1. WEB BROWSER PRIVACY & SECURITY Nan Li Informed Consent in the Mozilla Browser: Implementing Value-Sensitive Design 10/13/2009 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

2. Agenda  Value-Sensitive Design (VSD)  Criteria and issues of informed consent online  Redesign goals and strategies  Different prototypes and their evaluation  Usability test and results  Discussion 10/13/2009 2 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

3. Conceptual Investigation Technical Investigation Empirical Investigation  What is VSD? VSD seeks to design technology that accounts for human values in a principled and comprehensive manner throughout the design process (Friedman, 1997).  Key features of VSD  Interactional theory  Direct and indirect stakeholders  Tripartite methodology Value-Sensitive Design (VSD) Tripartite methodology Technical design & mechanisms VS. ValuesValue oriented perceptions and experience Philosophically informed analyses 10/13/2009 3 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

4. Criteria of Informed Consent Online  “Informed”  Disclosure  Comprehension  “Consent”  Voluntariness  Competence  Agreement  Minimal Distraction 10/13/2009 4 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

5. Minimal Distraction  Why is this important?  If overwhelmed with queries with low perceived benefits and risks, attention to each will become low  After some threshold, users will simply seek to disable the mechanism to avoid the annoyances it presents  In either of these cases, it is impossible to maintain the other 5 properties 10/13/2009 5 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

6. Issues of Informed Consent Online  Browsers do not disclose the right sort of information.  Preference settings are typically located in obscure menu hierarchies.  The undue burden still falls to the user.  Users' 'out-of-the-box' experience of cookies (the default setting) is no different than it was in 1995: to accept all cookies.  No browser alerts a user. 10/13/2009 6 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

7. Redesign Goals  Enhance users’ local understanding of discrete cookie events as the events occur  Enhance users’ global understanding of the common uses of cookie technology including potential benefits and risks associated with those uses  Enhance users’ ability to manage cookies  Achieve design goals 1, 2 and 3 while minimizing distraction for the user 10/13/2009 7 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

8. Redesign Strategies  Iterative design, rapid prototyping, user evaluations  Enhancements to cookie manager tool  Additional cookie information  Peripheral awareness and just-in-time interventions for cookie events 10/13/2009 8 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

9. Prototype1 - The Gedanken prototype  Pros:  Aware of discrete cookie-event  Automatically block a website  Link a discrete cookie even with ones already identified  Facilitate cookies mgmt  Cons:  Lacked of adequate awareness  Was short of intuitive representation for cookie classification  Fail to conceptual link discrete cookies with a global understanding 9

10. Prototype 2 - the Mozilla Cookie-Watcher  Pros:  the ability to link visual cues for discrete cookie events with the existing Cookie- Management toolkit  the opportunity to present persistent data about recently set cookies  the ease with which a focused user could ignore a small visual representation on the screen  Moving smoothly from observation to management  greater flexibility and expandability for representing the cookie classification scheme  Cons:  Cookie information tool 10

11.  Pros:  The Cookie- Information Dialog Box  Color and formatting in cookie information dialog box Prototype 3 - the Revised Mozilla Cookie-Watcher 11

12. Usability Study  Participants  8 (3 male, 5 female) between the ages of 20~30  University students who are experienced web users  Methods  Pre-session semi-structured interview  30 minutes hands-on session + semi-structured interview  Post-session interview 10/13/2009 12 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

13. Usability Study - Results  63% (5 participants) explored the tool on their own  37% (3) chose to close the tool to save screen space  25% (2) showed that they were short of knowledge about cookies in the pre-session interview.  88% stated they would use the tool  Increased awareness of cookie events  More likely to understand benefits and risks of cookies  More easily make cookie management actions  More smoothly transfer from observation to management 10/13/2009 13 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

14. Discussion  What the difficulties to implement just-in-time interventions for cookie events? Any good ideas?  How to making proper decisions about the tradeoff of privacy and functionality?  Who is better equipped to make the decision? The user or the browser? 10/13/2009 14 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security

15. Questions?  Presentation content comes from papers  Informed Consent in the Mozilla Browser: Implementing Value-Sensitive Design  Value Sensitive Design as a Pattern  Informed Consent by Design (Chapter 24) 10/13/2009 15 08-534 Usability Privacy and Security