Intelligent personal assistants (IPA), such as Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant, are becoming increasingly present in multi-user households leading to questions about privacy and consent, particularly for those who do not directly own the device they interact with. When these devices are placed in shared spaces, every visitor and cohabitant becomes an indirect user, potentially leading to discomfort, misuse of services, or unintentional sharing of personal data. To better understand how owners and visitors perceive IPAs, we interviewed 10 in-house users (account owners and cohabitants) and 9 visitors from a student and young professionals sample who have interacted with such devices on various occasions. We find that cohabitants in shared households with regular IPA interactions see themselves as owners of the device, although not having the same controls as the account owner. Further, we determine the existence of a smart speaker etiquette which doubles as trust-based boundary management. Both in-house users and visitors demonstrate similar attitudes and concerns around data use, constant monitoring by the device, and the lack of transparency around device operations. We discuss interviewees' system understanding, concerns, and protection strategies and make recommendation to avoid tensions around shared devices.CCS Concepts: • Security and privacy → Privacy protections; Social aspects of security and privacy; • Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in ubiquitous and mobile computing.
Judging the safety of a URL is something that even security experts struggle to do accurately without additional information. In this work, we aim to make experts' tools accessible to non-experts and assist general users in judging the safety of URLs by providing them with a usable report based on the information professionals use. We designed the report by iterating with 8 focus groups made up of end users, HCI experts, and security experts to ensure that the report was usable as well as accurately interpreted the information. We also conducted an online evaluation with 153 participants to compare different report-length options. We find that the longer comprehensive report allows users to accurately judge URL safety (93% accurate) and that summaries still provide benefit (83% accurate) compared to domain highlighting (65% accurate).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.