Smart Home Privacy: A Scoping Review

Ali Ahmed

1 a

, Victor Ungureanu

2 b

, Tarek Gaber

3 c

, Craig Watterson

1 d

and Fatma Masmoudi

4 e

Victoria University of Wellington, Kelburn Parade, Wellington, 6012, New Zealand

University of Liverpool, Sutton, England, U.K.

University of Salford, 43 Crescent, Salford, M5 4WT, Greater Manchester, U.K.

Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Alkharj, 11942, Saudi Arabia

Keywords:

Smart Homes, Privacy, Scoping Survey, Data Collection, User Consent, Data Anonymisation.

Abstract:

Privacy concerns in smart home technologies have surged as their adoption becomes ubiquitous. This scoping

review paper undertakes an exhaustive examination of the current literature to elucidate the state of privacy

within this burgeoning context. Employing a scoping review methodology, we have analysed about 78 peer-

reviewed articles. Key emergent themes include privacy concerns, trust, user perception, and a range of

technical risks and mitigation. Our ﬁndings reveal signiﬁcant gaps in privacy design and protection, establish-

ing this paper as a novel contribution that sets the groundwork for future research. Additionally, it provides

practitioners and policymakers with actionable insights for enhancing privacy measures in smart homes. Sup-

plemental material, including a curated database of the reviewed literature and previously published papers,

will be available to reviewers to enrich the understanding of our contribution.

1 INTRODUCTION

Smart home technologies have experienced unprece-

dented growth and integration into our daily lives, rev-

olutionising how we interact with our living spaces

(Deschamps-Sonsino, 2018, page 8). These intercon-

nected devices offer convenience, energy efﬁciency,

and enhanced security. However, this rapid prolif-

eration of smart home systems has raised signiﬁcant

privacy concerns, as these devices collect and pro-

cess vast amounts of personal data (Ziegeldorf et al.,

2014). This paper aims to provide a scoping survey

of the existing literature on privacy in smart homes,

shedding light on the various dimensions of this crit-

ical issue. This paper aims to contribute to under-

standing smart home privacy challenges and identify

avenues for further research.

One of the primary privacy concerns in smart

homes revolves around collecting and using personal

data. Smart home devices like voice assistants, smart

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7370-3044

https://orcid.org/0009-0000-6561-6939

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4065-4191

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9471-6015

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7339-3349

meters, and sensors can capture sensitive informa-

tion, including audio recordings, video feeds, energy

consumption patterns, and user behaviour (Sharif and

Tenbergen, 2020). The potential for unauthorised ac-

cess, data breaches, or misuse of this data raises sig-

niﬁcant ethical and legal concerns. Furthermore, shar-

ing personal data by smart home devices with third

parties introduces additional privacy risks (Edu et al.,

2020). Service providers, manufacturers, and adver-

tisers may have access to sensitive information, lead-

ing to potential proﬁling, targeted advertising, or even

surveillance. The lack of transparency regarding data-

sharing practices and the potential for data aggrega-

tion across multiple devices further exacerbate these

concerns. User consent and control over personal data

in smart homes are critical aspects of privacy protec-

tion. However, it is often challenging for users to un-

derstand the full extent of data collection and make

informed decisions regarding consent. Smart home

platforms ’ privacy policies and consent mechanisms

may be complex and difﬁcult to comprehend, lead-

ing to potential gaps in user understanding and control

over personal information.

Various technical and policy solutions have been

proposed to address these privacy challenges. Data

anonymisation techniques, encryption protocols, and

Ahmed, A., Ungureanu, V., Gaber, T., Watterson, C. and Masmoudi, F.

Smart Home Privacy: A Scoping Review.

DOI: 10.5220/0012255900003648

In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy (ICISSP 2024), pages 635-642

ISBN: 978-989-758-683-5; ISSN: 2184-4356

635

access control mechanisms aim to protect personal in-

formation while allowing the beneﬁts of smart home

technologies to be realised. Additionally, regula-

tory frameworks and industry standards have been de-

veloped to ensure privacy protection in smart home

ecosystems. By conducting a scoping review, this pa-

per aims to identify the current state of knowledge,

highlight research trends, and identify gaps that re-

quire further investigation. The ﬁndings of this paper

contributes to the ongoing discussions on smart home

privacy, informing policymakers, industry practition-

ers, and researchers about the key issues at hand and

fostering the development of privacy-preserving solu-

tions.

The organisation of this paper is as follows:

1. Section 2 introduces the research methodology.

2. Section 3 introduces the individual studies that

have been surveyed and provided a summary of

those studies.

3. Section 4 identiﬁes the common themes in litera-

ture and answers the research question.

4. Section 5 highlights the limitations of this study.

5. Section 6 concludes the paper and highlights pos-

sible future research.

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The objective of this scoping review is to map the ex-

isting literature on the topic of smart home privacy.

The review aims to identify and analyse the key con-

cepts, sources of evidence, and research gaps related

to privacy concerns in smart-home technologies. The

question, “What are the main dimensions of privacy

concerns in the context of smart homes?” guided this

scoping review. The question seeks to identify and

understand the primary aspects or dimensions related

to privacy concerns. In the context of smart homes,

these dimensions could include factors such as data

collection, surveillance, information sharing, security

vulnerabilities, user awareness, and control over per-

sonal information. The research question served as a

guiding principle throughout the scoping review pro-

cess. It helped focus the search strategy, select appro-

priate inclusion and exclusion criteria, and system-

atically assess and synthesise the ﬁndings from the

identiﬁed studies. By using this question as a starting

point, this paper aimed to ensure that the scoping re-

view covered a broad range of privacy dimensions and

addressed the diversity of concerns within the context

of smart homes.

To ensure a comprehensive search for relevant lit-

erature, the following databases is searched: IEEE

Xplore, ACM Digital Library, Springer, and Google

Scholar. The search terms and keywords to be

used include variations and combinations of: “smart

home”, “privacy”, “data protection”, “security”, “per-

sonal information”, “internet of things”, “smart de-

vices” and “ethics”.

The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the selec-

tion of articles are as follows:

Table 1: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

Criteria Description

Inclusion

Articles that focus on privacy con-

cerns in the context of smart-home

technologies.

Articles that present empirical

research, theoretical frameworks,

conceptual models, or practical

approaches to smart home privacy.

Articles published in the English

language.

Articles published from 2010 to

2023.

Exclusion

Articles that do not speciﬁcally ad-

dress smart homes privacy.

Articles that are not peer-reviewed.

Articles published in languages

other than English.

The study selection process involves title/abstract

screening and full-text screening. During the title/ab-

stract screening, articles that do not meet the inclu-

sion criteria will be excluded. In the full-text screen-

ing, the reviewers will assess the remaining articles

against the inclusion and exclusion criteria to select

the ﬁnal articles for data extraction and analysis.

Zotero

is used to extract relevant information

from the selected articles. The data to be ex-

tracted may include the author(s), year of publica-

tion, research methods, sample size, key ﬁndings, any

frameworks or models discussed, and possible auto-

generated tags. Afterwards, thematic analysis will be

employed to identify the main themes, concepts, and

dimensions related to smart home privacy.

Given the scoping nature of this review, a formal

quality assessment of individual studies will not be

conducted. Instead, the included articles will be as-

sessed for relevance to the research question and its

contribution to understanding smart home privacy.

https://www.zotero.org, last accessed 18 June 2023

ICISSP 2024 - 10th International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy

636

3 LITERATURE SURVEY:

INDIVIDUAL STUDIES

In the study by (Lin and Bergmann, 2016), the authors

emphasised the prevalence of privacy risks in smart

homes, underscoring the challenges arising from the

lack of expertise and standardisation. Their advocacy

for auto-conﬁguration and automatic updates in smart

appliances aimed to mitigate these risks. (Liu et al.,

2022) highlighted the necessity for Smart Home Pri-

vacy Protection (SHPP) standards as crucial for so-

cietal development. This emphasises the need for a

structured framework to address privacy concerns in

smart home ecosystems. Proposing innovative solu-

tions, (Alhazmi et al., 2022) introduced the MQTT-

Based Privacy Orchestrator (MPO). This solution

aims to comprehensively address security and privacy

concerns, targeting key barriers to consumer adoption

of IoT devices. (V

o et al., 2017) delved into opti-

mising Wake-Up-Word (WUW) detection in voice-

activated smart homes, proposing an architecture that

prioritises low-cost integration, privacy, and ease of

use. This signiﬁes a signiﬁcant step towards ensur-

ing secure voice interactions within smart home envi-

ronments. The comprehensive analysis conducted by

(Ford and Palmer, 2019) on the Alexa app and devices

revealed privacy issues related to command logging

accuracy and potential unauthorised recordings. The

study’s suggestion to process voice commands within

the smart home network presents a viable solution to

enhance user privacy. Studies such as (Abdallah et al.,

2020) and (Guhr et al., 2020) explore the intersec-

tion of smart home technology with specialised ap-

plications, catering to the elderly and assessing the

impact of privacy concerns on device adoption, re-

spectively. Additionally, (Zhang et al., 2020) intro-

duces a blockchain-based solution to optimise energy

consumption and enhance privacy in power data ex-

change. In addressing privacy challenges, (Apthorpe

et al., 2018) revisited trafﬁc padding methods, propos-

ing Stochastic Trafﬁc Padding (STP) as an effective

solution. Simultaneously, (Hatamian, 2020) provided

a privacy and security principles catalogue for app de-

velopers, offering practical guidance. Furthermore,

(Musto et al., 2021) outlined a strategy for person-

alised service access, while (Rios et al., 2021) intro-

duced a Privacy Manager based on Edge Computing

(PMEC) to enhance data privacy in IoT settings. Fi-

nally, (Qashlan et al., 2021) explored data security

through blockchain, integrating attribute-based access

control and edge computing.

The study by (Vimalkumar et al., 2021) inves-

tigated factors inﬂuencing user trust in Voice-based

Digital Assistants, shedding light on the signiﬁcance

of perceived risk and trust in shaping user percep-

tions and adoption. (Haney and Furman, 2022) ex-

plored the importance of smart home updates and

the link between these updates and privacy/security.

This highlights the need for transparent communica-

tion between users and developers regarding the im-

pact of updates on privacy. Investigations by (Li et al.,

2023) into the privacy concerns of new purchasers of

smart home devices and (Zou et al., 2023)’s demon-

stration of IoTBeholder’s effectiveness in predicting

user behaviour showcase the evolving landscape of

privacy considerations and predictive technologies in

smart homes.

(Pierce et al., 2022) addressed privacy concerns

in IoT devices, focusing on potential compromises

to individual privacy posed by spatial sensors. This

emphasises the importance of ensuring user privacy

in the evolving landscape of IoT. (Nassiri Abrisham-

chi et al., 2022) delved into side-channel attacks,

speciﬁcally Fingerprint and Timing-based Snooping

(FATS), proposing solutions to secure smart homes

against these passive assaults. This research con-

tributes to the ongoing efforts to fortify IoT devices

against emerging privacy threats. (Mohanty et al.,

2022) conducted a large-scale study on privacy con-

cerns in IoT devices, exploring factors like anonymity

and GDPR compliance. The study’s self-assessment

scorecard offers a practical tool for mitigating privacy

risks in IoT settings.

(Musale and Lee, 2023) examined the impact of

cloud-based Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs)

in IoT devices, revealing insights into user comfort in

data collection. This highlights the nuanced relation-

ship between technology and user perception in the

context of privacy. The exploration by (Windl et al.,

2023) into the need for tangible privacy mechanisms

in smart homes underscores the importance of incor-

porating tangible elements, such as tokens for privacy

preferences and dashboards for device overviews, to

enhance user awareness and control in complex envi-

ronments.

4 DISCUSSION

Figure 1 depicts the word frequency distribution

within the analysed literature. It is the ﬁrst step in

providing insights into the prevalent themes and con-

cepts related to smart homes and privacy concerns.

From Figure 1, one can discern that the text empha-

sises topics such as privacy, concerns, and user expec-

tations in the context of smart homes. Additionally, it

highlights the signiﬁcance of privacy-preserving tech-

nologies and the need for measures and countermea-

Smart Home Privacy: A Scoping Review

637

Figure 1: Literature Word Analysis.

Themes

Privacy

Concerns,

trust, and User

Perception and

Acceptance

Privacy Risks

and Attacks

Data Sharing

and Consent

Privacy

Design,

Guidelines,

and Protection

Techniques

Figure 2: Smart-home Privacy: Themes.

sures to address perceived risks.

Given that and guided by the research question,

the literature survey shows common Themes and cat-

egories in smart home privacy research. These cate-

gories capture the common themes that emerge from

the studies survey in this paper as seen in Table 2 and

Figure 2.

Privacy Concerns, Trust and User Perception and

Acceptance. Research on privacy concerns in smart

home environments broadly focuses on three areas:

risk perception, privacy threats, and user attitudes.

Studies such as (Guhr et al., 2020), (Balasubrama-

nian et al., 2021), and (Kreuter et al., 2020) investi-

gated the factors that inﬂuence users’ perceptions of

privacy risks. Another avenue of inquiry, represented

by (Haney and Furman, 2022), (Vimalkumar et al.,

2021), and (Mohanty et al., 2022), examines the im-

pact of privacy threats on user behaviour and technol-

ogy adoption. The relationship between privacy con-

cerns and user intentions has also been explored, as

evidenced by (Windl et al., 2023).

In summary, this body of work enhances our un-

derstanding of users’ privacy concerns, risk percep-

tions, and attitudes towards smart home technolo-

gies. The insights gained can guide the development

of user-centric design approaches, privacy-enhancing

strategies, and effective communication methods to

improve the acceptance of smart home devices. Fur-

thermore, the researchers on user attitudes towards

privacy in smart homes has illuminated key factors af-

Table 2: Themes and Corresponding Papers.

Theme Individual Papers

Privacy

Concerns,

Trust, and

User Per-

ception

and Ac-

ceptance

(Guhr et al., 2020; Balasubra-

manian et al., 2021; Kreuter

et al., 2020; Haney and Fur-

man, 2022; Vimalkumar et al.,

2021; Windl et al., 2023;

Zheng et al., 2018; Haney

et al., 2021; Schomakers et al.,

2021; Yao et al., 2019b;

Abdi et al., 2019; Haney

et al., 2020; Tabassum et al.,

2019; Georgiev and Schl

ogl,

2018; Wilkowska et al., 2015;

Schomakers et al., 2020; Al-

mutairi and Almarhabi, 2021;

Kaaz et al., 2017; Liu et al.,

2021; Shouran et al., 2019;

Shuhaiber et al., 2023)

Privacy

Risk and

Attacks

(Setayeshfar et al., 2021; Zou

et al., 2023; Musto et al., 2021;

Pierce et al., 2022; Nassiri Abr-

ishamchi et al., 2022; Edu et al.,

2020; Al-Turjman et al., 2022;

Habibzadeh et al., 2019; Tabas-

sum et al., 2019; Nemec Zla-

tolas et al., 2022; Duezguen

et al., 2021; Leit

ao, 2019; Acar

et al., 2020; Hafeez et al.,

2019; Ramapatruni et al., 2019;

Yakubu et al., 2023; Ozmen

et al., 2023)

Data Shar-

ing and

Consent

(Mohanty et al., 2022; Seymour

et al., 2023; Siddiqui et al.,

2023; Zampati, 2023; Khan

et al., 2020; Sultana et al., 2020;

Singh et al., 2019; Lin et al.,

2019; Zhang et al., 2023)

Privacy

Design,

Guide-

lines, and

Protection

Tech-

niques

(Zhang et al., 2020; Zou et al.,

2023; Hatamian, 2020; Musto

et al., 2021; Rios et al.,

2021; Qashlan et al., 2021;

Makhdoom et al., 2020; Sul-

tana et al., 2020; Singh et al.,

2019; Lin et al., 2019; Iqbal

et al., 2023; Poh et al., 2019;

She et al., 2019; Yao et al.,

2019a; A

ıvodji et al., 2019;

Wan et al., 2020; Hafeez et al.,

2019; Ramapatruni et al., 2019;

Augusto-Gonzalez et al., 2019;

Khanpara et al., 2023; Yakubu

et al., 2023; Ozmen et al., 2023)

ICISSP 2024 - 10th International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy

638

fecting privacy-related decisions. These insights are

instrumental for developing privacy-enhancing mea-

sures and user-centric designs, ultimately fostering

greater acceptance of smart home technologies.

Privacy Risks and Attacks. Several studies have

explored the security and privacy implications in

smart homes. For instance, (Setayeshfar et al.,

2021) revealed vulnerabilities through machine learn-

ing analyses of IoT signals. (Zou et al., 2023) consid-

ered blockchain for enhanced privacy, while (Musto

et al., 2021) focused on distributed identity manage-

ment. Additional risks like DDoS and ﬁrmware is-

sues were also documented (Saxena et al., 2020; Guhr

et al., 2020; Buil-Gil et al., 2023).

Data Sharing and Consent. Some studies have in-

vestigated the factors affecting users’ willingness to

share data in smart homes, including the role of pri-

vacy regulations. (Seymour et al., 2023) speciﬁ-

cally examined how GDPR inﬂuences trust and data-

sharing behaviour. User preferences and personality

traits are key in shaping data-sharing behaviour in

smart homes. (Siddiqui et al., 2023) explored the role

of control, perceived beneﬁts, and transparency in

data-sharing decisions. (Zampati, 2023) looked into

how personality traits like privacy concerns and risk

perception inﬂuence willingness to share data. These

insights could guide the development of tailored pri-

vacy mechanisms and policies for smart homes.

Privacy Design, Guidelines and Protection Tech-

niques. Several studies have proposed techniques to

enhance user privacy in smart homes. (Zhang et al.,

2020) and (Zou et al., 2023) focused on blockchain

technology to ensure data integrity and conﬁdential-

ity. (Hatamian, 2020) and (Musto et al., 2021) looked

into distributed authentication mechanisms for se-

cure user control. Context-aware policy languages

were explored by (Rios et al., 2021) and (Qashlan

et al., 2021) for ﬁne-grained data access control.

Cloud-based trusted environments were investigated

by (Makhdoom et al., 2020) and (Sultana et al., 2020)

to secure user data. These contributions aim to de-

velop robust privacy-enhancing solutions for smart

homes.

5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The search strategy is limited by the speciﬁc choice

of keywords and may miss some relevant studies. The

article selection criteria, focusing on aspects like pri-

vacy in smart homes and English language, could also

exclude pertinent work, thus affecting the review’s

comprehensiveness. Additionally, the absence of a

formal quality assessment of included studies may

question the overall reliability of the ﬁndings. There-

fore, the results may lack generalisability across the

broader ecosystem of smart home privacy issues.

While the inclusion of variations and combina-

tions of search terms is a good starting point, there

is a possibility that some relevant studies may not be

captured due to the speciﬁc choice of keywords. The

effectiveness of the search strategy in retrieving com-

prehensive results may depend on the relevance and

appropriateness of the chosen terms. The criteria for

article selection are focused on speciﬁc aspects, such

as privacy concerns in smart-home technologies, em-

pirical research, theoretical frameworks, and articles

published in English. While these criteria help narrow

down the scope, they may also exclude relevant stud-

ies that fall outside these speciﬁc criteria, potentially

limiting the comprehensiveness of the scoping re-

view. The methodology states that a formal quality as-

sessment of individual studies will not be conducted.

While this is acceptable for a scoping review, it means

that the included articles’ quality and potential biases

are not thoroughly evaluated, which may impact the

overall reliability of the ﬁndings. Given the aforemen-

tioned limitations, this study’s ﬁndings may lack gen-

eralisability to other areas of smart homes and may

not capture the broader landscape of privacy issues

that exist within the entire ecosystem of smart home

devices and systems.

6 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE

WORK

In summary, this scoping review offers a thorough

assessment of existing studies on privacy issues in

smart homes, identifying key themes like trust, user

perception, risks, and protective measures. The ﬁnd-

ings stress the urgency for continued research to ad-

dress these privacy concerns as smart home adoption

expands. Standardised privacy guidelines and user-

centric design are emphasised for ensuring trust, data

security, and ethical practices. Future research should

delve into user perceptions and trust to inform the

development of privacy-focused features. As smart

home technology evolves, ongoing studies should ex-

plore emerging privacy risks and the inﬂuence of new

technologies like AI and IoT on smart home privacy.

Smart Home Privacy: A Scoping Review

639

REFERENCES

Abdallah, N. H., Affes, E., Bouslimani, Y., Ghribi, M., Kad-

douri, A., and Ghariani, M. (2020). Smart assistant

robot for smart home management. In 2020 1st In-

ternational Conference on Communications, Control

Systems and Signal Processing (CCSSP), pages 317–

321. IEEE.

Abdi, N., Ramokapane, K. M., and Such, J. M. (2019).

More than smart speakers: Security and privacy per-

ceptions of smart home personal assistants. In Pro-

ceedings of the Fifteenth USENIX Conference on Us-

able Privacy and Security, SOUPS’19, page 451–466,

USA. USENIX Association.

Acar, A., Fereidooni, H., Abera, T., Sikder, A. K., Miet-

tinen, M., Aksu, H., Conti, M., Sadeghi, A.-R., and

Uluagac, S. (2020). Peek-a-boo: I see your smart

home activities, even encrypted! In Proceedings of

the 13th ACM Conference on Security and Privacy in

Wireless and Mobile Networks, pages 207–218.

ıvodji, U. M., Gambs, S., and Martin, A. (2019). Iot-

ﬂa: A secured and privacy-preserving smart home ar-

chitecture implementing federated learning. In 2019

IEEE security and privacy workshops (SPW), pages

175–180. IEEE.

Al-Turjman, F., Zahmatkesh, H., and Shahroze, R. (2022).

An overview of security and privacy in smart cities’ iot

communications. Transactions on Emerging Telecom-

munications Technologies, 33(3):1–19.

Alhazmi, A., Alawaji, K., and OConnor, T. (2022). Mpo:

Mqtt-based privacy orchestrator for smart home users.

In 2022 IEEE 46th Annual Computers, Software, and

Applications Conference (COMPSAC), pages 988–

993. IEEE.

Almutairi, O. and Almarhabi, K. (2021). Investigation of

smart home security and privacy: Consumer percep-

tion in saudi arabia. International Journal of Ad-

vanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(4).

Apthorpe, N., Huang, D. Y., Reisman, D., Narayanan, A.,

and Feamster, N. (2018). Keeping the smart home pri-

vate with smart (er) iot trafﬁc shaping. arXiv preprint

arXiv:1812.00955, page 128–148.

Augusto-Gonzalez, J., Collen, A., Evangelatos, S., Anag-

nostopoulos, M., Spathoulas, G., Giannoutakis, K. M.,

Votis, K., Tzovaras, D., Genge, B., Gelenbe, E., et al.

(2019). From internet of threats to internet of things:

A cyber security architecture for smart homes. In

2019 IEEE 24th International Workshop on Computer

Aided Modeling and Design of Communication Links

and Networks (CAMAD), pages 1–6. IEEE.

Balasubramanian, G. V., Beaney, P., and Chambers, R.

(2021). Digital personal assistants are smart ways for

assistive technology to aid the health and wellbeing of

patients and carers. BMC geriatrics, 21:1–10.

Buil-Gil, D., Kemp, S., Kuenzel, S., Coventry, L., Zakhary,

S., Tilley, D., and Nicholson, J. (2023). The digital

harms of smart home devices: A systematic literature

review. Computers in Human Behavior, 145:107770.

Deschamps-Sonsino, A. (2018). Smarter homes: how tech-

nology has changed your home life. Apress.

Duezguen, R., Mayer, P., Berens, B., Beckmann, C., Aldag,

L., Mossano, M., Volkamer, M., and Strufe, T. (2021).

How to increase smart home security and privacy risk

perception. In 2021 IEEE 20th International Confer-

ence on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and

Communications (TrustCom), pages 997–1004. IEEE.

Edu, J. S., Such, J. M., and Suarez-Tangil, G. (2020). Smart

home personal assistants: a security and privacy re-

view. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 53(6):1–36.

Ford, M. and Palmer, W. (2019). Alexa, are you listening to

me? an analysis of alexa voice service network trafﬁc.

Personal and ubiquitous computing, 23:67–79.

Georgiev, A. and Schl

ogl, S. (2018). Smart home technol-

ogy: An exploration of end user perceptions. Inno-

vative L

osungen f

ur eine alternde Gesellschaft: Kon-

ferenzbeitr

age der SMARTER LIVES, 18(20.02):2018.

Guhr, N., Werth, O., Blacha, P. P. H., and Breitner, M. H.

(2020). Privacy concerns in the smart home context.

SN Applied Sciences, 2:1–12.

Habibzadeh, H., Nussbaum, B. H., Anjomshoa, F.,

Kantarci, B., and Soyata, T. (2019). A survey on cy-

bersecurity, data privacy, and policy issues in cyber-

physical system deployments in smart cities. Sustain-

able Cities and Society, 50:101660.

Hafeez, I., Antikainen, M., and Tarkoma, S. (2019). Pro-

tecting iot-environments against trafﬁc analysis at-

tacks with trafﬁc morphing. In 2019 IEEE Interna-

tional Conference on Pervasive Computing and Com-

munications Workshops (PerCom Workshops), pages

196–201. IEEE.

Haney, J. and Furman, S. (2022). User perceptions and ex-

periences with smart home updates. In 2023 IEEE

Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pages 782–

799. IEEE Computer Society.

Haney, J. M., Acar, Y., and Furman, S. (2021). ” it’s the

company, the government, you and i”: User percep-

tions of responsibility for smart home privacy and se-

curity. In USENIX Security Symposium, pages 411–

428.

Haney, J. M., Furman, S. M., and Acar, Y. (2020). Smart

home security and privacy mitigations: Consumer per-

ceptions, practices, and challenges. In HCI for Cy-

bersecurity, Privacy and Trust: Second International

Conference, HCI-CPT 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd

HCI International Conference, HCII 2020, Copen-

hagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings 22,

pages 393–411. Springer.

Hatamian, M. (2020). Engineering privacy in smartphone

apps: A technical guideline catalog for app develop-

ers. IEEE Access, 8:35429–35445.

Iqbal, W., Abbas, H., Deng, P., Wan, J., Rauf, B., Ab-

bas, Y., and Rashid, I. (2023). Alam: Anonymous

lightweight authentication mechanism for sdn enabled

smart homes. Journal of Network and Computer Ap-

plications, page 103672.

Kaaz, K. J., Hoffer, A., Saeidi, M., Sarma, A., and Bobba,

R. B. (2017). Understanding user perceptions of

privacy, and conﬁguration challenges in home au-

tomation. In 2017 IEEE Symposium on Visual Lan-

guages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC),

pages 297–301. IEEE.

ICISSP 2024 - 10th International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy

640

Khan, M. A., Abbas, S., Rehman, A., Saeed, Y., Zeb, A.,

Uddin, M. I., Nasser, N., and Ali, A. (2020). A ma-

chine learning approach for blockchain-based smart

home networks security. IEEE Network, 35(3):223–

229.

Khanpara, P., Lavingia, K., Trivedi, R., Tanwar, S., Verma,

A., and Sharma, R. (2023). A context-aware internet

of things-driven security scheme for smart homes. Se-

curity and Privacy, 6(1):e269.

Kreuter, F., Haas, G.-C., Keusch, F., B

ahr, S., and Trapp-

mann, M. (2020). Collecting survey and smartphone

sensor data with an app: Opportunities and challenges

around privacy and informed consent. Social Science

Computer Review, 38(5):533–549.

Leit

ao, R. (2019). Anticipating smart home security and pri-

vacy threats with survivors of intimate partner abuse.

In Proceedings of the 2019 on designing interactive

systems conference, pages 527–539.

Li, L., Li, T., Cai, H., Zhang, J., and Wang, J. (2023). I

will only know after using it: The repeat purchasers of

smart home appliances and the privacy paradox prob-

lem. Computers & Security, 128:103156.

Lin, C., He, D., Kumar, N., Huang, X., Vijayakumar, P., and

Choo, K.-K. R. (2019). Homechain: A blockchain-

based secure mutual authentication system for smart

homes. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 7(2):818–

829.

Lin, H. and Bergmann, N. W. (2016). Iot privacy and secu-

rity challenges for smart home environments. Infor-

mation, 7(3):44.

Liu, D., Wu, C., Yang, L., Zhao, X., and Sun, Q. (2022).

The development of privacy protection standards for

smart home. Wireless Communications and Mobile

Computing, 2022.

Liu, Y., Gan, Y., Song, Y., and Liu, J. (2021). What

inﬂuences the perceived trust of a voice-enabled

smart home system: An empirical study. Sensors,

21(6):2037.

Makhdoom, I., Zhou, I., Abolhasan, M., Lipman, J., and Ni,

W. (2020). Privysharing: A blockchain-based frame-

work for privacy-preserving and secure data sharing

in smart cities. Computers & Security, 88:101653.

Mohanty, S., Cormican, K., and Dhanapathi, C. (2022).

Analysis of critical success factors to mitigate pri-

vacy risks in iot devices. Procedia Computer Science,

196:191–198.

Musale, P. and Lee, A. J. (2023). Trust tee?: Exploring

the impact of trusted execution environments on smart

home privacy norms. Proceedings on Privacy En-

hancing Technologies, 3:5–23.

Musto, C., Narducci, F., Polignano, M., De Gemmis, M.,

Lops, P., and Semeraro, G. (2021). Myrrorbot: A dig-

ital assistant based on holistic user models for person-

alized access to online services. ACM Transactions on

Information Systems (TOIS), 39(4):1–34.

Nassiri Abrishamchi, M. A., Zainal, A., Ghaleb, F. A.,

Qasem, S. N., and Albarrak, A. M. (2022). Smart

home privacy protection methods against a passive

wireless snooping side-channel attack. Sensors,

22(21):8564.

Nemec Zlatolas, L., Feher, N., and H

olbl, M. (2022). Secu-

rity perception of iot devices in smart homes. Journal

of Cybersecurity and Privacy, 2(1):65–73.

Ozmen, M. O., Song, R., Farrukh, H., and Celik, Z. B.

(2023). Evasion attacks and defenses on smart home

physical event veriﬁcation. In 30th Annual Network

and Distributed System Security Symposium, NDSS

2023, San Diego, California, USA, February 27 -

March 3, 2023, pages 1–18. The Internet Society.

Pierce, J., Weizenegger, C., Nandi, P., Agarwal, I., Gram,

G., Hurrle, J., Liao, H., Lo, B., Park, A., Phan, A.,

et al. (2022). Addressing adjacent actor privacy: De-

signing for bystanders, co-users, and surveilled sub-

jects of smart home cameras. In Designing Interactive

Systems Conference, pages 26–40.

Poh, G. S., Gope, P., and Ning, J. (2019). Privhome:

Privacy-preserving authenticated communication in

smart home environment. IEEE Transactions on De-

pendable and Secure Computing, 18(3):1095–1107.

Qashlan, A., Nanda, P., He, X., and Mohanty, M. (2021).

Privacy-preserving mechanism in smart home using

blockchain. IEEE Access, 9:103651–103669.

Ramapatruni, S., Narayanan, S. N., Mittal, S., Joshi, A.,

and Joshi, K. (2019). Anomaly detection models for

smart home security. In 2019 IEEE 5th Intl Confer-

ence on Big Data Security on Cloud (BigDataSecu-

rity), IEEE Intl Conference on High Performance and

Smart Computing,(HPSC) and IEEE Intl Conference

on Intelligent Data and Security (IDS), pages 19–24.

IEEE.

Rios, R., Onieva, J. A., Roman, R., and Lopez, J. (2021).

Personal iot privacy control at the edge. IEEE Security

& Privacy, 20(1):23–32.

Saxena, U., Sodhi, J., and Singh, Y. (2020). An analysis of

ddos attacks in a smart home networks. In 2020 10th

International Conference on Cloud Computing, Data

Science & Engineering (Conﬂuence), pages 272–276.

Schomakers, E.-M., Biermann, H., and Zieﬂe, M. (2020).

Understanding privacy and trust in smart home en-

vironments. In HCI for Cybersecurity, Privacy

and Trust: Second International Conference, HCI-

CPT 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd HCI Interna-

tional Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Den-

mark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings 22, pages 513–

532. Springer.

Schomakers, E.-M., Biermann, H., and Zieﬂe, M. (2021).

Users’ preferences for smart home automation–

investigating aspects of privacy and trust. Telematics

and Informatics, 64:101689.

Setayeshfar, O., Subramani, K., Yuan, X., Dey, R., Hong,

D., Lee, K. H., and Kim, I. K. (2021). Chatter-

hub: Privacy invasion via smart home hub. In 2021

IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing

(SMARTCOMP), pages 181–188.

Seymour, W., Cote, M., and Such, J. (2023). Legal obli-

gation and ethical best practice: Towards meaningful

verbal consent for voice assistants. In Proceedings

of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing

Systems CHI ’23, pages 1–16, New York, NY, USA.

Association for Computing Machinery.

Smart Home Privacy: A Scoping Review

641

Sharif, K. and Tenbergen, B. (2020). Smart home voice

assistants: a literature survey of user privacy and se-

curity vulnerabilities. Complex Systems Informatics

and Modeling Quarterly, 24:15–30.

She, W., Gu, Z.-H., Lyu, X.-K., Liu, Q., Tian, Z., and Liu,

W. (2019). Homomorphic consortium blockchain for

smart home system sensitive data privacy preserving.

IEEE Access, 7:62058–62070.

Shouran, Z., Ashari, A., and Priyambodo, T. (2019). Inter-

net of things (iot) of smart home: privacy and secu-

rity. International Journal of Computer Applications,

182(39):3–8.

Shuhaiber, A., Alkarbi, W., and Almansoori, S. (2023).

Trust in smart homes: The power of social inﬂuences

and perceived risks. In Intelligent Sustainable Sys-

tems: Selected Papers of WorldS4 2022, Volume 1,

pages 305–315. Springer.

Siddiqui, S., Hameed, S., Shah, S. A., Khan, A. K.,

and Aneiba, A. (2023). Smart contract-based secu-

rity architecture for collaborative services in munic-

ipal smart cities. Journal of Systems Architecture,

135:102802.

Singh, S., Ra, I.-H., Meng, W., Kaur, M., and Cho, G. H.

(2019). Sh-blockcc: A secure and efﬁcient internet of

things smart home architecture based on cloud com-

puting and blockchain technology. International Jour-

nal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 15(4):1–18.

Sultana, T., Almogren, A., Akbar, M., Zuair, M., Ullah,

I., and Javaid, N. (2020). Data sharing system inte-

grating access control mechanism using blockchain-

based smart contracts for iot devices. Applied Sci-

ences, 10(2):488–508.

Tabassum, M., Kosi

nski, T., and Lipford, H. R. (2019). ”i

don’t own the data”: End user perceptions of smart

home device data practices and risks. In Proceedings

of the Fifteenth USENIX Conference on Usable Pri-

vacy and Security, SOUPS’19, page 435–450, USA.

USENIX Association.

Vimalkumar, M., Sharma, S. K., Singh, J. B., and Dwivedi,

Y. K. (2021). ‘okay google, what about my privacy?’:

User’s privacy perceptions and acceptance of voice

based digital assistants. Computers in Human Behav-

ior, 120:106763.

o, B., Schubert, T., and Becker, B. (2017). ihouse:

A voice-controlled, centralized, retrospective smart

home. In Magno, M., Ferrero, F., and Bilas, V.,

editors, Sensor Systems and Software, pages 68–80,

Cham. Springer International Publishing.

Wan, Y., Xu, K., Xue, G., and Wang, F. (2020). Iotar-

gos: A multi-layer security monitoring system for

internet-of-things in smart homes. In IEEE INFO-

COM 2020-IEEE Conference on Computer Commu-

nications, pages 874–883. IEEE.

Wilkowska, W., Zieﬂe, M., and Himmel, S. (2015). Percep-

tions of personal privacy in smart home technologies:

do user assessments vary depending on the research

method? In Human Aspects of Information Security,

Privacy, and Trust: Third International Conference,

HAS 2015, Held as Part of HCI International 2015,

Los Angeles, CA, USA, August 2-7, 2015. Proceedings

3, pages 592–603. Springer.

Windl, M., Schmidt, A., and Feger, S. S. (2023). Investigat-

ing tangible privacy-preserving mechanisms for future

smart homes. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Confer-

ence on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages

1–16.

Yakubu, B. M., Khan, M. I., Khan, A., Jabeen, F., and

Jeon, G. (2023). Blockchain-based ddos attack mitiga-

tion protocol for device-to-device interaction in smart

home. Digital Communications and Networks.

Yao, Y., Basdeo, J. R., Kaushik, S., and Wang, Y. (2019a).

Defending my castle: A co-design study of privacy

mechanisms for smart homes. In Proceedings of the

2019 chi conference on human factors in computing

systems, pages 1–12.

Yao, Y., Basdeo, J. R., Mcdonough, O. R., and Wang,

Y. (2019b). Privacy perceptions and designs of by-

standers in smart homes. Proceedings of the ACM on

Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW):1–24.

Zampati, F. (2023). Ethical and legal considerations in

smart farming: A farmer’s perspective. Towards Re-

sponsible Plant Data Linkage: Data Challenges for

Agricultural Research and Development, pages 257–

272.

Zhang, F., Pan, Z., and Lu, Y. (2023). Aiot-enabled smart

surveillance for personal data digitalization: Contex-

tual personalization-privacy paradox in smart home.

Information & Management, 60(2):103736.

Zhang, S., Rong, J., and Wang, B. (2020). A privacy pro-

tection scheme of smart meter for decentralized smart

home environment based on consortium blockchain.

International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy

Systems, 121:106140.

Zheng, S., Apthorpe, N., Chetty, M., and Feamster, N.

(2018). User perceptions of smart home iot privacy.

Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interac-

tion, 2(CSCW):1–20.

Ziegeldorf, J. H., Morchon, O. G., and Wehrle, K. (2014).

Privacy in the internet of things: threats and chal-

lenges. Security and Communication Networks,

7(12):2728–2742.

Zou, Q., Li, Q., Li, R., Huang, Y., Tyson, G., Xiao, J., and

Jiang, Y. (2023). Iotbeholder: A privacy snooping at-

tack on user habitual behaviors from smart home wi-ﬁ

trafﬁc. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mo-

bile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 7(1):1–

26.

ICISSP 2024 - 10th International Conference on Information Systems Security and Privacy

642