Internet of Things (IoT) systems have aroused enthusiasm and concerns. Enthusiasm comes from their utilities in people daily life, and concerns may be associated with privacy issues. By using two IoT systems as case-studies, we examine users' privacy beliefs, concerns and attitudes. We focus on four major dimensions: the collection of personal data, the inference of new information, the exchange of information to third parties, and the risk-utility trade-off posed by the features of the system. Altogether, 113 Brazilian individuals answered a survey about such dimensions. Although their perceptions seem to be dependent on the context, there are recurrent patterns. Our results suggest that IoT users can be classified into unconcerned, fundamentalists and pragmatists. Most of them exhibit a pragmatist profile and believe in privacy as a right guaranteed by law. One of the most privacy concerning aspect is the exchange of personal information to third parties. Individuals' perceived risk is negatively correlated with their perceived utility in the features of the system. We discuss practical implications of these results and suggest heuristics to cope with privacy concerns when designing IoT systems.
Ubicomp researchers have long argued that privacy is a design issue, and it goes without saying that successful design requires that we understand the desires, concerns, and awareness of the technology's users. Yet, because ubicomp systems are relatively unusual, too little empirical research exists to inform designers about potential users. Complicating design further is the fact that ubicomp systems are typically embedded or invisible, making it difficult for users to know when invisible devices are present and functioning. As early as 1993, ubicomp researchers recognized that embedded technology's unobtrusiveness both belies and contributes to its potential for supporting potentially invasive applications. Not surprisingly, users' inability to see a technology makes it difficult for them to understand how it might affect their privacy. Unobtrusiveness, nevertheless, is a reasonable goal because such systems must minimize the demands on users. To investigate these issues further, I conducted an ethnographic study of what I believe is the first US eldercare facility to use a sensor-rich environment. Our subjects were normal civilians (rather than ubicomp researchers) who lived or worked in a ubiquitous computing environment. We interviewed residents, their family members, and the facility's caregivers and managers. Our questions focused on how people understood both the ubiquitous technology and its effect on their privacy. Although the embedded technology played a central role in how people viewed the environment, they had a limited understanding of the technology, thus raising several privacy, design, and safety issues. We examined factors that influence an individual's attitude and decisions about the information handling practices of corporations. Results from a survey of 425 consumers suggested that the hypothesized model was an accurate reflection of factors that affect privacy preferences of consumers. The results provide important implications for research and practice. Our study should contribute by initiating an integrative stream of research on the impact of IT and other factors on information privacy perception. For practitioners, our findings suggested that consumers hold corporations, not the IS, responsible for any inappropriate use of personal information. Organizations, therefore, must be proactive in formulating and enforcing information privacy policy in order to address consumers' concerns. Digitization of society raises concerns about privacy. This article first describes privacy threats of life-logging. It gives the technically novice reader a quick overview of what information and communication technology (ICT) is currently preparing for society, based on state-of-the art research in the industry laboratories: ubiquitous computing, aware environments, the Internet of Things, and so on. We explain how geolocation systems work and how they can provide detailed accounts of personal activity that will deeply affect privacy. At present, system designers rarely implement privacy-enhancing technologies — we explain why, based on empirical research. On the other hand, users, while expressing concern, do not protect themselves in practice — we list reasons for this. The problem is complex because the very nature of identity and social relations works against protecting personal data; this is the privacy dilemma. At least two key mechanisms in the production of good interaction and in the construct... hat the individual shall have full protection in person and in property is a principle as old as the common law; but it has been found necessary from time to time to define anew the exact nature and extent of such protection. Political, social, and economic changes entail the recognition of new rights, and the common law, in its eternal youth, grows to meet the new demands of society. Thus, in very early times, the law gave a remedy only for physical interference with life and property, for trespasses vi et armis. Then the "right to life" served only to protect the subject from battery in its various forms; liberty meant freedom from actual restraint; and the right to property secured to the individual his lands and his cattle. Later, there came a recognition of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and his intellect. Gradually the scope of these legal rights broadened; and now the right to life has come to mean the right to enjoy life, -the right to be let alone; the right to liberty secures the exercise of extensive civil privileges; and the term "property" has grown to comprise every form of possession -intangible, as well as tangible. With the rapid diffusion of the Internet, researchers, policy makers, and users have raised concerns about online privacy, although few studies have integrated aspects of usage with psychological and attitudinal aspects of privacy. This study develops a model involving gender, generalized self-efficacy, psychological need for privacy, Internet use experience, Internet use fluency, and beliefs in privacy rights as potential influences on online privacy concerns. Survey responses from 413 college students were analyzed by bivariate correlations, hierarchical regression, and structural equation modeling. Regression results showed that beliefs in privacy rights and a psychological need for privacy were the main influences on online privacy concerns. The proposed structural model was not well supported by the data, but a revised model, linking self-efficacy with psychological need for privacy and indicating indirect influences of Internet experience and fluency on online privacy concerns about privacy through beliefs in privacy rights, was supported by the data. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Abstract This study summarizes the development and validation of a multidimensional privacy orientation scale designed for measuring privacy attitudes of Social Network Site (SNS) users. Findings confirm the existence of four dimensions: (1) belief in the value of “privacy as a right”; (2) “other-contingent privacy”; (3) “concern about own informational privacy” and (4) “concern about privacy of others.” Moreover, a segmentation of SNS users based on these attitude scores reveals three types of users: (1) privacy advocates, who are concerned about both their own and other people’s privacy; (2) privacy individualists, who are concerned mostly about their own privacy, and (3) privacy indifferents, whose score on all dimensions are lower than other segments. The results indicate that the four privacy orientation dimensions and three user segments predict key differences in terms of privacy protective behavior, information disclosure, and viewing personal information of others.