Due to the amount of data that smartphone applications can potentially access, platforms enforce permission systems that allow users to regulate how applications access protected resources. If users are asked to make security decisions too frequently and in benign situations, they may become habituated and approve all future requests without regard for the consequences. If they are asked to make too few security decisions, they may become concerned that the platform is revealing too much sensitive information. To explore this tradeoff, we instrumented the Android platform to collect data regarding how often and under what circumstances smartphone applications are accessing protected resources regulated by permissions. We performed a 36-person field study to explore the notion of "contextual integrity," that is, how often are applications accessing protected resources when users are not expecting it? Based on our collection of 27 million data points and exit interviews with participants, we examine the situations in which users would like the ability to deny applications access to protected resources. We found out that at least 80% of our participants would have preferred to prevent at least one permission request, and overall, they thought that over a third of requests were invasive and desired a mechanism to block them.
A recent paper by Wijesekera et al. REF showed that during a study, at least 80% of the participants indicated that they would prevent at least one permission request of an experimental application if they were aware of its purpose and functionality.
Android Permissions Remystified: A Field Study on Contextual Integrity
ArXiv
ArXiv
Computer Science