journal article
Dec 21, 2022
Privacy-Enhancing Technology and Everyday Augmented Reality
Joseph O'Hagan
Pejman Saeghe
Jan Gugenheimer
Daniel Medeiros
Karola Marky
Mohamed Khamis
Mark McGill
Pejman Saeghe
Jan Gugenheimer
Daniel Medeiros
Karola Marky
Mohamed Khamis
Mark McGill
Abstract
Fundamental to Augmented Reality (AR) headsets is their capacity to visually and aurally sense the world around them, necessary to drive the positional tracking that makes rendering 3D spatial content possible. This requisite sensing also opens the door for more advanced AR-driven activities, such as augmented perception, volumetric capture and biometric identification - activities with the potential to expose bystanders to significant privacy risks. Existing Privacy-Enhancing Technologies (PETs) often safeguard against these risks at a low level e.g., instituting camera access controls. However, we argue that such PETs are incompatible with the need for always-on sensing given AR headsets' intended everyday use. Through an online survey (N=102), we examine bystanders' awareness of, and concerns regarding, potentially privacy infringing AR activities; the extent to which bystanders' consent should be sought; and the level of granularity of information necessary to provide awareness of AR activities to bystanders. Our findings suggest that PETs should take into account the AR activity type, and relationship to bystanders, selectively facilitating awareness and consent. In this way, we can ensure bystanders feel their privacy is respected by everyday AR headsets, and avoid unnecessary rejection of these powerful devices by society.
Topics
No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →
References
162
[1]
2021. Guide to the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/ Publisher: ICO.
[2]
2021. RightsCon: As AR/VR becomes a reality it needs a human rights framework. https://www.eff.org/event/rightscon-arvr-becomes-reality-it-needs-human-rights-framework
[3]
Article 19. 2021. Emotion Recognition Technology Report. https://www.article19.org/emotion-recognition-technology-report/
[4]
Article 19. 2021. When bodies become data: Biometric technologies and free expression. https://www.article19.org/biometric-technologies-privacy-data-free-expression/
[6]
Alessandro Acquisti, Ralph Gross, and Fred Stutzman. 2011. Faces of facebook: Privacy in the age of augmented reality. BlackHat USA 2 (2011), 1--20.
[9]
Imtiaz Ahmad, Rosta Farzan, Apu Kapadia, and Adam J. Lee. 2020. Tangible Privacy: Towards User-Centric Sensor Designs for Bystander Privacy. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW2 (Oct. 2020), 116:1--116:28. https://doi.org/10/gmk8w9
[10]
[11]
[13]
[15]
BBC News. 2019. Upskirting now a crime after woman's campaign. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47902522
[16]
Contextual Integrity through the Lens of Computer Science
Sebastian Benthall, Seda Gürses, Helen Nissenbaum
Foundations and Trends® in Privacy and Security
10.1561/3300000016
[18]
Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru. 2018. Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification. In Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. PMLR, 77--91. http://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html ISSN: 2640--3498.
[19]
Kent Bye. 2019. XR Ethics Manifesto. https://www.slideshare.net/kentbye/xr-ethics-manifesto-updated-nov-2--2019
[20]
Supriyo Chakraborty, Chenguang Shen, Kasturi Rangan Raghavan, Yasser Shoukry, Matt Millar, and Mani Srivastava. 2014. ipShield: A Framework For Enforcing Context-Aware Privacy. In 11th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 14). USENIX Association, Seattle, WA, 143--156. https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi14/technical-sessions/presentation/chakraborty
[22]
Bobby Chesney and Danielle Citron. 2019. Deep fakes: A looming challenge for privacy, democracy, and national security. Calif. L. Rev. 107 (2019), 1753. Publisher: HeinOnline.
[25]
Soumyadeb Chowdhury, Md Sadek Ferdous, and Joemon M. Jose. 2016. Bystander Privacy in Lifelogging. https://doi.org/10/gmk729
[26]
Strauss A. L. Corbin J. M. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. SAGE Publications, Inc.
[29]
Claudia Cuador. 2016. From Street Photography to Face Recognition: Distinguishing between the Right to Be Seen and the Right to Be Recognized. Nova L. Rev. 41 (2016), 237. Publisher: HeinOnline.
[30]
Jaybie A. De Guzman, Kanchana Thilakarathna, and Aruna Seneviratne. 2019. Security and Privacy Approaches in Mixed Reality: A Literature Survey. Comput. Surveys 52, 6 (Oct. 2019), 110:1--110:37. https://doi.org/10/ghbfgq
[31]
[34]
Ellysse Dick. 2020. How to Address Privacy Questions Raised by the Expansion of Augmented Reality in Public Spaces. Technical Report. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. https://itif.org/publications/2020/12/14/how-address-privacy-questions-raised-expansion-augmented-reality-public
[35]
Ellysse Dick. 2021. Balancing User Privacy and Innovation in Augmented and Virtual Reality. Technical Report. Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. https://itif.org/publications/2021/03/04/balancing-user-privacy-and-innovation-augmented-and-virtual-reality
[36]
[37]
Pierre Dragicevic. 2015. HCI Statistics without p-values. (06 2015), 36.
[38]
Brian L. Due. 2015. The social construction of a Glasshole: Google Glass and multiactivity in social interaction. PsychNology Journal 13, 2 (2015).
[42]
Liv Erickson. 2020. Exploring Digital Rights: Data Sovereignty in XR. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3tMiSzRHA0
[43]
Cori Faklaris, Francesco Cafaro, Asa Blevins, Matthew A. O'Haver, and Neha Singhal. 2020. A Snapshot of Bystander Attitudes about Mobile Live-Streaming Video in Public Settings. Informatics 7, 2 (June 2020), 10. https://doi.org/10/gmmfdh Number: 2 Publisher: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.
[44]
Md Sadek Ferdous, Soumyadeb Chowdhury, and Joemon M.Jose. 2017. Analysing privacy in visual lifelogging. Pervasive and Mobile Computing 40 (Sept. 2017), 430--449. https://doi.org/10/gbx5p3
[45]
Mary Anne Franks. 2017. The Desert of the Unreal: Inequality in Virtual and Augmented Reality. U.C.D. L. Rev. 51 (Jan. 2017), 499. https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles/539
[46]
Sofien Gannouni, Arwa Aledaily, Kais Belwafi, and Hatim Aboalsamh. 2021. Emotion detection using electroencephalography signals and a zero-time windowing-based epoch estimation and relevant electrode identification. Scientific Reports 11, 1 (March 2021), 7071. https://doi.org/10/gk6hbg Bandiera_abtest: a Cc_license_type: cc_by Cg_type: Nature Research Journals Number: 1 Primary_atype: Research Publisher: Nature Publishing Group Subject_term: Computational biology and bioinformatics;Neuroscience Subject_term_id: computational-biology-and-bioinformatics;neuroscience.
[47]
Nina Gerber, Paul Gerber, and Melanie Volkamer. 2018. Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & security 77 (2018), 226--261.
[50]
Jassim Happa, Mashhuda Glencross, and Anthony Steed. 2019. Cyber Security Threats and Challenges in Collaborative Mixed-Reality. Frontiers in ICT 6 (2019). https://doi.org/10/gh2pgv Publisher: Frontiers.
Showing 50 of 162 references
Metrics
91
Citations
162
References
Details
- Published
- Dec 21, 2022
- Vol/Issue
- 6(4)
- Pages
- 1-35
- License
- View
Authors
Funding
UK Research and Innovation
Award: EP/V011189/1
Cite This Article
Joseph O'Hagan, Pejman Saeghe, Jan Gugenheimer, et al. (2022). Privacy-Enhancing Technology and Everyday Augmented Reality. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 6(4), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3569501
Related
You May Also Like
Discovering Smart Home Internet of Things Privacy Norms Using Contextual Integrity
Noah Apthorpe, Yan Shvartzshnaider · 2018
129 citations