While voice assistants and smart speakers have become commonplace in recent years, a policy change for Amazon Echo devices has left some wondering how much information their devices are absorbing.
Amazon is removing a setting called 'Do Not Send Voice Recordings', which allowed some users in the United States to have their recordings processed locally on their device instead of being sent to Amazon.
This option was never offered to users in other countries.
Amazon said Australian Echo users can instead use their privacy settings to manage their recordings in other ways, including deleting them individually or in bulk, or choosing to not have them not saved after they have been processed by Amazon.
"The Alexa experience is designed to protect our customers' privacy and keep their data secure, and that's not changing," an Amazon spokesperson said regarding the recent changes.
"We're focusing on the privacy tools and controls that our customers use most and work well with generative AI experiences that rely on the processing power of Amazon's secure cloud."
Almost half of Australians considered the potential for websites, apps and devices listening to them to be one of the biggest privacy risks, according to the most recent Australian Community Attitudes to Privacy Survey.
What are the benefits of smart speakers?
Vision Australia runs a smart speaker program through which participants with vision impairments are set up with an Amazon Echo Dot and put through a group training program.
John Clower, an access technology specialist at Vision Australia, said it has been "really been great" for clients.
He said the program, now in its ninth iteration, had helped them develop a sense of community while learning how to use the devices to set timers and alarms, manage their calendars, play radio stations and more.
John Clower is an Access Technology Specialist at Vision Australia. Source: Supplied
"There's some people who just unplug it when they're not using it — and that's fine, of course."
Despite the ostensible benefits for some, privacy concerns about smart speakers remain.
Does accessibility come at the cost of privacy?
Dr Dhaval Vyas was lead investigator on a University of Queensland project that worked with 14 participants with disability to understand how AI could help support them.
"We want to ensure that it's something where humans are involved in decision making and they are the ones who are actually guiding the design process," he said.
While participants in the study — titled Human-Centred Privacy for AI-support Assistive Living for Persons with Disability — found tools like voice control useful, some shared concerns about data collection, storage and ownership, among other issues.
"I don't want to be part of some algorithm that sells my voice data to advertisers," one participant said.
Many participants wanted to retain control over recordings and were uncomfortable with devices that were constantly listening.
LISTEN TO
Is somebody watching me? Data breaches put spotlight back on digital privacy
SBS News
25/07/202405:53
Kathryn Gledhill-Tucker — a Nyungar technologist, writer and digital rights activist — told SBS there shouldn't be a trade-off between accessibility and privacy.
"Even if you're not a disabled person or you don't have disabled people in your life, having those affordances of accessibility or even just having a device that makes your life easier is something that we should be able to enjoy without sacrificing our privacy … and our personal security and our home security and the security of our communities," Gledhill-Tucker said.
Gledhill-Tucker said the latest change from Amazon was part of a broader pattern of companies claiming they need more data to "develop all these shiny new features like generative AI" offering "the next thing in the marketplace of garbage".
"They're looking for new ways to monetise Echo and Alexa and, unfortunately, privacy and security controls get in the way of monetising user data."
There are further concerns in the current political context.
"Having a recording device in every home is appealing to law enforcement and is a particularly terrible concern in a political climate of rising authoritarianism," Gledhill-Tucker said.
What are the risks?
Associate Professor James Parker studies machine listening at the University of Melbourne.
"When I started working on this topic, everybody was very concerned about smart speakers," he said.
"People were quite anxious about what precisely was being listened to.
"And I think that that is largely gone now."
Parker said that the initial release of the Amazon Echo in the mid-2010s came "after , which are also to do with government surveillance and corporate surveillance and listening".
The Amazon Echo Dot was first introduced in 2014, before being made available in Australia in 2018. Source: AP / Elaine Thompson
"That's a pretty powerful rhetorical trick."
Parker said the borders of wake words (e.g. 'Hey Alexa' or 'Hey Siri') have been eroded over the years in the name of convenience, as companies have moved from shorter phrases to handling multiple commands in a row to listening all the time.
"Sometimes we consent," Parker said. "But there are many situations where you just don't really know exactly what's being listened to and Amazon reserves the right ways to change exactly how it's listening and how the data is being used without you knowing."
"We now have so many listening devices everywhere that are hackable by nefarious people, governments, and so on and so on."
While there are examples of specific harms posed by smart speakers, Parker warns against framing the issue in this way.
"The moment you start framing in terms of those specific problems or breaches, Amazon or Apple or whoever can promise to fix them," he said.
Companies will often apologise for an error, be thankful for being alerted to it and promise to improve security standards, he said.
However, they often respond by saying: 'Well, we just need more data'.
"The bigger problem is the political economic problem basically, which is that we have conceded our data at scale.
"We've just granted, or we just gifted, all of this power and wealth to these guys by means of giving them our data or allowing them to tell us that it's fine to take our data for free."
Are there adequate protections in place?
Gledhill-Tucker said there was no need to trade privacy and security for accessibility.
"I want there to be tools in which you can have privacy and accessibility at the same time," they said.
Groups like Digital Rights Watch, where Gledhill-Tucker is campaigns and advocacy manager, have been campaigning for significant privacy reform.
Unlike countries that have a bill of rights, there is no federally enshrined right to privacy in Australia. Protection instead comes from the Privacy Act and its related Privacy Principles.
While the act was updated last year, many of the recommendations made by the attorney-general's review that preceded it were left for a second tranche of reforms set for after the election.
"It doesn't just leave individuals' privacy at risk," Gledhill-Tucker said.
"There are broader concerns for national security and also for organisations as well.
"Having privacy reform is good for business and it's good for people and it's good for the country, so it really can't wait any longer.
"Until we have a robust privacy act in place, we're particularly vulnerable in this country."
