Biblio

Many consumers now rely on different forms of voice assistants, both stand-alone devices and those built into smartphones. Currently, these systems react to specific wake-words, such as "Alexa," "Siri," or "Ok Google." However, with advancements in natural language processing, the next generation of voice assistants could instead always listen to the acoustic environment and proactively provide services and recommendations based on conversations without being explicitly invoked. We refer to such devices as "always listening voice assistants" and explore expectations around their potential use. In this paper, we report on a 178-participant survey investigating the potential services people anticipate from such a device and how they feel about sharing their data for these purposes. Our findings reveal that participants can anticipate a wide range of services pertaining to a conversation; however, most of the services are very similar to those that existing voice assistants currently provide with explicit commands. Participants are more likely to consent to share a conversation when they do not find it sensitive, they are comfortable with the service and find it beneficial, and when they already own a stand-alone voice assistant. Based on our findings we discuss the privacy challenges in designing an always-listening voice assistant.

Data-driven verification methods utilize execution data together with models for establishing safety requirements. These are often the only tools available for analyzing complex, nonlinear cyber-physical systems, for which purely model-based analysis is currently infeasible. In this chapter, we outline the key concepts and algorithmic approaches for data-driven verification and discuss the guarantees they provide. We introduce some of the software tools that embody these ideas and present several practical case studies demonstrating their application in safety analysis of autonomous vehicles, advanced driver assist systems (ADAS), satellite control, and engine control systems.

Security experts often recommend using password-management tools that both store passwords and generate random passwords. However, research indicates that only a small fraction of users use password managers with password generators. Past studies have explored factors in the adoption of password managers using surveys and online store reviews. Here we describe a semi-structured interview study with 30 participants that allows us to provide a more comprehensive picture of the mindsets underlying adoption and effective use of password managers and password-generation features. Our participants include users who use no password-specific tools at all, those who use password managers built into browsers or operating systems, and those who use separately installed password managers. Furthermore, past field data has indicated that users of built-in, browser-based password managers more often use weak and reused passwords than users of separate password managers that have password generation available by default. Our interviews suggest that users of built-in password managers may be driven more by convenience, while users of separately installed tools appear more driven by security. We advocate tailored designs for these two mentalities and provide actionable suggestions to induce effective password manager usage.

Older adults (65+) are becoming primary users of emerging smart systems, especially in health care. However, these technologies are often not designed for older users and can pose serious privacy and security concerns due to their novelty, complexity, and propensity to collect and communicate vast amounts of sensitive information. Efforts to address such concerns must build on an in-depth understanding of older adults' perceptions and preferences about data privacy and security for these technologies, and accounting for variance in physical and cognitive abilities. In semi-structured interviews with 46 older adults, we identified a range of complex privacy and security attitudes and needs specific to this population, along with common threat models, misconceptions, and mitigation strategies. Our work adds depth to current models of how older adults' limited technical knowledge, experience, and age-related declines in ability amplify vulnerability to certain risks; we found that health, living situation, and finances play a notable role as well. We also found that older adults often experience usability issues or technical uncertainties in mitigating those risks -- and that managing privacy and security concerns frequently consists of limiting or avoiding technology use. We recommend educational approaches and usable technical protections that build on seniors' preferences.