dec. 2018), 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287054
[36]
Marc Langheinrich. 2002. A Privacy Awareness System for Ubiquitous Computing Environments. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 237–245.
[37]
Kiron Lebeck, Kimberly Ruth, Tadayoshi Kohno, and Franziska Roesner. 2018. Towards Security and Privacy for Multi-User Augmented Reality: Foundations With End Users. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy(SP ’18). IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 392–408. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2018.00051
[38]
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 15, 4 (2004), 336–355. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0032
[39]
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.
[40]
Davit Marikyan, Savvas Papagiannidis, and Eleftherios Alamanos. 2019. A Systematic Review of the Smart Home Literature: A User Perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 138 (2019), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.015
[41]
Karola Marky, Sarah Prange, Florian Krell, Max Mühlhäuser, and Florian Alt. 2020. “You Just Can’t Know about Everything”: Privacy Perceptions of Smart Home Visitors. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1145/3428361.3428464
[42]
Karola Marky, Alexandra Voit, Alina Stöver, Kai Kunze, Svenja Schröder, and Max Mühlhäuser. 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 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society (Tallinn, Estonia) (NordiCHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 11 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419249.3420164
[43]
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). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5197–5207. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025735
[44]
Sarah Mennicken, David Kim, and Elaine May Huang. 2016. Integrating the Smart Home into the Digital Calendar. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5958–5969. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858168
[45]
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, London, UK, 8. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2018.0009
[46]
Vivian Genaro Motti and Kelly Caine. 2015. Users’ Privacy Concerns About Wearables. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48051-9_17
[47]
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 abs/2002.04631(2020), 1–18.
[48]
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
[49]
Donald A. Norman. 2014. Some Observations on Mental Models. In Mental Models. Psychology Press, 15–22.
[50]
Briony J. Oates. 2005. Researching Information Systems and Computing. Sage.
[51]
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
[52]
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.
[53]
Sarah Prange and Florian Alt. 2020. I Wish You Were Smart(Er): Investigating Users’ Desires and Needs Towards Home Appliances. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI EA ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3382910
[54]
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
[55]
Sarah Prange, Emanuel von Zezschwitz, and Florian Alt. 2019. Vision: Exploring Challenges and Opportunities for Usable Authentication in the Smart Home. In Proceedings of the IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops(EuroS PW ’19). IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 154–158. https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSPW.2019.00024
[56]
Olivia K. Richards. 2019. Family-Centered Exploration of the Benefits and Burdens of Digital Home Assistants. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI EA ’19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3308458
[57]
S. S. I. Samuel. 2016. A Review of Connectivity Challenges in IoT-Smart Home. In Proceedings of the MEC International Conference on Big Data and Smart City(ICBDSC ’16). IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBDSC.2016.7460395
[58]
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
[59]
Statista. 2019. Smart Home Worldwirde. https://www.statista.com/outlook/279/100/smart-home/worldwideAccessed: January 2021.
[60]
Statista. 2020. Smart Home Report 2020. https://de.statista.com/statistik/studie/id/41155/dokument/smart-home-report/ last accessed April 15, 2021.
[61]
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). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 16.
[62]
Joe Tullio, Anind K. Dey, Jason Chalecki, and James Fogarty. 2007. How It Works: A Field Study of Non-Technical Users Interacting with an Intelligent System. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI ’07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240630
[63]
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
[64]
Charlie Wilson, Tom Hargreaves, and Richard Hauxwell-Baldwin. 2017. Benefits and Risks of Smart Home Technologies. Energy Policy 103(2017), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.047
[65]
Katrin Wolf, Karola Marky, and Markus Funk. 2018. We should start thinking about Privacy Implications of Sonic Input in Everyday Augmented Reality!. In Mensch und Computer 2018 - Workshopband. Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V., Bonn, Germany, 353–359. https://doi.org/10.18420/muc2018-ws07-0466
[66]
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
[67]
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 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300428
[68]
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.
[69]
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.
[70]
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.
[71]
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
[72]
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
[73]
Verena Zimmermann, Merve Bennighof, Miriam Edel, Oliver Hofmann, Judith Jung, and Melina von Wick. 2018. ‘Home, Smart Home’–Exploring End Users’ Mental Models of Smart Homes. In Mensch und Computer 2018-Workshopband. Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V., Bonn, Germany, 407–417.
[74]
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

View all
  • (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
  • (2024)How We Use Together: Coordinating Individual Preferences for Using Shared Devices at HomeProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661634(3407-3418)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Do You Need to Touch? Exploring Correlations between Personal Attributes and Preferences for Tangible Privacy MechanismsProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642863(1-23)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Roles Matter! Understanding Differences in the Privacy Mental Models of Smart Home Visitors and Residents
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        MUM '21: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia
        December 2021
        263 pages
        ISBN:9781450386432
        DOI:10.1145/3490632
        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: 25 February 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions for this article.

        Check for updates

        Author Tags

        1. Bystander Privacy
        2. IoT Devices
        3. Smart Homes

        Qualifiers

        • Research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Funding Sources

        • German Research Foundation
        • dtec.bw - Digitalization and Technology Research Center of the Bundeswehr
        • German Federal Ministry of Education and Research

        Conference

        MUM 2021

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate 190 of 465 submissions, 41%

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)107
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
        Reflects downloads up to 17 Feb 2025

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all
        • (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
        • (2024)How We Use Together: Coordinating Individual Preferences for Using Shared Devices at HomeProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661634(3407-3418)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
        • (2024)Do You Need to Touch? Exploring Correlations between Personal Attributes and Preferences for Tangible Privacy MechanismsProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642863(1-23)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
        • (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
        • (2024)A Closer Look at Access Control in Multi-User Voice SystemsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.337914112(40933-40946)Online publication date: 2024
        • (2024)Who Are the Users of Smart Homes? Surveillance in Domestic IoT ContextsPrivacy Symposium 202410.1007/978-3-031-76265-9_7(141-164)Online publication date: 27-Nov-2024
        • (2023)"Nobody's happy"Proceedings of the Nineteenth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3632186.3632216(543-558)Online publication date: 7-Aug-2023
        • (2023)Investigating Privacy Perceptions and Subjective Acceptance of Eye Tracking on Handheld Mobile DevicesProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35911337:ETRA(1-16)Online publication date: 18-May-2023
        • (2023)Broadening Privacy and Surveillance: Eliciting Interconnected Values with a Scenarios Workbook on Smart Home CamerasProceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3563657.3596012(1093-1113)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2023
        • (2023)A Survey of User Perspectives on Security and Privacy in a Home Networking EnvironmentACM Computing Surveys10.1145/355809555:9(1-38)Online publication date: 16-Jan-2023
        • Show More Cited By

        View Options

        Login options

        View options

        PDF

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format.

        HTML Format

        Figures

        Tables

        Media

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media