Insights into Internet Privacy for Visually Impaired and Blind People

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9758)


Tracking blockers protect from and inform about hidden trackers and services that collect data in the background while the user is surfing the web. However, existing tracking blockers provide information and feedback visually and thus are barely accessible for visually impaired and blind users. In this paper we present insights about privacy concerns of visually impaired Internet users. Moreover we present feedback strategies and guidelines for an accessible tracking blocker developed in a user centered design process. The underlying feedback principles and guidelines can be used for the design of Privacy Enhancing Technology in other domains, and therefore serve as reference for designers and developers.


Internet privacy Visually impaired Tracking blocker Feedback Design guidelines 



We would like to thank the Hilfsgemeinschaft (Austrian Association in Support of the Blind and Visually Impaired) for their support. This work has been partly funded within the project BlindFaith funded by the Internet Foundation Austria in the 9th netidee call and within BlindBits, a project conducted in the program Sparkling Science funded by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy.


  1. 1.
    Akhter, F., Buzzi, M.C., Buzzi, M., Leporini, B.: Conceptual framework: how to engineer online trust for disabled users. In: 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, pp. 614–617 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buzzi, M.C., Buzzi, M., Leporini, B., Akhter, F.: User trust in ecommerce services: perception via screen reader. In: Proceedings - 2009 International Conference on New Trends in Information and Service Science, NISS 2009, pp. 1166–1171. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dobias, J.: Privacy effects of web bugs amplified by web 2.0. In: Fischer-Hübner, S., Duquenoy, P., Hansen, M., Leenes, R., Zhang, G. (eds.) Privacy and Identity Management for Life. IFIP AICT, vol. 352, pp. 244–257. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Egelman, S., Cranor, L.F., Hong, J.: You’ve been warned. In: Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI 2008, pp. 1065–1074. ACM Press (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Egelman, S.: Trust me: design patterns for constructing trustworthy trust indicators. Doctoral thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Felt, A.P., Reeder, R.W., Almuhimedi, H., Consolvo, S.: Experimenting at scale with Google Chrome’s SSL warning. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2014, pp. 2667–2670. ACM Press (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hochheiser, H., Feng, J., Lazar, J.: Challenges in universally usable privacy and security. In: Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lipford, H.R., Watson, J., Whitney, M., Froiland, K., Reeder, R.W.: Visual vs. compact. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2010, pp. 1111–1114. ACM Press (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Luca, A., Frauendienst, B., Maurer, M., et al.: Does MoodyBoard make internet use more secure? In: Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 2011, pp. 887–890. ACM Press (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McDonald, A.M., Reeder, R.W., Kelley, P.G., Cranor, L.F.: A comparative study of online privacy policies and formats. In: Goldberg, I., Atallah, M.J. (eds.) PETS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5672, pp. 37–55. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pemble, M.: Crying ‘Havoc’, Crying ‘Wolf’ or Just Howling at the Moon? Netw. Secur. 2001(9), 14–16 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sauer, G., Holman, J., Lazar, J., Hochheiser, H., Feng, J.: Accessible privacy and security: a universally usable human-interaction proof tool. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 9(3), 239–248 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schmuntzsch, U., Sturm, C., Roetting, M.: The warning glove – development and evaluation of a multimodal action-specific warning prototype. Appl. Ergon. 45(5), 1297–1305 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbHViennaAustria
  2. 2.Center for Human-Computer InteractionUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations