<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Workshops,
Los Angeles, USA, March</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>An Exploration on Sharing Smart Home Devices Beyond the Home</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Abhiditya Jha</string-name>
          <email>abhiditya@knights.ucf.edu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jess Kropczynski</string-name>
          <email>jess.kropczynski@uc.edu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Heather Richter Lipford</string-name>
          <email>Heather.Lipford@uncc.edu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Pamela Wisniewski</string-name>
          <email>Pamela.Wisniewski@ucf.edu</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>UNC Charlotte</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Charlotte NC</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="US">USA</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>University of Central Florida</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Orlando FL</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="US">USA</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>University of Cincinnati</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Cincinnati OH</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="US">USA</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2019</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>20</volume>
      <issue>2019</issue>
      <abstract>
        <p>We conducted a web-based survey with 19 smart home users to gain insights into their thoughts on sharing their smart home devices with people outside their home. We aim to find whether or not users would like to share particular devices, and why. We also studied the motivations and factors which affect their decisions. We found that most people would prefer to share their smart camera, security system and locks with family members and friends to allow them to access their home for emergencies and to monitor and take care of their property.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>eol&gt;Smart Devices</kwd>
        <kwd>Internet-of-Things</kwd>
        <kwd>Smart Home</kwd>
        <kwd>Access Control</kwd>
        <kwd>IoT Sharing</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1 Introduction</title>
      <p>The possibilities of sharing smart home Internet of Things (IoT)
devices beyond the home are endless, and warrant further
exploration on how such user interfaces should be designed. To
expand this body of knowledge and to identify possible design
opportunities for smart home device sharing, we posed the
following high-level research questions:
•
•</p>
      <p>RQ1: Which smart home devices are users willing to share
with people outside of their home and for what purpose?
RQ2: With whom are smart home users willing to share
access to their smart devices and what factors affect their
decision?
To address these questions, we conducted an online survey of
IUI Workshops'19, March 20, 2019, Los Angeles, USA.</p>
      <p>Copyright © 2019 for the individual papers by the papers' authors. Copying
permitted for private and academic purposes. This volume is published and
copyrighted by its editors/author(s).
smart home users. Thus far, we conducted a pilot study with 19
adults on Amazon Mechanical Turk. In this position paper, we
provide an introduction of relevant work, our empirical methods,
and preliminary results.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2 Background</title>
      <p>
        Smart home IoT devices can collect and analyze data within
homes, relay information to users, and enhance the potential for
managing different domestic systems (e.g., heating, lighting,
entertainment) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Most smart home IoT devices offer some
form of access control among users within the home. However,
these smart home IoT devices also have the capability to share
control with anyone over the Internet. While this technical
capability exists, research on whether and how people would
want to share these devices is lacking.
      </p>
      <p>
        He et al.[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ] found that home IoT users desired different access
control capabilities for different functionality within a single
device. However, they did not explicitly explore whether and
how users would want to share these devices with people not
located within their home. Bahirat et al. found that “who” and
“what” are the most significant parameters in users’ decision to
allow or reject IoT based information collection [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. Therefore,
we asked smart home IoT users with whom outside of their
homes they would like to share their existing smart home devices
and for what purpose. We also inquired whether participants
would want others to share their devices with them. As such, the
novel contribution of this work is examining use cases for
sharing smart home IoT devices beyond the home.
3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Methods</title>
      <p>The user study consisted of an online Qualtrics survey where
each participant was a smart home device user. The study was
approved by the Institutional Review Board. The survey
questions were designed to explore the sharing preferences of
real smart home device users with a focus on devices, device
capabilities, and sharing those capabilities with others outside of
one’s home. We recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk and
word-of-mouth. The participants were adults residing in the
United States. The 12 participants recruited from Amazon
Mechanical Turk were paid $1 upon completion of the survey.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4 Preliminary Results</title>
      <p>The survey respondents owned an average of 7.07 smart home
IoT devices with a standard deviation of 5.4 devices. Age of
respondents varied from 23 to 48 years, the mean age being 34.79
years.
The most common smart home devices were smart TVs (15),
video streaming devices (12), smart speakers or personal voice
assistants (12), smart cameras (12), motion/contact sensors (10),
smart displays (10), smart lights (9) and smart thermostats (7).
Out of the 19 people surveyed, 14 people were willing to share
their smart home devices with people outside of their home.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>4.2 Devices Shares and with Whom</title>
      <p>The most common devices participants indicated they would
want shared with people outside of the home were Smart
Camera (6 shares), Security Alarm (4 shares), Motion Sensor (4
shares), Flood Alarm (3 shares) and Smart Lock (3 shares). Most
people who were willing to share their smart home devices
outside of their home wanted to do so with their family (40%)
and friends (21%). Others wanted to share with a partner or
spouse who lived outside the home (15%), co-worker (12%), and
acquaintance (12%).</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>4.3 Reasons for Sharing Smart Home Devices</title>
      <p>The participants provided various reasons for sharing their
smart home devices with people outside of their home. The most
common theme was allowing access to the home for emergency
situations and monitoring the home when they are not home.
These cases often involved sharing of smart locks in case of
emergencies, such as:
P1: “Access to the house and know if someone breaks in.”
Another commonly stated reason was taking care of pets when
their owners are not home:
P2: “If our house was on fire, I would hope someone would try to
save our dog.”
The sharing of smart cameras was always data sharing rather
than remote control. People wanted to share access to their
cameras to trusted family and friends so that they can watch
over their homes when they can’t themselves. One person
provided the following reason for sharing her camera with a
family member who lived out of her state.</p>
      <p>P4: “So that she can access my camera time to time and ensure my
house is safe even when I am there or not.”
She justified sharing her smart doorbell with her family member
who lived out of state as follows:
P4: “For the safety purposes. She can inform me if someone is at my
door when I am out for a vacation. I can then act accordingly.”</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>4.4 Reason for Not Sharing Smart Home</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>Devices</title>
      <p>Five people indicated they would not share their smart home
devices with anyone outside of their home. Two persons who
owned more than 15 smart home devices did not want to share
them with anyone outside of their homes because they felt no
need to do so:
P5: “People that watch my house do not need remote access at the
moment, they can access via codes on the devices on site. Also, we
do not leave the home often enough to worry too much.”
Another person said he would only share devices with people
who don’t live in his house when they are visiting:
P6: “The only time I would likely share access to my smart home
devices with people who do not live in my house will be when they
are visiting for a prolonged period of time. For example, if I have a
guest staying over, I will provide access to their lights, fan and
smart speaker in the guest bedroom. They can issue voice
commands to control most devices when they are in home, but that
does not mean they will be getting their own account or login.”
The other participants were primarily concerned about privacy
and security breaches, even from the device manufacturers
themselves:
P7: “I don’t want anyone spying on me; I especially don’t want
Amazon or the government spying on me!”</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>4.5 Reciprocal Sharing</title>
      <p>In terms of reciprocal sharing, most people stated that they
would prefer access to a family member’s or friend’s smart
camera, security system and locks to be able to access their home
for emergencies and to monitor and take care of their home and
pets.
5</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>Conclusion</title>
      <p>We are exploring end users’ perceptions of smart home sharing
beyond the home. Our pilot results indicate that there are
reasons people desire and can benefit from this sharing. We are
conducting a full survey with more participants to gain
additional insights.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</title>
      <p>This research was funded by Mozilla Research. We thank them
for their support. Any opinion, findings, and conclusions or
recommendations expressed in this material are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our research
sponsor.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Bahirat</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            <surname>He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Menon</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Knijnenburg</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2018</year>
          .
          <article-title>A Data-Driven Approach to Developing IoT Privacy-Setting Interfaces</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of IUI 18</source>
          ,
          <fpage>165</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>176</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S. K.</given-names>
            <surname>Firth</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Fouchal</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Kane</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            <surname>Dimitriou</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T. M.</given-names>
            <surname>Hassan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2013</year>
          .
          <article-title>Decision support systems for domestic retrofit provision using smart home data streams</article-title>
          .
          <source>30th International Conference on Applications of IT in the AEC Industry.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F</given-names>
            <surname>W. He</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Golla</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Padhi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Ofek</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Dürmuth</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E. Fernandes, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Ur</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2018</year>
          .
          <article-title>Rethinking Access Control and Authentication for the Home Internet of Things (IoT)</article-title>
          .
          <fpage>255</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>272</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>