A Scenario-Based Methodology for Exploring Risks: Children and Programmable IoT

ABSTRACT

In this paper we report on research exploring the privacy, security and safety implications of children being able to program Internet of Things devices. We present our methodology for understanding the contexts in which children may wish to use programmable IoT, identifying risks that emerge in such contexts, and creating a set of questions that might guide design of such technologies so that they are safe for child users. We evaluate the success of the methodology, discuss the limitations of the approach, and describe future work.

References

1. Susanne Bødker. 2006. When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles. ACM, 1--8.
2. Hervé Borrion and Noémie Bouhana. 2012. iCARE: A Scenario-Based Method for the RIBS Project. In 2012 European Intelligence and Security Informatics Conference. IEEE, 284--284.
3. J. Carr. 2012. Viewpoint: What went wrong at Habbo Hotel? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology- 18433471. (2012).
4. Audrey Desjardins and Ron Wakkary. 2011. How children represent sustainability in the home. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. ACM, 37--45.
5. Allison Druin. 1999. The Role of Children in the Design Technology. Technical Report.
6. Family Online Safety Institute. 2016a. Connected Families: How Parents Think & Feel about Wearables, Toys, and the Internet of Things. https://www.fosi.org/ policy-research/connected-families/. (2016).
7. Family Online Safety Institute. 2016b. Kids & The Connected Home: Privacy in the Age of Connected Dolls, Talking Dinosaurs, and Battling Robots. https://fpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Kids-The- Connected-Home-Privacy-in-the-Age-of-Connected- Dolls-Talking-Dinosaurs-and-Battling-Robots.pdf. (2016).
8. Family Online Safety Institute. 2017. FOSI Roundtable: Connected Families. The risks and opportunities of connected devices, Toys and Cars. https://www.fosi.org/ events/fosi-roundtable-connected-families/. (2017).
9. Daniel Fitton and Janet C Read. 2016. Primed Design Activities: Scaffolding Young Designers During Ideation. In Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. ACM, 50.
10. Emily A Greene-Colozzi. 2017. An Exploration of Youth Experiences in Chatrooms. http://tinyurl.com/ y4lt8y99. (2017).
11. Lawrence Kohlberg and Richard H Hersh. 1977. Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory into practice 16, 2 (1977), 53--59.
12. Priya Kumar, Shalmali Milind Naik, Utkarsha Ramesh Devkar, Marshini Chetty, Tamara L Clegg, and Jessica Vitak. 2017. ?No Telling Passcodes Out Because They're Private': Understanding Children's Mental Models of Privacy and Security Online. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1, CSCW (2017), 64.
13. Priya Kumar, Jessica Vitak, Marshini Chetty, Tamara L Clegg, Jonathan Yang, Brenna McNally, and Elizabeth Bonsignore. 2018. Co-designing online privacy-related games and stories with children. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children. ACM, 67--79.
14. Tanya Le Sage, Sonia Toubaline, and Hervé Borrion. 2013. An object-oriented approach for modelling security scenarios. In 2013 UKSim 15th International Conference on Computer Modelling and Simulation. IEEE, 396--400.
15. Joseph Lindley, Paul Coulton, and Rachel Cooper. 2017. Why the internet of things needs object orientated ontology. The Design Journal 20, sup1 (2017), S2846--S2857.
16. Andrew Manches, Pauline Duncan, Lydia Plowman, and Shari Sabeti. 2015. Three questions about the Internet of things and children. TechTrends 59, 1 (2015), 76--83.
17. Emily McReynolds, Sarah Hubbard, Timothy Lau, Aditya Saraf, Maya Cakmak, and Franziska Roesner. 2017. Toys that listen: A study of parents, children, and internet-connected toys. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 5197--5207.
18. Neema Moraveji, Jason Li, Jiarong Ding, Patrick O'Kelley, and Suze Woolf. 2007. Comicboarding: using comics as proxies for participatory design with children. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1371--1374.
19. BBC News. 2017a. German Parents Told to Destroy Cayla Dolls Over Hacking Fears. https://www.bbc.co.uk/ news/world-europe-39002142. (2017).
20. BBC News. 2017b. Minecraft paedophile Adam Isaac groomed boys online. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ukwales- south-east-wales-38691882. (2017).
21. NSPCC. 2016. Sexting: Understanding the Risks. https://www.nspcc.org.uk/globalassets/documents/onlinesafety/ sexting-understanding-the-risks.pdf. (2016).
22. NSPCC. 2017. Technology, toys and the internet. https://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/keepingchildren- safe/online-safety/technology-toys-and-theinternet/. (2017).
23. Seymour Papert. 1986. Constructionism: A new opportunity for elementary science education. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Media Laboratory, Epistemology and Learning Group.
24. A. Pardes. 2017. Silicon Valley Writes a Playbook to Help Avert Ethical Disasters. https://www.wired.com/ story/ethical-os/. (2017).
25. James Pierce and Carl DiSalvo. 2017. Dark Clouds, Io&#!+, and {Crystal Ball Emoji}: Projecting Network Anxieties with Alternative Design Metaphors. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, 1383--1393.
26. J. Rodger and J. Taylor. 2017. Everything you need to know about the Letter X Snapchat bullying craze. https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-worldnews/ snapchat-facebook-social-media-bullying- 13994981. (2017).
27. Sue Sentance, Jane Waite, Steve Hodges, Emily MacLeod, and Lucy Yeomans. 2017a. Creating Cool Stuff: Pupils' Experience of the BBC micro:bit. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, 531--536.
28. Sue Sentance, Jane Waite, Lucy Yeomans, and Emily MacLeod. 2017b. Teaching with physical computing devices: the BBC micro:bit initiative. In Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computing Education. ACM, 87--96.
29. Rachel C Smith, Ole S Iversen, Thomas Hjermitslev, and Aviaja B Lynggaard. 2013. Towards an ecological inquiry in child-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. ACM, 183--192.
30. W. Stewart. 2017. Five-year-old girl suffers horrific burns after becoming the latest victim of 'fire fairy' game spreading online where children are told to secretly turn on gas rings. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ news/article-4290590/Fire-fairy-game-tells-childrenturn- gas-stoves.html. (2017).
31. The New York Times. 2018. Thermostats, Locks and Lights: Digital Tools of Domestic Abuse. https://www. nytimes.com/2018/06/23/technology/smart-homedevices- domestic-abuse.html. (2018).
32. Georgia M Winters, Leah E Kaylor, and Elizabeth L Jeglic. 2017. Sexual offenders contacting children online: an examination of transcripts of sexual grooming. Journal of sexual aggression 23, 1 (2017), 62--76.
33. Pamela Wisniewski. 2018. The Privacy Paradox of Adolescent Online Safety: A Matter of Risk Prevention or Risk Resilience? IEEE Security & Privacy 16, 2 (2018), 86--90.
34. Susan Wright. 2007. Graphic-Narrative Play: Young Children's Authoring through Drawing and Telling. International Journal of Education & the Arts 8, 8 (2007), 1--28.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Human computer interaction (HCI)

    • HCI design and evaluation methods

      • User studies

    • HCI theory, concepts and models

  • Interaction design

    • Interaction design process and methods

      • Participatory design