Increasing User Confdence in Privacy-Sensitive Robots by Raniah Abdullah Bamagain Bachelor of Science Information Technology Computing and Information Technology 2012 A thesis submitted to the College of Computer Engineering and Sciences at Florida Institute of Technology in partial fulfllment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Information Assurance and Cybersecurity Melbourne, Florida May, 2019 ⃝c Copyright 2019 Raniah Abdullah Bamagain All Rights Reserved The author grants permission to make single copies. We the undersigned committee hereby approve the attached thesis Increasing User Confdence in Privacy-Sensitive Robots by Raniah Abdullah Bamagain Marius Silaghi, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Computer Engineering and Sciences Committee Chair Hector Gutierrez, Ph.D. Professor Department of Mechanical and Civil Engineering Outside Committee Member Lucas Stephane, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Computer Engineering and Sciences Committee Member Philip Bernhard, Ph.D Associate Professor and Head Department of Computer Engineering and Sciences ABSTRACT Title: Increasing User Confdence in Privacy-Sensitive Robots Author: Raniah Abdullah Bamagain Major Advisor: Marius Silaghi, Ph.D. As the deployment and availability of robots grow rapidly, and spreads everywhere to reach places where they can communicate with humans, and they can constantly sense, watch, hear, process, and record all the environment around them, numerous new benefts and services can be provided, but at the same time, various types of privacy issues appear. Indeed, the use of robots that process data remotely causes privacy concerns. There are some main factors that could increase the capabil- ity of violating the users' privacy, such as the robots' appearance, perception, or navigation capability, as well as the lack of authentication, the lack of warning sys- tem, and the characteristics of the application. Here we analyze these factors and propose solutions that assist in mitigating the problem of privacy violation while using social robots. These solutions assist in solving the limitations of current robots and in producing privacy-sensitive robots. The result consists in usable, trusted, and comfortable techniques to bring security in the context of social robot utilization, to protect users' privacy in the presence of social robots, to increase users' awareness towards associated privacy risks, and to fnd trade-ofs between privacy loss and utility achieved. The aim is to increase the user confdence in the privacy guarantees made available by the robots. The results are verifed with surveys and experiment. iii Table of Contents Abstract iii List of Figures ix List of Tables xiv Acknowledgments xv 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overview . 1 1.2 Motivation . 3 1.3 Research Problem . 4 1.3.1 Research Questions . 6 1.4 Proposed Solutions . 7 1.4.1 Research Hypotheses . 9 1.5 Thesis Structure . 12 2 Background 13 2.1 Overview . 13 2.2 Robotics in History . 14 2.3 Robotics Classifcations . 24 iv 2.4 Robotic Sensors . 28 2.5 Robot Communications . 30 2.6 Summary . 32 3 Literature Review 33 3.1 Overview . 33 3.2 Threat on Robotics . 33 3.2.1 Meaning of Privacy . 35 3.3 Privacy Issues in Robotics . 36 3.3.1 Privacy Concerns . 38 3.3.1.1 Overview . 38 3.3.1.2 Related Works . 38 3.3.1.3 Limitations . 43 3.3.2 Shape of Robots . 44 3.3.2.1 Overview . 44 3.3.2.2 Related Works . 44 3.3.2.3 Limitations . 48 3.3.3 Robots' Perception (Camera and Microphone) . 49 3.3.3.1 Overview . 49 3.3.3.2 Related Works . 49 3.3.3.3 Limitations . 58 3.3.3.4 Related Works . 58 3.3.3.5 Limitations . 59 3.3.4 Robots Navigation (Movement) . 59 3.3.4.1 Overview . 59 3.3.4.2 Related Works . 59 v 3.3.4.3 Limitations . 62 3.3.5 Authentications on Robots . 62 3.3.5.1 Overview . 62 3.3.5.2 Related Works . 63 3.3.5.3 Limitations . 66 3.3.6 Robot Warning System . 66 3.3.6.1 Overview . 66 3.3.6.2 Related Works . 66 3.3.6.3 Limitations . 67 3.3.7 Robots' Application's Characteristics . 68 3.3.7.1 Overview . 68 3.3.7.2 Related Works . 68 3.3.7.3 Limitations . 69 3.4 Summary . 69 4 Proposed Privacy Sensitive Robots 70 4.1 Overview . 70 4.2 Shape of Robots . 71 4.3 Constraining Robots' Perception (Camera and Microphone) . 77 4.3.1 Constraining Robots' Camera . 77 4.3.2 Constraining the Robots' Microphone . 86 4.4 Constraining Robots' Navigation (Movement) . 88 4.5 Users' Authentications on Robots . 91 4.6 Robot Warning System . 92 4.7 Robots Application's Characteristics . 95 4.8 Summary . 97 vi 5 Methodology 98 5.1 Overview . 98 5.2 The Goals of the Study . 98 5.3 The Methods of the Study . 99 5.3.1 Surveys . 99 5.3.2 Experiment . 101 5.4 The Participants of the Study . 102 5.5 Summary . 102 6 Study Analysis and Results 103 6.1 Overview . 103 6.2 Surveys Results . 104 6.2.1 The "Cameras' Covers" Survey . 104 6.2.2 The "Filters' Efects” Survey . 105 6.2.3 The Main Survey . 109 6.2.3.1 Demographics Information . 109 6.2.3.2 General Background and Concerns . 111 6.2.3.3 The Possible Techniques that Could Assist in Mit- igating Privacy Violation . 132 6.2.3.4 Additional Features of the Social Robot for Privacy Protection . 144 6.2.3.5 Awareness/ Warning System . 153 6.3 Experiment Results . 161 6.4 Summary . 162 7 Discussions and Future Work 164 vii 7.1 Limitations . 164 7.2 Future Work . 165 8 Conclusion 166 References 168 A IRB Approval Letter 183 B Surveys 184 B.1 The Informed Consent . 184 B.2 The "Cameras' Covers" Survey . 187 B.3 The "Filters' Efects” Survey . 187 B.4 The Main Survey (Social Robots) . 193 viii List of Figures 4.1 The results of people's opinions on the outer shape of robots [73] . 72 4.2 iCub, Flobi, Dreamer, Simon . 74 4.3 Robots eyeglasses . 75 4.4 Pepper robot equipped with screen . 76 4.5 1) abstraction, 2) blurring, 3) pixelating, and 4) redacting . 78 4.6 Abstraction, blur, and redact flters used by a previous study [34] . 78 4.7 Replacing flter . 79 4.8 Replacing flter used by a previous study [34] . 79 4.9 Replacing flter applied on money safe box . 80 4.10 Morphing and image melding [62] . 81 4.11 The left image is the original image and the second image is our proposed adaptive flter \delete and replace" . 83 4.12 The left image is the original image and the second image is our proposed adaptive flter \delete and replace" . 83 4.13 The images on the left and on the right, from the top to the bottom, show the original image, abstract, blur, redact, replace, and our proposed flter . 85 4.14 The process of the scenario . 91 4.15 Examples of the proposed warning system . 94 ix 4.16 Example of the existing applications of robots, NAO and Pepper . 96 6.1 The number of participants who use or do not use covers to protect their privacy . 105 6.2 The picture that shows there is no manipulation and make sense: picture 1 shows abstraction, picture 2 shows replace, picture 3 shows redact, picture 4 shows blur, and picture 5 shows "delete and replace"107 6.3 The picture that shows there is no manipulation and makes sense: picture 1 shows abstraction, picture 2 shows replace, picture 3 shows redact, picture 4 shows blur, and picture 5 shows "delete and replace"107 6.4 The preferred flters for protecting privacy . 108 6.5 Smart devices that are owned by participants . 112 6.6 Number of participants who have or do not have a social robot . 113 6.7 The places that participants have the social robots . 114 6.8 Participants' desire to own a social robot . 115 6.9 The places that participants want to have the social robots . 116 6.10 The tasks that the participants want to use the social robot for . 117 6.11 The users' concerns about the social robots . 120 6.12 Level of signifcance of privacy for users at their home and workplace122 6.13 Participants' rating regarding the objects that they are concerned about regarding privacy . 124 6.14 Participants' rating regarding the information that they are con- cerned about regarding privacy . 126 6.15 Participants' rating regarding the locations that they are concerned about regarding privacy . 128 x 6.16 Participants' rating regarding the situations that they are concerned about regarding privacy . ..