Disagreeable Privacy Policies: Mismatches between Meaning and Users’ Understanding

Privacy policies are verbose, difficult to understand, take too long to read, and may be the least-read items on most websites even as users express growing concerns about information collection practices. For all their faults, though, privacy policies remain the single most important source of information for users to attempt to learn how companies collect, use, and share data. Likewise, these policies form the basis for the self-regulatory notice and choice framework that is designed and promoted as a replacement for regulation. The underlying value and legitimacy of notice and choice depends, however, on the ability of users to understand privacy policies. This paper investigates the differences in interpretation among expert, knowledgeable, and typical users and explores whether those groups can understand the practices described in privacy policies at a level sufficient to support rational decision-making. The paper seeks to fill an important gap in the understanding of privacy policies through primary research on user interpretation and to inform the development of technologies combining natural language processing, machine learning and crowdsourcing for policy interpretation and summarization. For this research, we recruited a group of law and public policy graduate students at Fordham University, Carnegie Mellon University, and the University of Pittsburgh (“knowledgeable users”) and presented these law and policy researchers with a set of privacy policies from companies in the e-commerce and news & entertainment industries. We asked them nine basic questions about the policies’ statements regarding data collection, data use, and retention. We then presented the same set of policies to a group of privacy experts and to a group of non-expert users. The findings show areas of common understanding across all groups for certain data collection and deletion practices, but also demonstrate very important discrepancies in the interpretation of privacy policy language, particularly with respect to data sharing. The discordant interpretations arose both within groups and between the experts and the two other groups. The presence of these significant discrepancies has critical implications. First, the common understandings of some attributes of described data practices mean that semi-automated extraction of meaning from website privacy policies may be able to assist typical users and improve the effectiveness of notice by conveying the true meaning to users. However, the disagreements among experts and disagreement between experts and the other groups reflect that ambiguous wording in typical privacy policies undermines the ability of privacy policies to effectively convey notice of data practices to the general public. The results of this research will, consequently, have significant policy implications for the construction of the notice and choice framework and for the US reliance on this approach. The gap in interpretation indicates that privacy policies may be misleading the general public and that those policies could be considered legally unfair and deceptive. And, where websites are not effectively conveying privacy policies to consumers in a way that a “reasonable person” could, in fact, understand the policies, “notice and choice” fails as a framework. Such a failure has broad international implications since websites extend their reach beyond the United States

How to make privacy policies both GDPR-compliant and usable

It is important for organisations to ensure that their privacy policies are General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) compliant, and this has to be done by the May 2018 deadline. However, it is also important for these policies to be designed with the needs of the human recipient in mind. We carried out an investigation to find out how best to achieve this.We commenced by synthesising the GDPR requirements into a checklist-type format. We then derived a list of usability design guidelines for privacy notifications from the research literature. We augmented the recommendations with other findings reported in the research literature, in order to confirm the guidelines. We conclude by providing a usable and GDPR-compliant privacy policy template for the benefit of policy writers

After Over-Privileged Permissions: Using Technology and Design to Create Legal Compliance

Consumers in the mobile ecosystem can putatively protect their privacy with the use of application permissions. However, this requires the mobile device owners to understand permissions and their privacy implications. Yet, few consumers appreciate the nature of permissions within the mobile ecosystem, often failing to appreciate the privacy permissions that are altered when updating an app. Even more concerning is the lack of understanding of the wide use of third-party libraries, most which are installed with automatic permissions, that is permissions that must be granted to allow the application to function appropriately. Unsurprisingly, many of these third-party permissions violate consumers’ privacy expectations and thereby, become “over-privileged” to the user. Consequently, an obscurity of privacy expectations between what is practiced by the private sector and what is deemed appropriate by the public sector is exhibited. Despite the growing attention given to privacy in the mobile ecosystem, legal literature has largely ignored the implications of mobile permissions. This article seeks to address this omission by analyzing the impacts of mobile permissions and the privacy harms experienced by consumers of mobile applications. The authors call for the review of industry self-regulation and the overreliance upon simple notice and consent. Instead, the authors set out a plan for greater attention to be paid to socio-technical solutions, focusing on better privacy protections and technology embedded within the automatic permission-based application ecosystem

An Automated Approach to Auditing Disclosure of Third-Party Data Collection in Website Privacy Policies

A dominant regulatory model for web privacy is "notice and choice". In this model, users are notified of data collection and provided with options to control it. To examine the efficacy of this approach, this study presents the first large-scale audit of disclosure of third-party data collection in website privacy policies. Data flows on one million websites are analyzed and over 200,000 websites' privacy policies are audited to determine if users are notified of the names of the companies which collect their data. Policies from 25 prominent third-party data collectors are also examined to provide deeper insights into the totality of the policy environment. Policies are additionally audited to determine if the choice expressed by the "Do Not Track" browser setting is respected. Third-party data collection is wide-spread, but fewer than 15% of attributed data flows are disclosed. The third-parties most likely to be disclosed are those with consumer services users may be aware of, those without consumer services are less likely to be mentioned. Policies are difficult to understand and the average time requirement to read both a given site{\guillemotright}s policy and the associated third-party policies exceeds 84 minutes. Only 7% of first-party site policies mention the Do Not Track signal, and the majority of such mentions are to specify that the signal is ignored. Among third-party policies examined, none offer unqualified support for the Do Not Track signal. Findings indicate that current implementations of "notice and choice" fail to provide notice or respect choice

Ethical guidelines for nudging in information security & privacy

There has recently been an upsurge of interest in the deployment of behavioural economics techniques in the information security and privacy domain. In this paper, we consider first the nature of one particular intervention, the nudge, and the way it exercises its influence. We contemplate the ethical ramifications of nudging, in its broadest sense, deriving general principles for ethical nudging from the literature. We extrapolate these principles to the deployment of nudging in information security and privacy. We explain how researchers can use these guidelines to ensure that they satisfy the ethical requirements during nudge trials in information security and privacy. Our guidelines also provide guidance to ethics review boards that are required to evaluate nudge-related research

Collaborative Consent: harnessing the strengths of the Internet for consent in the online environment

Consent in the online environment is a crucial issue at this stage of the development of the Internet, and at the same time, in practice it is generally dealt with only on a superficial level. However, while the Internet offers significant challenges in terms of consent, it also provides unparalleled opportunities, which, if grasped, could enable a new level of consent, particularly where consent is required for services such as behavioural advertising systems. Through an examination of the failure of Phorm, the paper introduces a new concept, 'collaborative consent', treating consent not as a discrete, one-off decision but as a collaborative and communicative process, an ongoing relationship between the individual and the enterprise. The Internet provides a medium for immediate and interactive communication that could allow information to be given and choices to be made in real time - a first step to real, informed consent in the online world