An official website of the United States government
Information about the privacy and security of Internet of Things (IoT) devices is not readily available to consumers who want to consider it before making purchase decisions. While legislators have proposed adding succinct, consumer accessible, labels, they do not provide guidance on the content of these labels. In this paper, we report on the results of a series of interviews and surveys with privacy and security experts, as well as consumers, where we explore and test the design space of the content to include on an IoT privacy and security label. We conduct an expert elicitation study by following a three-round Delphi process with 22 privacy and security experts to identify the factors that experts believed are important for consumers when comparing the privacy and security of IoT devices to inform their purchase decisions. Based on how critical experts believed each factor is in conveying risk to consumers, we distributed these factors across two layers—a primary layer to display on the product package itself or prominently on a website, and a secondary layer available online through a web link or a QR code. We report on the experts’ rationale and arguments used to support their choice of factors. Moreover, to study how consumers would perceive the privacy and security information specified by experts, we conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with 15 participants, who had purchased at least one IoT device (smart home device or wearable). Based on the results of our expert elicitation and consumer studies, we propose a prototype privacy and security label to help consumers make more informed IoTrelated purchase decisions.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on May 11, 2025
Is a Trustmark and QR Code Enough? The Effect of IoT Security and Privacy Label Information Complexity on Consumer Comprehension and Behavior
The U.S. Government is developing a package label to help consumers access reliable security and privacy information about Internet of Things (IoT) devices when making purchase decisions. The label will include the U.S. Cyber Trust Mark, a QR code to scan for more details, and potentially additional information. To examine how label information complexity and educational interventions affect comprehension of security and privacy attributes and label QR code use, we conducted an online survey with 518 IoT purchasers. We examined participants’ comprehension and preferences for three labels of varying complexities, with and without an educational intervention. Participants favored and correctly utilized the two higher-complexity labels, showing a special interest in the privacy-relevant content. Furthermore, while the educational intervention improved understanding of the QR code’s purpose, it had a modest effect on QR scanning behavior. We highlight clear design and policy directions for creating and deploying IoT security and privacy labels.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1801472
- PAR ID:
- 10571898
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- ISBN:
- 9798400703300
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 32
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Honolulu HI USA
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Starting December 2020, all new and updated iOS apps must display app-based privacy labels. As the first large-scale implementation of privacy nutrition labels in a real-world setting, we aim to understand how these labels affect perceptions of app behavior. Replicating the methodology of Emani-Naeini et al. [IEEE S&P '21] in the space of IoT privacy nutrition labels, we conducted an online study in January 2023 on Prolific with n=1,505 participants to investigate the impact of privacy labels on users' risk perception and willingness to install apps. We found that many privacy label attributes raise participants' risk perception and lower their willingness to install an app. For example, when the app privacy label indicates that financial info will be collected and linked to their identities, participants were 15 times more likely to report increased privacy and security risks associated with the app. Likewise, when a label shows that sensitive info will be collected and used for cross-app/website tracking, participants were 304 times more likely to report a decrease in their willingness to install. However, participants had difficulty understanding privacy label jargon such as diagnostics, identifiers, track and linked. We provide recommendations for enhancing privacy label transparency, the importance of label clarity and accuracy, and how labels can impact consumer choice when suitable alternative apps are available.more » « less
-
Internet of Things (IoT) device manufacturers provide little information to consumers about their security and data handling practices. Therefore, IoT consumers cannot make informed purchase choices around security and privacy. While prior research has found that consumers would likely consider security and privacy when purchasing IoT devices, past work lacks empirical evidence as to whether they would actually pay more to purchase devices with enhanced security and privacy. To fill this gap, we conducted a two-phase incentive compatible online study with 180 Prolific participants. We measured the impact of five security and privacy factors (e.g., access control) on participants’ purchase behaviors when presented individually or together on an IoT label. Participants were willing to pay a significant premium for devices with better security and privacy practices. The biggest price differential we found was for de-identified rather than identifiable cloud storage. Mainly due to its usability challenges, the least valuable improvement for participants was to have multi-factor authentication as opposed to passwords. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations on creating more effective IoT security and privacy labeling programs.more » « less
-
This study examines the content and layout of the proposed broadband consumer disclosure labels mandated by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Our large-scale user study identifies key consumer preferences and comprehension factors through a two-phase survey of 2,500 broadband internet consumers. Findings reveal strong support for broadband labels, but dissatisfaction with the FCC's proposed labels from 2016. Participants generally struggled to use the label for cost computations and plan comparisons. Technical terms confused participants, but providing participants with brief education made the terms usable. Participants desired additional information, including reliability, speed measures for both periods when performance is “normal” and periods when performance is much worse than normal, quality-of-experience ratings, and detailed network management practices. This feedback informed our improved label designs that outperformed the 2016 labels in comprehension and preference. Overall, consumers valued clear pricing and performance details, comprehensive information, and an easy-to-understand format for plan comparison. Requiring broadband service providers to deposit machine-readable plan information in a publicly accessible database would enable third parties to further customize how information is presented to meet these consumer needs. Our work additionally highlights the need for user studies of labels to ensure they meet consumer demands.more » « less
-
Privacy labels---standardized, compact representations of data collection and data use practices---are often presented as a solution to the shortcomings of privacy policies. Apple introduced mandatory privacy labels for apps in its App Store in December 2020; Google introduced mandatory labels for Android apps in July 2022. iOS app privacy labels have been evaluated and critiqued in prior work. In this work, we evaluated Android Data Safety Labels and explored how differences between the two label designs impact user comprehension and label utility. We conducted a between-subjects, semi-structured interview study with 12 Android users and 12 iOS users. While some users found Android Data Safety Labels informative and helpful, other users found them too vague. Compared to iOS App Privacy Labels, Android users found the distinction between data collection groups more intuitive and found explicit inclusion of omitted data collection groups more salient. However, some users expressed skepticism regarding elided information about collected data type categories. Most users missed critical information due to not expanding the accordion interface, and they were surprised by collection practices excluded from Android's definitions. Our findings also revealed that Android users generally appreciated information about security practices included in the labels, and iOS users wanted that information added.more » « less
