skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


This content will become publicly available on January 1, 2026

Title: Understanding Privacy Norms through Web Forms
Web forms are one of the primary ways to collect personal information online, yet they are relatively under-studied. Unlike web tracking, data collection through web forms is explicit and contextualized. Users (i) are asked to input specific personal information types, and (ii) know the specific context (i.e., on which website and for what purpose). For web forms to be trusted by users, they must meet the common sense standards of appropriate data collection practices within a particular context (i.e., privacy norms). In this paper, we extract the privacy norms embedded within web forms through a measurement study. First, we build a specialized crawler to discover web forms on websites. We run it on 11,500 popular websites, and we create a dataset of 293K web forms. Second, to process data of this scale, we develop a cost-efficient way to annotate web forms with form types and personal information types, using text classifiers trained with assistance of large language models (LLMs). Third, by analyzing the annotated dataset, we reveal common patterns of data collection practices. We find that (i) these patterns are explained by functional necessities and legal obligations, thus reflecting privacy norms, and that (ii) deviations from the observed norms often signal unnecessary data collection. In addition, we analyze the privacy policies that accompany web forms. We show that, despite their wide adoption and use, there is a disconnect between privacy policy disclosures and the observed privacy norms.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1956393 1900654
PAR ID:
10585584
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Publisher / Repository:
The journal Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PoPETs)
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies
Volume:
2025
Issue:
1
ISSN:
2299-0984
Page Range / eLocation ID:
5 to 22
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Furnell, Steven (Ed.)
    A huge amount of personal and sensitive data is shared on Facebook, which makes it a prime target for attackers. Adversaries can exploit third-party applications connected to a user’s Facebook profile (i.e., Facebook apps) to gain access to this personal information. Users’ lack of knowledge and the varying privacy policies of these apps make them further vulnerable to information leakage. However, little has been done to identify mismatches between users’ perceptions and the privacy policies of Facebook apps. We address this challenge in our work. We conducted a lab study with 31 participants, where we received data on how they share information in Facebook, their Facebook-related security and privacy practices, and their perceptions on the privacy aspects of 65 frequently-used Facebook apps in terms of data collection, sharing, and deletion. We then compared participants’ perceptions with the privacy policy of each reported app. Participants also reported their expectations about the types of information that should not be collected or shared by any Facebook app. Our analysis reveals significant mismatches between users’ privacy perceptions and reality (i.e., privacy policies of Facebook apps), where we identified over-optimism not only in users’ perceptions of information collection, but also on their self-efficacy in protecting their information in Facebook despite experiencing negative incidents in the past. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study on the gap between users’ privacy perceptions around Facebook apps and the reality. The findings from this study offer directions for future research to address that gap through designing usable, effective, and personalized privacy notices to help users to make informed decisions about using Facebook apps. 
    more » « less
  2. Children’s and adolescents’ online data privacy are regulated by laws such as the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). Online services that are directed towards general audiences (i.e., including children, adolescents, and adults) must comply with these laws. In this paper, first, we present DiffAudit, a platform-agnostic privacy auditing methodology for general audience services. DiffAudit performs differential analysis of network traffic data flows to compare data processing practices (i) between child, adolescent, and adult users and (ii) before and after consent is given and user age is disclosed. We also present a data type classification method that utilizes GPT-4 and our data type ontology based on COPPA and CCPA, allowing us to identify considerably more data types than prior work. Second, we apply DiffAudit to a set of popular general audience mobile and web services and observe a rich set of behaviors extracted from over 440K outgoing requests, containing 3,968 unique data types we extracted and classified. We reveal problematic data processing practices prior to consent and age disclosure, lack of differentiation between age-specific data flows, inconsistent privacy policy disclosures, and sharing of linkable data with third parties, including advertising and tracking services. 
    more » « less
  3. Organisations disclose their privacy practices by posting privacy policies on their websites. Even though internet users often care about their digital privacy, they usually do not read privacy policies, since understanding them requires a significant investment of time and effort. Natural language processing has been used to create experimental tools to interpret privacy policies, but there has been a lack of large privacy policy corpora to facilitate the creation of large-scale semi-supervised and unsupervised models to interpret and simplify privacy policies. Thus, we present the PrivaSeer Corpus of 1,005,380 English language website privacy policies collected from the web. The number of unique websites represented in PrivaSeer is about ten times larger than the next largest public collection of web privacy policies, and it surpasses the aggregate of unique websites represented in all other publicly available privacy policy corpora combined. We describe a corpus creation pipeline with stages that include a web crawler, language detection, document classification, duplicate and near-duplicate removal, and content extraction. We employ an unsupervised topic modelling approach to investigate the contents of policy documents in the corpus and discuss the distribution of topics in privacy policies at web scale. We further investigate the relationship between privacy policy domain PageRanks and text features of the privacy policies. Finally, we use the corpus to pretrain PrivBERT, a transformer-based privacy policy language model, and obtain state of the art results on the data practice classification and question answering tasks. 
    more » « less
  4. Development of a comprehensive legal privacy framework in the United States should be based on identification of the common deficiencies of privacy policies. We attempt to delineate deficiencies by critically analyzing the privacy policies of mobile apps, application suites, social networks, Internet Service Providers, and Internet-of-Things devices. Whereas many studies have examined readability of privacy policies, few have specifically identified the information that should be provided in privacy policies but is not. Privacy legislation invariably starts a definition of personally identifiable information. We find that privacy policies’ definitions of personally identifiable information are far too restrictive, excluding information that does not itself identify a person but which can be used to reasonably identify a person, and excluding information paired with a device identifier which can be reasonably linked to a person. Legislation should define personally identifiable information to include such information, and should differentiate between information paired with a name versus information paired with a device identifier. Privacy legislation often excludes anonymous and de-identified information from notice and choice requirements. We find that privacy policies’ descriptions of anonymous and de-identified information are far too broad, including information paired with advertising identifiers. Computer science has repeatedly demonstrated that such information is reasonably linkable. Legislation should define these categories of information to align with technological abilities. Legislation should also not exempt de-identified information from notice requirements, to increase transparency. Privacy legislation relies heavily on notice requirements. We find that, because privacy policies’ disclosures of the uses of personal information are disconnected from their disclosures about the types of personal information collected, we are often unable to determine which types of information are used for which purposes. Often, we cannot determine whether location or web browsing history is used solely for functional purposes or also for advertising. Legislation should require the disclosure of the purposes for each type of personal information collected. We also find that, because privacy policies disclosures of sharing of personal information are disconnected from their disclosures about the types of personal information collected, we are often unable to determine which types of information are shared. Legislation should require the disclosure of the types of personal information shared. Finally, privacy legislation relies heavily on user choice. We find that free services often require the collection and sharing of personal information. As a result, users often have no choices. We find that whereas some paid services afford users a wide variety of choices, paid services in less competitive sectors often afford users few choices over use and sharing of personal information for purposes unrelated to the service. As a result, users are often unable to dictate which types of information they wish to allow to be shared, and which types they wish to allow to be used for advertising. Legislation should differentiate between take-it-or-leave it, opt-out, and opt-in approaches based on the type of use and on whether the information is shared. Congress should consider whether user choices should be affected by the presence of market power. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    As our society has become more information oriented, each individual is expressed, defined, and impacted by information and information technology. While valuable, the current state-of-the-art mostly are designed to protect the enterprise/ organizational privacy requirements and leave the main actor, i.e., the user, un-involved or with the limited ability to have control over his/her information sharing practices. In order to overcome these limitations, algorithms and tools that provide a user-centric privacy management system to individuals with different privacy concerns are required to take into the consideration the dynamic nature of privacy policies which are constantly changing based on the information sharing context and environmental variables. This paper extends the concept of contextual integrity to provide mathematical models and algorithms that enables the creations and management of privacy norms for individual users. The extension includes the augmentation of environmental variables, i.e. time, date, etc. as part of the privacy norms, while introducing an abstraction and a partial relation over information attributes. Further, a formal verification technique is proposed to ensure privacy norms are enforced for each information sharing action. 
    more » « less