xxyyyes
Why Johnny Can’t Opt Out: A Usability Evaluation of Tools to Limit Online Behavioral Advertising
Pedro G. Leon, Blase Ur, Rebecca Balebako, Lorrie Faith Cranor, Richard Shay, and Yang Wang
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
{pedrogln,bur,balebako,lorrie,rshay,yangwan1}@cmu.edu
ABSTRACT
We present results of a 45-participant laboratory study investigating the usability of nine tools to limit online behavioral advertising (OBA). We interviewed participants about OBA and recorded their behavior and attitudes as they configured and used a privacy tool, such as a browser plugin that blocks requests to specific URLs, a tool that sets browser cookies indicating a user’s preference to opt out of OBA, or the privacy settings built into a web browser. We found serious usability flaws in all tools we tested. Participants found many tools difficult to configure, and tools’ default settings were often minimally protective. Ineffective communication, confusing interfaces, and a lack of feedback led many participants to conclude that a tool was blocking OBA when they had not properly configured it to do so. Without being familiar with many advertising companies and tracking technologies, it was difficult for participants to use the tools effectively.
Author Keywords
Usability; Privacy; Online Behavioral Advertising; Cookies
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.2 Information Interfaces and Presentation: Miscellaneous
General Terms
Human Factors; Experimentation; Security
INTRODUCTION
The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other groups have voiced privacy concerns about online behavioral advertising (OBA) for over a decade [8]. The FTC defines online behavioral advertising as “the practice of tracking an individual’s online activities in order to deliver advertising tailored to the individual’s interests” [9]. Industry organizations have developed self-regulatory principles that call for companies to empower consumers to control
Pedro G. Leon, Blase Ur, Rebecca Balebako, Lorrie Faith Cranor, Richard Shay, and Yang Wang
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
{pedrogln,bur,balebako,lorrie,rshay,yangwan1}@cmu.edu
ABSTRACT
We present results of a 45-participant laboratory study investigating the usability of nine tools to limit online behavioral advertising (OBA). We interviewed participants about OBA and recorded their behavior and attitudes as they configured and used a privacy tool, such as a browser plugin that blocks requests to specific URLs, a tool that sets browser cookies indicating a user’s preference to opt out of OBA, or the privacy settings built into a web browser. We found serious usability flaws in all tools we tested. Participants found many tools difficult to configure, and tools’ default settings were often minimally protective. Ineffective communication, confusing interfaces, and a lack of feedback led many participants to conclude that a tool was blocking OBA when they had not properly configured it to do so. Without being familiar with many advertising companies and tracking technologies, it was difficult for participants to use the tools effectively.
Author Keywords
Usability; Privacy; Online Behavioral Advertising; Cookies
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.2 Information Interfaces and Presentation: Miscellaneous
General Terms
Human Factors; Experimentation; Security
INTRODUCTION
The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other groups have voiced privacy concerns about online behavioral advertising (OBA) for over a decade [8]. The FTC defines online behavioral advertising as “the practice of tracking an individual’s online activities in order to deliver advertising tailored to the individual’s interests” [9]. Industry organizations have developed self-regulatory principles that call for companies to empower consumers to control
References: internet cookies. In CHI Extended Abstracts (2006). (2009), 541–550. for designers. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8, 6 (2004), 440–454. Usability Testing, 1275–1316. advertising. In TPRC (2010). http://ssrn.com/abstract=1898390 (2011). Denver, CO: Measuring Usability LLC., 2011. Eds. O’Reilly, 2005, ch. 20, 401–420. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1478214 (2009).