Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Mapping User Preference to Privacy Default Settings

Published: 02 November 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Managing the privacy of online information can be a complex task often involving the configuration of a variety of settings. For example, Facebook users determine which audiences have access to their profile information and posts, how friends can interact with them through tagging, and how others can search for them—and many more privacy tasks. In most cases, the default privacy settings are permissive and appear to be designed to promote information sharing rather than privacy. Managing privacy online can be complex and often users do not change defaults or use granular privacy settings. In this article, we investigate whether default privacy settings on social network sites could be more customized to the preferences of users. We survey users' privacy attitudes and sharing preferences for common SNS profile items. From these data, we explore using audience characterizations of profile items to quantify fit scores that indicate how well default privacy settings represent user privacy preferences. We then explore the fit of various schemes, including examining whether privacy attitude segmentation can be used to improve default settings. Our results suggest that using audience characterizations from community data to create default privacy settings can better match users' desired privacy settings.

References

[1]
Alessandro Acquisti and Ralph Gross. 2006. Imagined communities awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. In Privacy Enhancing Technology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Cambridge, UK, 36--58.
[2]
Frank B. Baker and Seock-Ho Kim. 2004. Item Response Theory: Parameter Estimation Techniques, (2nd. ed.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
[3]
Andrew Besmer and Heather Lipford. 2009. Tagged photos: Concerns, perceptions, and protections. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA'09). ACM, New York, NY, 4585--4590.
[4]
d Boyd and N. B. Ellison. 2007. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 1 (October 2007), 210--230
[5]
Alex Braunstein, Laura Granka, and Jessica Staddon. 2011. Indirect content privacy surveys: Measuring privacy without asking about it. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS'11). ACM, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1.
[6]
Tom Buchanan, Carina Paine, Adam N. Joinson, and Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2007. Development of measures of online privacy concern and protection for use on the internet. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58, 2 (January 2007), 157--165.
[7]
J. Cohen. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, 1 (April 1960), 37--46.
[8]
Jacob Cohen. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Psychology Press, Sage, New York, NY, USA.
[9]
Tamara Dinev and Paul Hart. 2004. Internet privacy concerns and their antecedents—measurement validity and a regression model. Behaviour & Information Technology 23, 6 (November 2004), 413--422.
[10]
Serge Egelman, Andrew Oates, and Shriram Krishnamurthi. 2011. Oops, I did it again: Mitigating repeated access control errors on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'11). ACM, New York, NY, 2295--2304.
[11]
Nicole B. Ellison, Charles Steinfield, and Cliff Lampe. 2007. The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12, 4 (August 2007), 1143--1168.
[12]
Lujun Fang and Kristen LeFevre. 2010. Privacy wizards for social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW'10). ACM, New York, NY, 351--360.
[13]
T. Govani and H. Pashley. 2005. Student awareness of the privacy implications when using Facebook. Privacy Poster Fair at Carnegie Mellon University School of Library and Information Science.
[14]
Ralph Gross, Alessandro Acquisti, and H. John Heinz, III. 2005. Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES'05). ACM, 71--80.
[15]
Maritza Johnson, Serge Egelman, and Steven M. Bellovin. 2012. Facebook and privacy: It's complicated. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS'12). ACM, 1.
[16]
P. Kumaraguru and L. F. Cranor. 2005. Privacy indexes: A survey of Westin's studies. Retrieved February 3, 2014, from Research Showcase @ CMU, Carnegie Mellon University. http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1857&context=isr.
[17]
Kun Liu and Evimaria Terzi. 2010. A framework for computing the privacy scores of users in online social networks. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 5, 1 (Dec. 2010), 1--30.
[18]
M. Madejski, M. Johnson, and S. M. Bellovin. 2012. A study of privacy settings errors in an online social network. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PERCOM'12). IEEE Lugano, Switzerland, 340--345. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6197450.
[19]
E. Michael Maximilien, Tyrone Grandison, Tony Sun, Dwayne Richardson, Sherry Guo, and Kun Liu. 2009. Privacy-as-a-service: Models, algorithms, and results on the Facebook platform. In Proceedings of Web 2.0 Security and Privacy (W2SP), Vol. 2. IEEE, Oakland, CA, USA. http://alme1.almaden.ibm.com/cs/projects/iis/hdb/Publications/papers/privw2sp.pdf.
[20]
Tehila Minkus and Nasir Memon. 2014. On a scale from 1 to 10, how private are you? Scoring Facebook privacy settings. In Proceeding of the Workshop on Usable Security. Internet Society, San Diego, CA, USA.
[21]
Mingzhen Mo, Dingyan Wang, Baichuan Li, Dan Hong, and I. King. 2010. Exploit of online social networks with Semi-Supervised Learning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN'10). Barcelona, Spain, NJ, USA, 1--8. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5596850.
[22]
Mainack Mondal, Yabing Liu, Bimal Viswanath, Krishna P. Gummadi, and Alan Mislove. 2014. Understanding and specifying social access control lists. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). USENIX Association, Menlo Park, CA, USA, 271--283.
[23]
Jonathan Mugan, T Sharma, and Norman Sadeh. 2011. Understandable Learning of Privacy Preferences through Default Personas and Suggestions. Technical Report. Carnegie Mellon University.
[24]
Daniel M. Oppenheimer, Tom Meyvis, and Nicolas Davidenko. 2009. Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, 4 (July 2009), 867--872.
[25]
R. Ravichandran, M. Benisch, P. Kelley, and N. Sadeh. 2009. Capturing social networking privacy preferences. In Proceedings of Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PET'09). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Seattle, WA, USA, 1--18. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-03168-7_1.
[26]
Robert W. Reeder, Clare-Marie Karat, John Karat, and Carolyn Brodie. 2007. Usability challenges in security and privacy policy-authoring interfaces. In Proceedings of the 11th IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction - Volume Part II (INTERACT'07). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 141--155.
[27]
N. Sadeh, J. Hong, L. Cranor, I. Fette, P. Kelley, M. Prabaker, and J. Rao. 2009. Understanding and capturing people's privacy policies in a mobile social networking application. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 13, 6 (August 2009), 401--412.
[28]
M. Shehab, G. Cheek, H. Touati, A. C. Squicciarini, and Pau-Chen Cheng. 2010. User centric policy management in online social networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks (POLICY'10). IEEE, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 9--13.
[29]
M. Shehab and H. Touati. 2012. Semi-supervised policy recommendation for online social networks. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM'12). IEEE, Istanbul, Turkey.
[30]
Arunesh Sinha, Yan Li, and Lujo Bauer. 2013. What you want is not what you get: Predicting sharing policies for text-based content on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security (AISec'13). ACM, New York, NY, 13--24.
[31]
K. Strater and H. R. Lipford. 2008. Strategies and struggles with privacy in an online social networking community. In Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction-Volume 1 (BCS-HCI'08). British Computer Society, Swinton, UK, 111--119.
[32]
Frederic Stutzman. 2006. An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network communities. Journal of the International Digital Media and Arts Association 3, 1 (May 2006), 10--18.
[33]
Fred Stutzman and Jacob Kramer-Duffield. 2010. Friends only: Examining a privacy-enhancing behavior in Facebook. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'10). ACM, New York, NY, 1553--1562.
[34]
Hisashi Tanizaki. 1997. Power comparison of non-parametric tests: Small-sample properties from Monte Carlo experiments. Journal of Applied Statistics 24, 5 (1997), 603--632.
[35]
Eran Toch, Norman M. Sadeh, and Jason Hong. 2010. Generating default privacy policies for online social networks. In Proceedings of the 28th of the International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA'10). ACM, New York, NY, 4243--4248.
[36]
Yang Wang, Gregory Norcie, Saranga Komanduri, Alessandro Acquisti, Pedro Giovanni Leon, and Lorrie Faith Cranor. 2011. “I regretted the minute I pressed share”: A qualitative study of regrets on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 7th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS'11). ACM, New York, NY, 10:1--10:16.
[37]
Jason Watson, Andrew Besmer, and Heather Richter Lipford. 2012. +Your circles: Sharing behavior on Google+. In Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS'12). ACM, New York, NY, 12:1--12:9.
[38]
Pamela Wisniewski, Heather Lipford, and David Wilson. 2012. Fighting for my space: Coping mechanisms for SNS boundary regulation. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'12). ACM, New York, NY, 609--618.
[39]
Pamela J. Wisniewski. 2012. Understanding and Designing for Interactional Privacy Needs Within Social Networking Sites. Ph.D dissertation. Charlotte, NC, USA.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Disintermediation of consumer services through blockchain? The role of intermediary brands, value-added services, and privacy concernsInternational Journal of Information Management: The Journal for Information Professionals10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2024.10280678:COnline publication date: 1-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Effective Anonymous Messaging: The Role of AltruismDecision and Game Theory for Security10.1007/978-3-031-74835-6_12(240-259)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Unveiling the Privacy Risk: A Trade-Off Between User Behavior and Information Propagation in Social MediaComplex Networks & Their Applications XII10.1007/978-3-031-53503-1_23(277-290)Online publication date: 29-Feb-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction  Volume 22, Issue 6
December 2015
232 pages
ISSN:1073-0516
EISSN:1557-7325
DOI:10.1145/2830543
Issue’s Table of Contents
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 ACM 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: 02 November 2015
Accepted: 01 August 2015
Received: 01 May 2015
Published in TOCHI Volume 22, Issue 6

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Privacy
  2. access control
  3. default policies
  4. social network sites

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)76
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
Reflects downloads up to 22 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Disintermediation of consumer services through blockchain? The role of intermediary brands, value-added services, and privacy concernsInternational Journal of Information Management: The Journal for Information Professionals10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2024.10280678:COnline publication date: 1-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Effective Anonymous Messaging: The Role of AltruismDecision and Game Theory for Security10.1007/978-3-031-74835-6_12(240-259)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Unveiling the Privacy Risk: A Trade-Off Between User Behavior and Information Propagation in Social MediaComplex Networks & Their Applications XII10.1007/978-3-031-53503-1_23(277-290)Online publication date: 29-Feb-2024
  • (2023)Effect of Device Risk Perceptions and Understandability of Data Management Features on Consumers' Willingness to Pay (WTP) for IoT Device Premium Data Management PlanProceedings of the 2023 European Symposium on Usable Security10.1145/3617072.3617118(68-85)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2023
  • (2023)Co-Design Perspectives on Algorithm Transparency Reporting: Guidelines and PrototypesProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3593013.3594064(1076-1087)Online publication date: 12-Jun-2023
  • (2023)“It’s up to the Consumer to be Smart”: Understanding the Security and Privacy Attitudes of Smart Home Users on Reddit2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP)10.1109/SP46215.2023.10179344(2850-2866)Online publication date: May-2023
  • (2023)Automating privacy decisions -where to draw the line?2023 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (EuroS&PW)10.1109/EuroSPW59978.2023.00017(108-116)Online publication date: Jul-2023
  • (2023)How “What you think you know about cybersecurity” can help users make more secure decisionsInformation & Management10.1016/j.im.2023.10386060:7(103860)Online publication date: Nov-2023
  • (2023)Systematic review on privacy categorisationComputer Science Review10.1016/j.cosrev.2023.10057449(100574)Online publication date: Aug-2023
  • (2022)Assessing User Privacy on Social Media: The Twitter Case StudyProceedings of the 2022 Workshop on Open Challenges in Online Social Networks10.1145/3524010.3539502(1-9)Online publication date: 28-Jun-2022
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media