#computer accessability

I'm going to try not to scream. Because I spent over an hour figuring out how to force my web browser to remember my username (not my password, just my username) for a website that I need to log into regularly.

Poor design and inaccessible design are everywhere. And they are extremely prevalent when it comes to computing, application design, and web design. I know that. I have been fighting it for years. Like, more than five years.

Generally, I find that poor design and inaccessible design come from organizations that just don't care or individual programmers and designers who simply don't know better. But it would seem that everyone gets a pass when it comes to anything vaguely resembling security. And I'm fed up with it. It's not okay. It is not ethical for you to bar me from your system because you designed security which is not accessible to me. Period.

And before someone comments to tell me that I don't understand computer security: I do. I've taken graduate level number theory courses, and I understand encryption. I've done RSA encryption by hand. I've read many articles from organizations such as the Electronic Frontiers Foundation which emphasize privacy and security in the digital world. I use free software extensively. I know how to program. I'm the kind of geek who reads the source code of webpages. I'm not an expert, but I'm significantly more knowledgeable than 99% of the population.

To be clear, I'm not advocating for lack of security. What I am advocating for are two things: 1. Allow users to choose which security risks are worth taking with respect to their own data. 2. Design security systems which are flexible enough to be accessible to people with a variety of abilities.

That's it. Neither of those things sound unreasonable to me. But yet I see extremely frustrating violations of those two principles all the time.

Today it was a website that decided it wasn't okay for me to have my web browser remember my username. First of all, it's just my username! And the website also lets me log in with my email address, which is basically just public knowledge. I mean, seriously. Not hard to find my email address. Second, it's my account and if someone else was able to access it, they would be accessing only my private data. In other words, that risk only affects me, so it should be my decision to make. Third, my web browser is my software. (And I use Mozilla Firefox, so it is free and open source.) It runs on my computer. It should take instructions from me first and foremost. My computer, my software, my choices. Period.

Here's another example: Ctrl-Alt-Del. That keystroke. I hate it. It's a historical relic which was originally a troubleshooting tool used by IBM technicians. It should have never made it into the mainstream. And yet Microsoft uses it as a required part of logging in to a Windows PC, in the name of security. (The actual security provided by that is questionable.I am not going to go there right now. A web search will point you in the right direction if you're interested.) To clarify, I can turn that off on my own computer. And I have. But, my university uses it and requires that I do the same. I can manage it, but it's extra difficulty and extra pain that's really not necessary. And there are plenty of people who can't. (For example, upper limb amputees, people with significant fine motor or coordination difficulties, people without fingers, people who can't physically get their hands to the keyboard.)

Shall we have another? Windows User Account Control. Words that strike rage into my heart. In addition to having some pretty significant technical design issues, Windows User Account Control has the absolutely charming feature of not accepting any software generated input. The claim is that this can prevent a virus or other malicious code from accepting the prompt for the user. That's at least partially true. But it also prevents a huge number of assistive technology users from being able to interact with the system. Personally, I've turned it off on my own computer. Which is fine for me. But that design decision effectively prevents anyone who relies on assistive technology (including me) from ever working in the computer technology field (using Windows, at least). Those people can't be Windows system administrators, they can't be tech-support consultants, they can't do certain types of development work. (I have a hunch that's actually a violation of the ADA, but Microsoft can hire an awful lot of lawyers....)

Looking at these and many other examples, it seems to me that we give developers a free pass on accessibility when it comes to security. Perhaps it's because our culture struggles so much to evaluate real risks (as opposed to perceived risks). Perhaps it's because we really love the way security theater makes us feel safer. Perhaps it's just because the people who tend to do disability advocacy work don't understand security and don't know how to make a solid argument when these topics come up. But whatever the cause, it's not okay.

Nope, not kidding. I have actually been writing computer programs with my eyes (and a few voice commands thrown in here and there).

More specifically, I'm using an eye tracking device called the Tobii EyeX. It's a consumer-level eye tracker which mounts to the bottom of my computer monitor and connects to my computer via USB 3.0. (I've written about this type of eye tracking device before, and you can also look at Tobii's website.)

Okay, so how?...

Good question! And I'm going to answer it with the rest of this post. I'm going to write this in the general style of a how-to guide, in case any of my readers actually want to copy my set up. (To my knowledge, no one else has documented how to do this.) However, even if you have no desire to write Python with your eyes, you might still want to skim the rest of this. Several of the tools that I'm using have potentially much broader applications.

Within the past year, multiple companies have released eyetrackers costing hundreds, instead of (tens of) thousands, of dollars. These new devices are aimed at gaming and multimedia applications, but they are still amazingly useful as assistive technology. The two main competitors at this point seem to be Eye Tribe and Tobii EyeX.

I purchased an EyeX unit this March, and it has significantly expanded what I can do with my computer. I will write later about the specifics of my setup, but I want to today just survey some of the development happening on the EyeX and other low-cost eye tracking devices (much software works across multiple devices) which is relevant to disability. (There is also significant gaming development on the platform, but it is largely using multiple input devices and would not be accessible to many physically disabled people. Plus,Tobii will tell you all about that.)

To be clear, I’m saying that these devices have great accessibility potential, not that they are currently ready made computer access solutions. At present, using these devices as an accessibility tool requires at least moderate technical skills.

Okay, without further ado, here are some software projects I find interesting:

OptiKey is an on-screen keyboard and mouse emulator specifically designed for eye tracking input. Free and open source. Windows only.

Project Iris uses eye tracking to control the mouse. It also allows you to define active screen regions and triggers actions when you look at them. Many potential uses for accessible gaming. Paid. Windows only.

Gaze Speaker is a self contained environment for speech generation by eye movements. Also includes other tools like an email client, a simple web browser, and a file browser, all designed to be accessed by eye alone. Free and open source.

I have been browsing the Internet in search of accessible mouse solutions (for my own use), and, as a result, I have been looking at able of websites that sell assistive technology.  And I have seen something that I think is, quite frankly, a predatory practice: companies selling software that does very little from a programming perspective (and could easily be replaced with free software) for hundreds (sometimes thousands) of dollars.  And they're selling these products to disabled people who have often been severely disadvantaged in getting a technology education because of their disabilities.  So, I present, a list of software functions that you should never pay for.  Ever.

(To be clear, not all assistive software is predatory.  Some of it is very useful software that does complex tasks using innovative algorithms and large datasets.  I want to help you learn to tell the difference.)

You should never buy software to perform the following tasks: 1) hover clickers or dwell clickers (software that automatically clicks the mouse when you hold the cursor still for a set length of time) 2) software to alter your mouse speed, acceleration, or sensitivity 3) software to remap inputs (for example, to switch the right and left buttons on your mouse, or to type in a phrase whenever you press a certain key) 4) on-screen keyboards (unless you have very specific needs, such as gaze interaction or interaction with another specialized input device.  Or may be if the keyboard is particularly innovative and useful.) 5) software to "filter" your keyboard input or ignore repeated keypresses 6) macro writing software (such as software that lets you "record" the sequence of actions and then play them back with a single keypress) 7) break timers (software that reminds you to take a break from using the computer) 8) software to use a gaming device, such as a joystick or videogame controller, as a mouse

Please, please, please don't buy these products!  Use free software (or features built into your operating system) to do these tasks, and spend your money on something that will actually help you!

If you need help figuring out how to use free tools to do any of these tasks, feel free to send me a message.  As a quick reference, is here is how I would recommend approaching the tasks that I have listed above. 1) I use an AutoHotkey script.  There are also several free dwell clickers available for download; a Google search should point you in the right direction.  (Linux users: both the GNOME and KDE have a hover click tool available under the standard accessibility options.) 2) Start with the controls in your operating system.  If that's not enough, try the drivers provided by the manufacturer of your mouse/trackball/joystick/etc. or a tool like AutoHotkey. 3) AutoHotkey! 4) Most modern operating systems have one included.  There are also lots of free options online. 5) This is a standard accessibility option in modern operating systems. 6) There are lots of free macro packages available.  I like AutoHotkey on Windows and simple shell scripts on Linux. 7)  Workrave (hey, look, I have a whole post about it!) 8) Again, AutoHotkey!

Okay, computer security has me all worked into a tizzy.  Because it is so, so readily apparent that no one gives a shit about accessibility.  I'm just so frustrated, because it is so apparent that even imagined security concerns that have no basis in fact trump the needs of disabled people.  And that's not okay.

It seems to be okay, not just here, but on a broader societal level to justify inaccessibility in the name of security.  I recently spoke to a woman who actually worked for an assistive technology agency.  She has muscular dystrophy, and she can't do the control-alt-delete key stroke to log into Windows, either.  And yet her organization is unwilling (or unable) to make an exception so that she can use her computer.  (She has her husband do it, which is fine for her, but not by any means a general solution.) It's ridiculous!  And here's the crazy thing about that control-alt-delete key stroke: essentially nobody in computer security agrees that it's beneficial or necessary.  (Some people claim it should always have been done with a single button dedicated to security; others say that no button can be effective in today's world of complex operating systems and proliferating input devices.)  There are many instances of people noting that the keystroke is an accessibility issue.  (For one thing, it basically requires two hands.  For another, it can't be activated from on-screen keyboards or other emulation devices.  It's also more cognitively demanding and physically challenging than other alternatives.)  And yet we still have it.  In spite of years of hardware and software design, that horribly inaccessible key stroke is still with us.  Still haunting thousands of disabled people every day.  And my University, despite being populated with intelligent people who should be able to understand this, still insists that I must press those three magic keys.

It just baffles me.  This is such an easy problem to understand, and such an easy problem to solve.  (Here is a perfectly generic and nearly universally accessible solution:  Place an extra button on the computer, which serves as the equivalent of control-alt-delete.  Additionally, place an input port next to the button which can be used to attach any sort of a switch that the user desires and have such a switch perform the same function.  Now any person can use whatever device they need to to activate that keystroke.  Easy.  Alternate solution: just ditch the whole thing.  Many security experts say it doesn't matter anyway.)  

This is a cool website which allows anyone with a microphone and internet access to use dictation software developed by Google.  It’s not perfect, but the recognition accuracy is pretty impressive.  I was seriously surprised at how well it worked! 

Unfortunately, there are no tools for correcting mistakes or editing your writing.

It only works with the Google Chrome browser (or the chromium browser).