Share to Protect

Quantitative Study on Privacy Issues in V2X-Technology
  • Teresa SchmidtEmail author
  • Ralf Philipsen
  • Martina Ziefle
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9750)


Currently, V2X-technology is a highly prominent research topic. The numerous advantages, possible applications and development opportunities of this intelligent technology connection into everywhere traffic situations encourage research associations worldwide to work together. Main goals are the reduction of traffic accidents, optimization and increase of energy efficiency and formation of a dense information network. However, without the acceptance of the technology from the users’ side, the needed data and information may not be provided. In order to understand the users’ attitude towards privacy and data security, the present study focuses the willingness to share data depending on different traffic situations. Using an empirical research approach, it can be stated, that users tend to be more willing to share (different types of) data to reduce the probability of a severe event. Although the necessity is transported, a general rejection of transferring (any kind of) data could be detected.


V2X-technology V2X-communication Privacy User acceptance data Security 



We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. Also, we owe gratitude to the research group on mobility at RWTH Aachen University, which works in the Center for European Research on Mobility (CERM) supported by the Excellence Initiative of German State and Federal Government. Many thanks go also to Juliana Brell and Iana Gorokhova for their valuable research input.


  1. 1.
    Statistisches Bundesamt: Verkehrsunfälle [traffic accidents] – Fachserie 8 Reihe 7 (2014). Accessed 2 Feb 2016
  2. 2.
    Farmer, C.M.: Effect of electronic stability control on automobile crash risk. Traffic Inj. Prev. 5(4), 317–325 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breuer, J.J., Faulhaber, A., Frank, P., Gleissner, S.: Real world safety benefits of brake assistance systems. In: 20th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV) (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zimmer, M.: Surveillance, privacy and the ethics of vehicle safety communication technologies. Ethics Inf. Technol. 7(4), 201–210 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Othmane, L.B., Weffers, H., Mohamad, M.M., Wolf, M.: A survey of security and privacy in connected vehicles. In: Benhaddou, D., Al-Fuqaha, A. (eds.) Wireless Sensor and Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, pp. 217–247. Springer, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Le, L., Festag, A., Baldessari, R., Zhang, W.: V2X communication and intersection safety. In: Meyer, G., Valldorf, J., Gessner, W. (eds.) Advanced Microsystems for Automotive Applications. VDI-Buch, pp. 97–107. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Katsaros, K., Kernchen, R., Dianati, M., Rieck, D., Zinoviou, C.: Application of vehicular communications for improving the efficiency of traffic in urban areas. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 11(12), 1657–1667 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gajananan, K., Sontisirikit, S., Zhang, J., Miska, M., Chung, E., Guha, S., Prendinger, H.: A cooperative its study on green light optimisation using an integrated traffic, driving, and communication simulator. In: 36th Australasian Transport Research Forum (ATRF), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iglesias, I., Isasi, L., Larburu, M., Martin, A., Peña, A.: Networked clean vehicles, how the environment information will improve fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions. SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubricants 2(1), 167–171 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Themann, P., Kotte, J., Raudszus, D., Eckstein, L.: Discrete dynamic optimization in automated driving systems to improve energy efficiency in cooperative networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Dearborn, Michigan, USA, pp. 370–375 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Volvo (a): Volvo Cars and POC to demonstrate life-saving wearable cycling tech concept at International CES 2015. Accessed 22 Jan 2016
  12. 12.
    Schmidt, T., Philipsen, R., Ziefle, M.: Safety first? V2X – percived benefits, barriers and trade-offs of automated driving. In: Full Paper Submitted to the International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems, Vehits 2015 (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Beier, G.: Kontrollüberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik [Locus of control when interacting with technology]. Rep. Psychol. 24(9), 684–693 (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Volvo (b): Volvo Car Group’s first self-driving Autopilot cars test on public roads around Gothenburg. Accessed 22 Jan 2016
  15. 15.
    Google Inc.: Google Self-Driving Car Project. Accessed 28 Jan 2016
  16. 16.
    Van Driel, C.J.G.: Driver support in congestion: an assessment of user needs and impacts on driver and traffic flow (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Lefevre, S., Petit, J., Bajcsy, R., Laugier, C., Kargl, F.: Impact of v2x privacy strategies on intersection collision avoidance systems. In: IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference, Bosten, United States (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harvey, C., Stanton, N.A.: Usability evaluation for in-vehicle systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhou, T.: The impact of privacy concern on user adoption of location-based services. Ind. Manage. Data Syst. 111(2), 212–226 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Acquisti, H.A., Brandimarte, L., Loewenstein, G.: Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science 347(6221), 509–514 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teresa Schmidt
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ralf Philipsen
    • 1
  • Martina Ziefle
    • 1
  1. 1.Human-Computer Interaction CenterRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations