skip to main content
research-article

Privacy-Enhancing Technology and Everyday Augmented Reality: Understanding Bystanders' Varying Needs for Awareness and Consent

Published:11 January 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

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.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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-frameworkGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Article 19. 2021. Emotion Recognition Technology Report. https://www.article19.org/emotion-recognition-technology-report/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Article 19. 2021. When bodies become data: Biometric technologies and free expression. https://www.article19.org/biometric-technologies-privacy-data-free-expression/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Melvin Abraham, Pejman Saeghe, Mark Mcgill, and Mohamed Khamis. 2022. Implications of XR on Privacy, Security and Behaviour: Insights from Experts. In Nordic Human-Computer Interaction Conference (Aarhus, Denmark) (NordiCHI '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 30, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3546155.3546691Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Alessandro Acquisti, Ralph Gross, and Frederic D. Stutzman. 2014. Face recognition and privacy in the age of augmented reality. Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 6, 2 (2014), 1. https://doi.org/10/gh3w6cGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Anne Adams and Martina Angela Sasse. 1999. Users Are Not the Enemy. Commun. ACM 42, 12 (Dec. 1999), 40--46. https://doi.org/10.1145/322796.322806Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  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/gmk8w9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. 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 2, 3 (Sept. 2018), 89:1----89:27. https://doi.org/10/gmmd9bGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 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. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3, 3 (Sept. 2019), 72:1--72:29. https://doi.org/10/gmk8wgGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Sally A. Applin and Catherine Flick. 2021. Facebook's Project Aria indicates problems for responsible innovation when broadly deploying AR and other pervasive technology in the Commons. Journal of Responsible Technology 5 (2021), 100010. https://doi.org/10/gk6g7n Publisher: Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. A. Barth, A. Datta, J.C. Mitchell, and H. Nissenbaum. 2006. Privacy and contextual integrity: framework and applications. In 2006 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S P'06). 15 pp.-198. https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2006.32Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Mitchell Baxter, Anna Bleakley, Justin Edwards, Leigh Clark, Benjamin R. Cowan, and Julie R. Williamson. 2021. "You, Move There!": Investigating the Impact of Feedback on Voice Control in Virtual Environments. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3469595.3469609Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. BBC News. 2019. Upskirting now a crime after woman's campaign. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47902522Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Sebastian Benthall, Seda Gürses, and Helen Nissenbaum. 2017. Contextual Integrity through the Lens of Computer Science. Found. Trends Priv. Secur. 2, 1 (dec 2017), 1--69. https://doi.org/10.1561/3300000016Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jolie Bonner, Joseph O'Hagan, Florian Mathis, Jamie Ferguson, and Mohamed Khamis. 2021. Using Personal Data to Support Authentication: User Attitudes and Suitability. In 20th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (Leuven, Belgium) (MUM 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 35--42. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490632.3490644Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Kent Bye. 2019. XR Ethics Manifesto. https://www.slideshare.net/kentbye/xr-ethics-manifesto-updated-nov-2--2019Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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/chakrabortyGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Raja Chatila and John C. Havens. 2019. The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. In Robotics and Well-Being, Maria Isabel Aldinhas Ferreira, João Silva Sequeira, Gurvinder Singh Virk, Mohammad Osman Tokhi, and Endre E. Kadar (Eds.). Vol. 95. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 11--16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12524-0_2 Series Title: Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. SungIk Cho, Seung-wook Kim, JongMin Lee, JeongHyeon Ahn, and JungHyun Han. 2020. Effects of volumetric capture avatars on social presence in immersive virtual environments. In 2020 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR). 26--34. https://doi.org/10/gh2qr9 ISSN: 2642--5254.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Shreya Chopra and Frank Maurer. 2020. Evaluating User Preferences for Augmented Reality Interactions with the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (Salerno, Italy) (AVI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 20, 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3399715.3399716Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Soumyadeb Chowdhury, Md Sadek Ferdous, and Joemon M. Jose. 2016. Bystander Privacy in Lifelogging. https://doi.org/10/gmk729Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Strauss A. L. Corbin J. M. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. SAGE Publications, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Kirsten Crager and Anindya Maiti. 2017. Information leakage through mobile motion sensors: User awareness and concerns. In Proceedings of the European Workshop on Usable Security (EuroUSEC).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Poppy Crum. 2019. Hearables: Here come the: Technology tucked inside your ears will augment your daily life. IEEE Spectrum 56, 5 (2019), 38--43. https://doi.org/10/gh2qwv Publisher: IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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/ghbfgqGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Paula Delgado-Santos, Giuseppe Stragapede, Ruben Tolosana, Richard Guest, Farzin Deravi, and Ruben Vera-Rodriguez. 2022. A Survey of Privacy Vulnerabilities of Mobile Device Sensors. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 11s, Article 224 (sep 2022), 30 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3510579Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. 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. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 2377--2386. https://doi.org/10/gh2sn5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. 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). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2377--2386. https://doi.org/10/gh2sn5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  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-publicGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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-realityGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Mariella Dimiccoli, Juan Marín, and Edison Thomaz. 2018. Mitigating Bystander Privacy Concerns in Egocentric Activity Recognition with Deep Learning and Intentional Image Degradation. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 1, 4 (Jan. 2018), 132:1--132:18. https://doi.org/10/gmmfbgGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Pierre Dragicevic. 2015. HCI Statistics without p-values. (06 2015), 36.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Brian L. Due. 2015. The social construction of a Glasshole: Google Glass and multiactivity in social interaction. PsychNology Journal 13, 2 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Chloe Eghtebas, Francisco Kiss, Marion Koelle, and Paweł Woźniak. 2021. Advantage and Misuse of Vision Augmentation -- Exploring User Perceptions and Attitudes using a Zoom Prototype. In Augmented Humans Conference 2021 (AHs'21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 77--85. https://doi.org/10/gmk86wGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Lisa A Elkin, Matthew Kay, James J Higgins, and Jacob O Wobbrock. 2021. An aligned rank transform procedure for multifactor contrast tests. In The 34th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 754--768.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. 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 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10/gf5d6vGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Liv Erickson. 2020. Exploring Digital Rights: Data Sovereignty in XR. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3tMiSzRHA0Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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/gbx5p3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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/539Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Uwe Gruenefeld, Abdallah El Ali, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2017. Visualizing out-of-view objects in head-mounted augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. Number 81. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3098279.3122124Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Jan Gugenheimer, Evgeny Stemasov, Harpreet Sareen, and Enrico Rukzio. 2018. FaceDisplay: Towards Asymmetric Multi-User Interaction for Nomadic Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173628Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  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.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Jassim Happa, Anthony Steed, and Mashhuda Glencross. 2021. Privacy-certification standards for extended-reality devices and services. In 2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). IEEE, Lisbon, Portugal, 397--398. https://doi.org/10/gmfc7pGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. David Harborth and Sebastian Pape. 2021. Investigating privacy concerns related to mobile augmented reality Apps -- A vignette based online experiment. Computers in Human Behavior 122 (Sept. 2021), 106833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106833Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Tim Hardwick. 2021. Facebook Weighing Up Legality of Facial Recognition in Upcoming Smart Glasses. https://www.macrumors.com/2021/02/27/facebook-facial-recognition-smart-glasses-legal/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Rakibul Hasan, David Crandall, Mario Fritz, and Apu Kapadia. 2020. Automatically Detecting Bystanders in Photos to Reduce Privacy Risks. In 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security andPrivacy (SP). 318--335. https://doi.org/10/gmbpxc ISSN: 2375-1207.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Mariam Hassib, Hatem Abdelmoteleb, and Mohamed Khamis. 2020. Are my Apps Peeking? Comparing Nudging Mechanisms to Raise Awareness of Access to Mobile Front-facing Camera. In 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. ACM, Essen Germany, 186--190. https://doi.org/10/gmmgchGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Brittan Heller. 2020. Reimagining Reality: Human Rights and Immersive Technology. Carr Center Discussion Paper Series 2020--008 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Brittan Heller. 2020. Watching Androids Dream of Electric Sheep: Immersive Technology, Biometric Psychography, and the Law. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law 23, 1 (Dec. 2020), 1. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/jetlaw/vol23/iss1/1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Matt Honan. 2013. I, Glasshole: My Year With Google Glass. Wired (Dec. 2013). https://www.wired.com/2013/12/glasshole/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Sabrina Hoppe, Tobias Loetscher, Stephanie A. Morey, and Andreas Bulling. 2018. Eye Movements During Everyday Behavior Predict Personality Traits. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 12 (2018), 105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00105Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. 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 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 571--582. https://doi.org/10/cqdzGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Olivier Hugues, Philippe Fuchs, and Olivier Nannipieri. 2011. New augmented reality taxonomy: Technologies and features of augmented environment. In Handbook of augmented reality. Springer, 47--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Soheil Human and Florian Cech. 2021. A Human-Centric Perspective on Digital Consenting: The Case of GAFAM. In Human Centred Intelligent Systems (Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies), Alfred Zimmermann, Robert J. Howlett, and Lakhmi C. Jain (Eds.). Springer, Singapore, 139--159. https://doi.org/10/gh6fc4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Marcello Ienca. 2021. Do We Have a Right to Mental Privacy and Cognitive Liberty? https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/do-we-have-a-right-to-mental-privacy-and-cognitive-liberty/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Ross Johnstone, Neil McDonnell, and Julie R. Williamson. 2022. When Virtuality Surpasses Reality: Possible Futures of Ubiquitous XR. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI EA '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 6, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3516396Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Matthew Kay, Lisa A. Elkin, James J. Higgins, and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2021. ARTool: Aligned Rank Transform. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ARToolGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Matthew Kay, Lisa A. Elkin, and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2021. Contrast tests with ART. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ARTool/vignettes/art-contrasts.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Danielle Keats Citron. 2018. Sexual privacy. Yale LJ 128 (2018), 1870. Publisher: HeinOnline.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Mohamed Khamis and Florian Alt. 2021. Privacy and Security in Augmentation Technologies. In Technology-Augmented Perception and Cognition, Tilman Dingler and Evangelos Niforatos (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 257--279. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30457-7_8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Marion Koelle, Swamy Ananthanarayan, Simon Czupalla, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2018. Your smart glasses' camera bothers me! exploring opt-in and opt-out gestures for privacy mediation. In Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (NordiCHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 473--481. https://doi.org/10/gjbvrpGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Marion Koelle, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2017. Are you hiding it? usage habits of lifelogging camera wearers. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--8. https://doi.org/10/gmk87jGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Marion Koelle, Edgar Rose, and Susanne Boll. 2019. Ubiquitous Intelligent Cameras---Between Legal Nightmare and Social Empowerment. IEEE MultiMedia 26, 2 (April 2019), 76--86. https://doi.org/10/gmk7rh Conference Name: IEEE MultiMedia.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Marion Koelle, Torben Wallbaum, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2019. Evaluating a Wearable Camera's Social Acceptability In-the-Wild. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--6. https://doi.org/10/gmk82vGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  73. 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 Twelfth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 177--187. https://doi.org/10/gmk7czGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Jacob Leon Kröger, Leon Gellrich, Sebastian Pape, Saba Rebecca Brause, and Stefan Ullrich. 2022. Personal information inference from voice recordings: User awareness and privacy concerns. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 2022, 1 (2022), 6--27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Katharina Krombholz, Adrian Dabrowski, Matthew Smith, and Edgar Weippl. 2017. Exploring Design Directions for Wearable Privacy. https://publications.cispa.saarland/2808/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Jacob Leon Kröger, Otto Hans-Martin Lutz, and Florian Müller. 2020. What Does Your Gaze Reveal About You? On the Privacy Implications of Eye Tracking. In Privacy and Identity Management. Data for Better Living: AI and Privacy: 14th IFIP WG 9.2, 9.6/11.7, 11.6/SIG 9.2.2 International Summer School, Windisch, Switzerland, August 19--23, 2019, Revised Selected Papers, Michael Friedewald, Melek Önen, Eva Lievens, Stephan Krenn, and Samuel Fricker (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 226--241. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--030--42504--3_15Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  77. Mikko Kytö, Ilyena Hirskyj-Douglas, and David McGookin. 2021. From Strangers to Friends: Augmenting Face-to-face Interactions with Faceted Digital Self-Presentations. In Augmented Humans Conference 2021 (AHs'21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 192--203. https://doi.org/10/gmk7c9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. 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 on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (2018), 1--31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Kiron Lebeck, Kimberly Ruth, Tadayoshi Kohno, and Franziska Roesner. 2018. Towards Security and Privacy for Multi-user Augmented Reality: Foundations with End Users. In 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). 392--408. https://doi.org/10/gmbp4q ISSN: 2375--1207.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Kyungjun Lee, Daisuke Sato, Saki Asakawa, Hernisa Kacorri, and Chieko Asakawa. 2020. Pedestrian Detection with Wearable Cameras for the Blind: A Two-way Perspective. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376398Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Mark A. Lemley and Eugene Volokh. 2017. Law, virtual reality, and augmented reality. U. Pa. L. Rev. 166 (2017), 1051. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol166/iss5/1/ Publisher: HeinOnline.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Jackson Lingane. 2021. FPF Report: Mitigate the Privacy Risks of AR & VR Tech. https://fpf.org/blog/fpf-report-outlines-opportunities-to-mitigate-the-privacy-risks-of-ar-vr-technologies/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Ryan Mac. 2021. Facebook Apologizes After A.I. Puts 'Primates' Label on Video of Black Men. The New York Times (Sept. 2021). https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/03/technology/facebook-ai-race-primates.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. makobouzu. 2021. voice-canceling sound + semantic segmentation. https://twitter.com/amako0609/status/1381454621990735873Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. Vincent Manancourt and Mark Scott. 2020. Facebook earmarks €302M for privacy fines. https://www.politico.eu/article/facebook-earmarks-e302m-for-privacy-fines/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  86. Steve Mann. 2013. Veilance and reciprocal transparency: Surveillance versus sousveillance, AR glass, lifeglogging, and wearable computing. In 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS): Social Implications of Wearable Computing and Augmediated Reality in Everyday Life. 1--12. https://doi.org/10/gmk7hr ISSN: 2158--3412.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  87. Karola Marky, Nina Gerber, Michelle Gabriela Pelzer, Mohamed Khamis, and Max Mühlhäuser. 2022. "You offer privacy like you offer tea": Investigating Mechanisms for Improving Guest Privacy in IoT-Equipped Households. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 4 (2022), 400--420. https://doi.org/10.56553/popets-2022--0115Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. 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. In 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. ACM, Essen Germany, 83--95. https://doi.org/10/gmk7dfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. 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 (NordiCHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--11. https://doi.org/10/gmk7dgGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  90. Arunesh Mathur, Jonathan Mayer, and Mihir Kshirsagar. 2021. What Makes a Dark Pattern... Dark? Design Attributes, Normative Considerations, and Measurement Methods. arXiv:2101.04843 [cs] (Jan. 2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445610 arXiv: 2101.04843.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  91. Daniel McDuff and Christophe Hurter. 2018. InPhysible: Camouflage Against Video-Based Physiological Measurement. In 2018 40th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC). 5784--5789. https://doi.org/10/gmmfcw ISSN: 1558--4615.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  92. Mark McGill. 2021. The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Extended Reality (XR) Report--Extended Reality (XR) and the Erosion of Anonymity and Privacy. Extended Reality (XR) and the Erosion of Anonymity and Privacy - White Paper (Nov. 2021), 1--24. Conference Name: Extended Reality (XR) and the Erosion of Anonymity and Privacy - White Paper.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. Mark McGill, Stephen Brewster, David McGookin, and Graham Wilson. 2020. Acoustic Transparency and the Changing Soundscape of Auditory Mixed Reality. (April 2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376702Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  94. Mark McGill, Jan Gugenheimer, and Euan Freeman. 2020. A Quest for Co-Located Mixed Reality: Aligning and Assessing SLAM Tracking for Same-Space Multi-User Experiences. 26th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (Nov. 2020), 1--10. https://doi.org/10/ghwfq2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  95. Maryam Mehrnezhad, Ehsan Toreini, Siamak F Shahandashti, and Feng Hao. 2018. Stealing PINs via mobile sensors: actual risk versus user perception. International Journal of Information Security 17, 3 (2018), 291--313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  96. Franziska Meirose, Sven Schultze, Sebastian Kuehlewind, Marion Koelle, Larbi Abdenebaoui, and Susanne Boll. 2018. Towards Respectful Smart Glasses through Conversation Detection. (2018). https://doi.org/10/gmk87r Accepted: 2018--07--09T08:40:22Z Publisher: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V..Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  97. Monica Athnasious. 2021. Creepshots: what are they and why are they still happening? Victims share their experiences. https://screenshot-media.com/politics/human-rights/what-is-a-creepshot/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  98. Alec G. Moore, Ryan P. McMahan, Hailiang Dong, and Nicholas Ruozzi. 2021. Personal Identifiability of User Tracking Data During VR Training. In 2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). 556--557. https://doi.org/10/gk6gwxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  99. Emilio Mordini and Holly Ashton. 2012. The Transparent Body: Medical Information, Physical Privacy and Respect for Body Integrity. In Second Generation Biometrics: The Ethical, Legal and Social Context, Emilio Mordini and Dimitros Tzovaras (Eds.). Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 257--283. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3892-8_12Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  100. N. A. Moreham. 2014. BEYOND INFORMATION: PHYSICAL PRIVACY IN ENGLISH LAW. The Cambridge Law Journal 73, 2 (July 2014), 350--377. https://doi.org/10/gpgcqw Publisher: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. Anne Nassauer and Nicolas M. Legewie. 2021. Video Data Analysis: A Methodological Frame for a Novel Research Trend. Sociological Methods & Research 50, 1 (Feb. 2021), 135--174. https://doi.org/10/gfwsfz Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  102. BBC News. 2015. Google apologises for Photos app's racist blunder. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33347866. Accessed: 2021-09-08.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  103. BBC News. 2021. Facebook apology as AI labels black men primates. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-58462511. Accessed: 2021-09-08.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  104. Helen Nissenbaum. 2009. Privacy in context. In Privacy in Context. Stanford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  105. Joseph O'Hagan, Mohamed Khamis, Mark McGill, and Julie R. Williamson. 2022. Exploring Attitudes Towards Increasing User Awareness of Reality From Within Virtual Reality. In ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences (Aveiro, JB, Portugal) (IMX '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 151--160. https://doi.org/10.1145/3505284.3529971Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  106. Joseph O'Hagan, Mohamed Khamis, and Julie R. Williamson. 2021. Surveying Consumer Understanding & Sentiment Of VR. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Immersive Mixed and Virtual Environment Systems (MMVE '21) (Istanbul, Turkey) (MMVE '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 14--20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3458307.3460965Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  107. Joseph O'Hagan, Pejman Saeghe, Jan Gugenheimer, Daniel Medeiros, Karola Marky, Mohamed Khamis, and Mark McGill. 2022. Dataset and full survey for "Privacy-Enhancing Technology and Everyday Augmented Reality: Understanding Bystanders' Varying Needs for Awareness and Consent". https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7244156Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  108. Joseph O'Hagan and Julie R. Williamson. 2020. Reality Aware VR Headsets. In Proceedings of the 9TH ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (Manchester, United Kingdom) (PerDis '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 9--17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3393712.3395334Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  109. Joseph O'Hagan, Julie R. Williamson, and Mohamed Khamis. 2020. Bystander Interruption of VR Users. In Proceedings of the 9TH ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (Manchester, United Kingdom) (PerDis '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 19--27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3393712.3395339Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  110. Richard Owen, Phil Macnaghten, and Jack Stilgoe. 2012. Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy 39, 6 (12 2012), 751--760. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093arXiv:https://academic.oup.com/spp/article-pdf/39/6/751/4588094/scs093.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  111. Joseph O'Hagan, Julie R Williamson, Mohamed Khamis, and Mark McGill. 2022. Exploring Manipulating In-VR Audio To Facilitate Verbal Interactions Between VR Users And Bystanders. In International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI 2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  112. Joseph O'Hagan, Julie R. Williamson, Mark McGill, and Mohamed Khamis. 2021. Safety, Power Imbalances, Ethics and Proxy Sex: Surveying In-The-Wild Interactions Between VR Users and Bystanders. In 2021 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). 211--220. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR52148.2021.00036Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  113. 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 (Dec. 2018), 379. https://doi.org/10/gmk837Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  114. Alfredo J. Perez and Sherali Zeadally. 2018. Privacy Issues and Solutions for Consumer Wearables. IT Professional 20, 4 (July 2018), 46--56. https://doi.org/10/f79t Conference Name: IT Professional.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  115. Alfredo J. Perez, Sherali Zeadally, Scott Griffith, Luis Y. Matos Garcia, and Jaouad A. Mouloud. 2020. A User Study of a Wearable System to Enhance Bystanders' Facial Privacy. IoT 1, 2 (Dec. 2020), 198--217. https://doi.org/10/gmk83t Number: 2 Publisher: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  116. Mark Pesce. 2020. Augmented Reality and the Surveillance Society. https://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardware/augmented-reality-and-the-surveillance-societyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  117. 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/10.1145/3411764.3445067Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  118. Andrew Raij, Animikh Ghosh, Santosh Kumar, and Mani Srivastava. 2011. Privacy Risks Emerging from the Adoption of Innocuous Wearable Sensors in the Mobile Environment. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 11--20. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978945Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  119. Philipp A. Rauschnabel, Jun He, and Young K. Ro. 2018. Antecedents to the adoption of augmented reality smart glasses: A closer look at privacy risks. Journal of Business Research 92 (2018), 374--384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  120. D.A. Reid, S. Samangooei, C. Chen, M.S. Nixon, and A. Ross. 2013. Soft Biometrics for Surveillance: An Overview. In Handbook of Statistics. Vol. 31. Elsevier, 327--352. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53859-8.00013-8Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  121. Neil Richards and Woodrow Hartzog. 2016. Privacy's Trust Gap: A Review Book Review. Yale Law Journal 126, 4 (2016), 1180--1224. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/ylr126&i=1230Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  122. Neil Richards and Woodrow Hartzog. 2017. Privacy's Trust Gap: A Review. THE YALE LAW JOURNAL (2017), 45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  123. Jan Ole Rixen, Teresa Hirzle, Mark Colley, Yannick Etzel, Enrico Rukzio, and Jan Gugenheimer. 2021. Exploring Augmented Visual Alterations in Interpersonal Communication. (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  124. Katitza Rodriguez and Kurt Opsahl. 2020. Augmented Reality Must Have Augmented Privacy. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/10/augmented-reality-must-have-augmented-privacyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  125. Franziska Roesner, Tamara Denning, Bryce Clayton Newell, Tadayoshi Kohno, and Ryan Calo. 2014. Augmented reality: hard problems of law and policy. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct Publication (UbiComp '14 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1283--1288. https://doi.org/10/gmmd9xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  126. Franziska Roesner and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2021. Security and Privacy for Augmented Reality: Our 10-Year Retrospective. (Aug. 2021), 5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  127. Franziska Roesner, Tadayoshi Kohno, and David Molnar. 2014. Security and privacy for augmented reality systems. Commun. ACM 57, 4 (2014), 88--96. https://doi.org/10/gh2pf6 Publisher: ACM New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  128. Franziska Roesner, David Molnar, Alexander Moshchuk, Tadayoshi Kohno, and Helen J. Wang. 2014. World-Driven Access Control for Continuous Sensing. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, Scottsdale Arizona USA, 1169--1181. https://doi.org/10/ggp6n4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  129. Adam Rogers. 2018. So Long, Glassholes: Wearables Aren't Science Projects Anymore. Wired (May 2018). https://www.wired.com/story/google-glass-predicted-the-future/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  130. Angela Sasse. 2015. Scaring and Bullying People into Security Won't Work. IEEE Security Privacy 13, 3 (2015), 80--83. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2015.65Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  131. Roman Schlegel, Apu Kapadia, and Adam J. Lee. 2011. Eyeing your exposure: quantifying and controlling information sharing for improved privacy. In Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--14. https://doi.org/10/fzcp8rGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  132. Stefan Schneegass, Romina Poguntke, and Tonja Machulla. 2019. Understanding the Impact of Information Representation on Willingness to Share Information. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in ComputingSystems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300753Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  133. Hanna Schraffenberger and Edwin Van der Heide. 2014. Everything augmented: On the real in augmented reality. Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts 6, 1 (2014), 17--29. https://doi.org/10/gh2qvbGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  134. Hanna Kathrin Schraffenberger. 2018. Arguably augmented reality: relationships between the virtual and the real. Ph. D. Dissertation. ISBN: 9789492679673 OCLC: 1082194193.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  135. Gwen Shaffer. 2021. Applying a Contextual Integrity Framework to Privacy Policies for Smart Technologies. Journal of Information Policy 11 (2021), 222--265. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0222Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  136. Dangdang Shao, Chenbin Liu, and Francis Tsow. 2021. Noncontact Physiological Measurement Using a Camera: A Technical Review and Future Directions. ACS Sensors 6, 2 (Feb. 2021), 321--334. https://doi.org/10/gmk7ht Publisher: American Chemical Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  137. Jiayu Shu, Rui Zheng, and Pan Hui. 2017. Your Privacy Is in Your Hand: Interactive Visual Privacy Control with Tags and Gestures. In Communication Systems and Networks (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Nishanth Sastry and Sandip Chakraborty (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 24--43. https://doi.org/10/gmmfbkGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  138. Jiayu Shu, Rui Zheng, and Pan Hui. 2018. Cardea: context-aware visual privacy protection for photo taking and sharing. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 304--315. https://doi.org/10.1145/3204949.3204973Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  139. Dan Simmons. 2021. 13 Countries with GDPR-like Data Privacy Laws. https://insights.comforte.com/13-countries-with-gdpr-like-data-privacy-lawsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  140. Samarth Singhal, Carman Neustaedter, Thecla Schiphorst, Anthony Tang, Abhisekh Patra, and Rui Pan. 2016. You are Being Watched: Bystanders' Perspective on the Use of Camera Devices in Public Spaces. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3197--3203. https://doi.org/10/gmmfbjGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  141. Mel Slater, Cristina Gonzalez-Liencres, Patrick Haggard, Charlotte Vinkers, Rebecca Gregory-Clarke, Steve Jelley, Zillah Watson, Graham Breen, Raz Schwarz, William Steptoe, Dalila Szostak, Shivashankar Halan, Deborah Fox, and Jeremy Silver. 2020. The Ethics of Realism in Virtual and Augmented Reality. Frontiers in Virtual Reality 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10/ggpvct Publisher: Frontiers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  142. Snapchat. 2018. Lens Studio. https://lensstudio.snapchat.com/. Accessed: 2021--09--08.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  143. Softpedia News. 2015. In Japan, Phone Camera Shutter Sounds Can't Be Muted to Prevent Upskirt Photography. https://www.softpedia.com/blog/in-japan-phone-camera-shutter-sounds-can-t-be-muted-to-prevent-upskirt-photography-487446.shtmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  144. Titus Stahl. 2016. Indiscriminate mass surveillance and the public sphere. Ethics and Information Technology 18, 1 (March 2016), 33--39. https://doi.org/10/ggsqqrGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  145. Jay Stanley. 2019. The Dawn of Robot Surveillance: AI, Video Analytics, and Privacy. https://www.aclu.org/report/dawn-robot-surveillanceGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  146. Julian Steil, Inken Hagestedt, Michael Xuelin Huang, and Andreas Bulling. 2019. Privacy-aware eye tracking using differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications (ETRA '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--9. https://doi.org/10/gf6dj3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  147. Julian Steil, Marion Koelle, Wilko Heuten, Susanne Boll, and Andreas Bulling. 2019. PrivacEye: privacy-preserving head-mounted eye tracking using egocentric scene image and eye movement features. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications. ACM, Denver Colorado, 1--10. https://doi.org/10/gf8gcdGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  148. Megan Sullaway. 2022. Lone Wolves and Wolf Packs: Revenge Porn, Cyber Mobs, and Creepshots. Indoctrination to Hate: Recruitment Techniques of Hate Groups and how to Stop Them (2022), 217.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  149. Omer Tene and Jules Polonetsky. 2013. A theory of creepy: technology, privacy and shifting social norms. Yale JL & Tech. 16 (2013), 59. Publisher: HeinOnline.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  150. Marc Teyssier, Marion Koelle, Paul Strohmeier, Bruno Fruchard, and Jürgen Steimle. 2021. Eyecam: Revealing Relations between Humans and Sensing Devices through an Anthropomorphic Webcam. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--13. https://doi.org/10/gksmb5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  151. Alexandra Thompson and Leigh Ellen Potter. 2019. Overlays and Goggles and Projections, Oh My! Exploring Public Perceptions of Augmented Reality Technologies. In Proceedings of the 31st Australian Conference on Human-Computer-Interaction (OZCHI'19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 295--301. https://doi.org/10/gmk7c6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  152. Alexandra Thompson and Leigh Ellen Potter. 2020. Defining AR: Public Perceptions of an Evolving Landscape. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--8. https://doi.org/10/gmk7c7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  153. Marc Tran. 2015. Combatting gender privilege and recognizing a woman's right to privacy in public spaces: Arguments to criminalize catcalling and creepshots. Hastings Women's LJ 26 (2015), 185.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  154. Yilun Wang and Michal Kosinski. 2018. Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images. Journal of personality and social psychology 114, 2 (2018), 246.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  155. Susan Wiedenbeck, Jim Waters, Leonardo Sobrado, and Jean-Camille Birget. 2006. Design and evaluation of a shoulder-surfing resistant graphical password scheme. In Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces (AVI '06). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 177--184. https://doi.org/10/bcrv2pGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  156. Julie R. Williamson, Joseph O'Hagan, John Alexis Guerra-Gomez, John H Williamson, Pablo Cesar, and David A. Shamma. 2022. Digital Proxemics: Designing Social and Collaborative Interaction in Virtual Environments. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 423, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517594Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  157. Jacob O. Wobbrock, Leah Findlater, Darren Gergle, and James J. Higgins. 2011. The aligned rank transform for nonparametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 143--146. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978963Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  158. Katrin Wolf, Karola Marky, and Markus Funk. 2018. We should start thinking about Privacy Implications of Sonic Input in Everyday Augmented Reality! (2018). https://doi.org/10/gmk7sk Accepted: 2018-08-18T10:44:01Z Publisher: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V..Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  159. Niels Wouters, Ryan Kelly, Eduardo Velloso, Katrin Wolf, Hasan Shahid Ferdous, Joshua Newn, Zaher Joukhadar, and Frank Vetere. 2019. Biometric Mirror: Exploring Ethical Opinions towards Facial Analysis and Automated Decision-Making. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 447--461. https://doi.org/10/gjbt7hGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  160. Jiahui Yu, Zhe Lin, Jimei Yang, Xiaohui Shen, Xin Lu, and Thomas S. Huang. 2018. Generative Image Inpainting with Contextual Attention. In 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 5505--5514. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2018.00577Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  161. Rafael Yuste, Jared Genser, and Stephanie Herrmann. 2021. It's Time for Neuro-Rights. Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development 18 (2021), 154--165. Publisher: Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  162. Nan-ning Zheng, Zi-yi Liu, Peng-ju Ren, Yong-qiang Ma, Shi-tao Chen, Si-yu Yu, Jian-ru Xue, Ba-dong Chen, and Fei-yue Wang. 2017. Hybrid-augmented intelligence: collaboration and cognition. Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering 18, 2 (Feb. 2017), 153--179. https://doi.org/10/gg6r35Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Privacy-Enhancing Technology and Everyday Augmented Reality: Understanding Bystanders' Varying Needs for Awareness and Consent

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in

              Full Access

              • Published in

                cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
                Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 6, Issue 4
                December 2022
                1534 pages
                EISSN:2474-9567
                DOI:10.1145/3580286
                Issue’s Table of Contents

                Copyright © 2023 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: 11 January 2023
                Published in imwut Volume 6, Issue 4

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article
                • Research
                • Refereed

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader