arXiv subjects

Patrick Gage Kelley

Publications and source records attributed to Patrick Gage Kelley.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Why and How People Check Generative AI Output for Mistakes

Generative AI output can contain errors, such as hallucinations, non-responsive results, or otherwise inaccurate or potentially harmful content. To explore the public's emerging understanding, attitudes, and behavior regarding such mistakes, we ran an online survey in the United States with 1,503 respondents, with a representative sample of the population. We report high public awareness of generative AI mistakes. Further, many respondents report checking generative AI output, for example, by comparing results with other online resources. We conclude with guidance for explanations and in-product disclosures about generative AI mistakes.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

HelpBench: Assessing the Ability of LLMs to Provide Privacy, Safety, and Security Advice

This paper introduces HelpBench, a benchmark for assessing whether LLMs are capable of providing accurate help in response to questions about digital privacy, safety, and security. We curated 450 questions representing authentic user situations and developed rubrics for each question to evaluate the factual accuracy and tone of a response. Example questions touch on how to regain access to lost or suspended accounts, how to balance the trade-offs of hardware security keys versus other forms of two-factor authentication, whether a suspicious email is likely a scam, or whether an abuser might be able to track an individual based on their device peripherals. We then developed and applied an auto-rater to evaluate responses from 18 state-of-the-art LLMs. Our results indicate that while models provide high-quality advice (with scores of 82% on average), one in ten responses from models scores less than 65%, reflecting inaccurate and even harmful advice. Addressing these failures is critical for models to serve as trustworthy sources of assistance for digital privacy, safety, and security needs.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

How Generative AI Empowers Attackers and Defenders Across the Trust & Safety Landscape

Generative AI (GenAI) is a powerful technology poised to reshape Trust & Safety. While misuse by attackers is a growing concern, its defensive capacity remains underexplored. This paper examines these effects through a qualitative study with 43 Trust & Safety experts across five domains: child safety, election integrity, hate and harassment, scams, and violent extremism. Our findings characterize a landscape in which GenAI empowers both attackers and defenders. GenAI dramatically increases the scale and speed of attacks, lowering the barrier to entry for creating harmful content, including sophisticated propaganda and deepfakes. Conversely, defenders envision leveraging GenAI to detect and mitigate harmful content at scale, conduct investigations, deploy persuasive counternarratives, improve moderator wellbeing, and offer user support. This work provides a strategic framework for understanding GenAI's impact on Trust & Safety and charts a path for its responsible use in creating safer online environments.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

"It didn't feel right but I needed a job so desperately": Understanding People's Emotions & Help Needs During Financial Scams

Online financial scams represent a long-standing and serious threat for which people seek help. We present a study to understand people's in situ motivations for engaging with scams and the help needs they express before, during, and after encountering a scam. We identify the main emotions scammers exploited (e.g., fear, hope) and characterize how they did so. We examine factors -- such as financial insecurity and legal precarity -- which elevate people's risk of engaging with specific scams and experiencing harm. We indicate when people sought help and describe their help-seeking needs and emotions at different stages of the scam. We discuss how these needs could be met through the design of contextually-specific prevention, diagnostic, mitigation, and recovery interventions.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Understanding Help Seeking for Digital Privacy, Safety, and Security

The complexity of navigating digital privacy, safety, and security threats often falls directly on users. This leads to users seeking help from family and peers, platforms and advice guides, dedicated communities, and even large language models (LLMs). As a precursor to improving resources across this ecosystem, our community needs to understand what help seeking looks like in the wild. To that end, we blend qualitative coding with LLM fine-tuning to sift through over one billion Reddit posts from the last four years to identify where and for what users seek digital privacy, safety, or security help. We isolate three million relevant posts with 93% precision and recall and automatically annotate each with the topics discussed (e.g., security tools, privacy configurations, scams, account compromise, content moderation, and more). We use this dataset to understand the scope and scale of help seeking, the communities that provide help, and the types of help sought. Our work informs the development of better resources for users (e.g., user guides or LLM help-giving agents) while underscoring the inherent challenges of supporting users through complex combinations of threats, platforms, mitigations, context, and emotions.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

Frontier AI's Impact on the Cybersecurity Landscape

The impact of frontier AI (i.e., AI agents and foundation models) in cybersecurity is rapidly increasing. In this paper, we comprehensively analyze this trend through multiple aspects: quantitative benchmarks, qualitative literature review, empirical evaluation, and expert survey. Our analyses consistently show that AI's capabilities and applications in attacks have exceeded those on the defensive side. Our empirical evaluation of widely used agent systems on cybersecurity benchmarks highlights that current AI agents struggle with flexible workflow planning and using domain-specific tools for complex security analysis -- capabilities particularly critical for defensive applications. Our expert survey of AI and security researchers and practitioners indicates a prevailing view that AI will continue to benefit attackers over defenders, though the gap is expected to narrow over time. These results show the urgent need to evaluate and mitigate frontier AI's risks, steering it towards benefiting cyber defenses. Responding to this need, we provide concrete calls to action regarding: the construction of new cybersecurity benchmarks, the development of AI agents for defense, the design of provably secure AI agents, the improvement of pre-deployment security testing and transparency, and the strengthening of user-oriented education and defenses. Our paper summary and blog are available at https://rdi.berkeley.edu/frontier-ai-impact-on-cybersecurity/.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

SoK: A Framework for Unifying At-Risk User Research

At-risk users are people who experience elevated digital security, privacy, and safety threats because of what they do, who they are, where they are, or who they are with. In this systematization work, we present a framework for reasoning about at-risk users based on a wide-ranging meta-analysis of 85 papers. Across the varied populations that we examined (e.g., children, activists, women in developing regions), we identified 10 unifying contextual risk factors--such as oppression or stigmatization and access to a sensitive resource--which augment or amplify digital-safety threats and their resulting harms. We also identified technical and non-technical practices that at-risk users adopt to attempt to protect themselves from digital-safety threats. We use this framework to discuss barriers that limit at-risk users' ability or willingness to take protective actions. We believe that the security, privacy, and human-computer interaction research and practitioner communities can use our framework to identify and shape research investments to benefit at-risk users, and to guide technology design to better support at-risk users.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

"We are not Future-ready": Understanding AI Privacy Risks and Existing Mitigation Strategies from the Perspective of AI Developers in Europe

The proliferation of AI has sparked privacy concerns related to training data, model interfaces, downstream applications, and more. We interviewed 25 AI developers based in Europe to understand which privacy threats they believe pose the greatest risk to users, developers, and businesses and what protective strategies, if any, would help to mitigate them. We find that there is little consensus among AI developers on the relative ranking of privacy risks. These differences stem from salient reasoning patterns that often relate to human rather than purely technical factors. Furthermore, while AI developers are aware of proposed mitigation strategies for addressing these risks, they reported minimal real-world adoption. Our findings highlight both gaps and opportunities for empowering AI developers to better address privacy risks in AI.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Privacy Risks of General-Purpose AI Systems: A Foundation for Investigating Practitioner Perspectives

The rise of powerful AI models, more formally $\textit{General-Purpose AI Systems}$ (GPAIS), has led to impressive leaps in performance across a wide range of tasks. At the same time, researchers and practitioners alike have raised a number of privacy concerns, resulting in a wealth of literature covering various privacy risks and vulnerabilities of AI models. Works surveying such risks provide differing focuses, leading to disparate sets of privacy risks with no clear unifying taxonomy. We conduct a systematic review of these survey papers to provide a concise and usable overview of privacy risks in GPAIS, as well as proposed mitigation strategies. The developed privacy framework strives to unify the identified privacy risks and mitigations at a technical level that is accessible to non-experts. This serves as the basis for a practitioner-focused interview study to assess technical stakeholder perceptions of privacy risks and mitigations in GPAIS.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Understanding Help-Seeking and Help-Giving on Social Media for Image-Based Sexual Abuse

Image-based sexual abuse (IBSA), like other forms of technology-facilitated abuse, is a growing threat to people's digital safety. Attacks include unwanted solicitations for sexually explicit images, extorting people under threat of leaking their images, or purposefully leaking images to enact revenge or exert control. In this paper, we explore how people seek and receive help for IBSA on social media. Specifically, we identify over 100,000 Reddit posts that engage relationship and advice communities for help related to IBSA. We draw on a stratified sample of 261 posts to qualitatively examine how various types of IBSA unfold, including the mapping of gender, relationship dynamics, and technology involvement to different types of IBSA. We also explore the support needs of victim-survivors experiencing IBSA and how communities help victim-survivors navigate their abuse through technical, emotional, and relationship advice. Finally, we highlight sociotechnical gaps in connecting victim-survivors with important care, regardless of whom they turn to for help.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Supporting Human Raters with the Detection of Harmful Content using Large Language Models

In this paper, we explore the feasibility of leveraging large language models (LLMs) to automate or otherwise assist human raters with identifying harmful content including hate speech, harassment, violent extremism, and election misinformation. Using a dataset of 50,000 comments, we demonstrate that LLMs can achieve 90% accuracy when compared to human verdicts. We explore how to best leverage these capabilities, proposing five design patterns that integrate LLMs with human rating, such as pre-filtering non-violative content, detecting potential errors in human rating, or surfacing critical context to support human rating. We outline how to support all of these design patterns using a single, optimized prompt. Beyond these synthetic experiments, we share how piloting our proposed techniques in a real-world review queue yielded a 41.5% improvement in optimizing available human rater capacity, and a 9--11% increase (absolute) in precision and recall for detecting violative content.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2024

How Knowledge Workers Think Generative AI Will (Not) Transform Their Industries

Generative AI is expected to have transformative effects in multiple knowledge industries. To better understand how knowledge workers expect generative AI may affect their industries in the future, we conducted participatory research workshops for seven different industries, with a total of 54 participants across three US cities. We describe participants' expectations of generative AI's impact, including a dominant narrative that cut across the groups' discourse: participants largely envision generative AI as a tool to perform menial work, under human review. Participants do not generally anticipate the disruptive changes to knowledge industries currently projected in common media and academic narratives. Participants do however envision generative AI may amplify four social forces currently shaping their industries: deskilling, dehumanization, disconnection, and disinformation. We describe these forces, and then we provide additional detail regarding attitudes in specific knowledge industries. We conclude with a discussion of implications and research challenges for the HCI community.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

SoK: Safer Digital-Safety Research Involving At-Risk Users

Research involving at-risk users -- that is, users who are more likely to experience a digital attack or to be disproportionately affected when harm from such an attack occurs -- can pose significant safety challenges to both users and researchers. Nevertheless, pursuing research in computer security and privacy is crucial to understanding how to meet the digital-safety needs of at-risk users and to design safer technology for all. To standardize and bolster safer research involving such users, we offer an analysis of 196 academic works to elicit 14 research risks and 36 safety practices used by a growing community of researchers. We pair this inconsistent set of reported safety practices with oral histories from 12 domain experts to contribute scaffolded and consolidated pragmatic guidance that researchers can use to plan, execute, and share safer digital-safety research involving at-risk users. We conclude by suggesting areas for future research regarding the reporting, study, and funding of at-risk user research

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

"There's so much responsibility on users right now:" Expert Advice for Staying Safer From Hate and Harassment

Online hate and harassment poses a threat to the digital safety of people globally. In light of this risk, there is a need to equip as many people as possible with advice to stay safer online. We interviewed 24 experts to understand what threats and advice internet users should prioritize to prevent or mitigate harm. As part of this, we asked experts to evaluate 45 pieces of existing hate-and-harassment-specific digital-safety advice to understand why they felt advice was viable or not. We find that experts frequently had competing perspectives for which threats and advice they would prioritize. We synthesize sources of disagreement, while also highlighting the primary threats and advice where experts concurred. Our results inform immediate efforts to protect users from online hate and harassment, as well as more expansive socio-technical efforts to establish enduring safety.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

Practicing Information Sensibility: How Gen Z Engages with Online Information

Assessing the trustworthiness of information online is complicated. Literacy-based paradigms are both widely used to help and widely critiqued. We conducted a study with 35 Gen Zers from across the U.S. to understand how they assess information online. We found that they tended to encounter -- rather than search for -- information, and that those encounters were shaped more by social motivations than by truth-seeking queries. For them, information processing is fundamentally a social practice. Gen Zers interpreted online information together, as aspirational members of social groups. Our participants sought information sensibility: a socially-informed awareness of the value of information encountered online. We outline key challenges they faced and practices they used to make sense of information. Our findings suggest that like their information sensibility practices, solutions and strategies to address misinformation should be embedded in social contexts online.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Designing Toxic Content Classification for a Diversity of Perspectives

In this work, we demonstrate how existing classifiers for identifying toxic comments online fail to generalize to the diverse concerns of Internet users. We survey 17,280 participants to understand how user expectations for what constitutes toxic content differ across demographics, beliefs, and personal experiences. We find that groups historically at-risk of harassment - such as people who identify as LGBTQ+ or young adults - are more likely to to flag a random comment drawn from Reddit, Twitter, or 4chan as toxic, as are people who have personally experienced harassment in the past. Based on our findings, we show how current one-size-fits-all toxicity classification algorithms, like the Perspective API from Jigsaw, can improve in accuracy by 86% on average through personalized model tuning. Ultimately, we highlight current pitfalls and new design directions that can improve the equity and efficacy of toxic content classifiers for all users.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2021

"Why wouldn't someone think of democracy as a target?": Security practices & challenges of people involved with U.S. political campaigns

People who are involved with political campaigns face increased digital security threats from well-funded, sophisticated attackers, especially nation-states. Improving political campaign security is a vital part of protecting democracy. To identify campaign security issues, we conducted qualitative research with 28 participants across the U.S. political spectrum to understand the digital security practices, challenges, and perceptions of people involved in campaigns. A main, overarching finding is that a unique combination of threats, constraints, and work culture lead people involved with political campaigns to use technologies from across platforms and domains in ways that leave them--and democracy--vulnerable to security attacks. Sensitive data was kept in a plethora of personal and work accounts, with ad hoc adoption of strong passwords, two-factor authentication, encryption, and access controls. No individual company, committee, organization, campaign, or academic institution can solve the identified problems on their own. To this end, we provide an initial understanding of this complex problem space and recommendations for how a diverse group of experts can begin working together to improve security for political campaigns.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2021

Exciting, Useful, Worrying, Futuristic: Public Perception of Artificial Intelligence in 8 Countries

As the influence and use of artificial intelligence (AI) have grown and its transformative potential has become more apparent, many questions have been raised regarding the economic, political, social, and ethical implications of its use. Public opinion plays an important role in these discussions, influencing product adoption, commercial development, research funding, and regulation. In this paper we present results of an in-depth survey of public opinion of artificial intelligence conducted with 10,005 respondents spanning eight countries and six continents. We report widespread perception that AI will have significant impact on society, accompanied by strong support for the responsible development and use of AI, and also characterize the public's sentiment towards AI with four key themes (exciting, useful, worrying, and futuristic) whose prevalence distinguishes response to AI in different countries.

cs.CY↗