Camera glasses create fundamental privacy tensions between wearers seeking recording functionality and bystanders concerned about unauthorized surveillance. We present a systematic multi-stakeholder evaluation of privacy mechanisms through surveys (N=525) and paired interviews (N=20) in China. Study 1 quantifies expectation-willingness gaps: bystanders consistently demand stronger information transparency and protective measures than wearers will provide, with disparities intensifying in sensitive contexts where 65-90% of bystanders would take defensive action. Study 2 evaluates twelve privacy-enhancing technologies, revealing four fundamental trade-offs that undermine current approaches: visibility versus disruption, empowerment versus burden, protection versus agency, and accountability versus exposure. These gaps reflect structural incompatibilities rather than inadequate goodwill, with context emerging as the primary determinant of privacy acceptability. We propose context-adaptive pathways that dynamically adjust protection strategies: minimal-friction visibility in public spaces, structured negotiation in semi-public environments, and automatic protection in sensitive contexts. Our findings contribute a diagnostic framework for evaluating privacy mechanisms and implications for context-aware design in ubiquitous sensing.

翻译：相机眼镜在寻求记录功能的佩戴者与担忧未经授权监控的旁观者之间引发了根本性的隐私张力。我们通过在中国开展的问卷调查（N=525）和配对访谈（N=20），对隐私机制进行了系统的多利益相关方评估。研究1量化了期望-意愿差距：旁观者始终要求比佩戴者愿意提供的更强的信息透明度和保护措施，在敏感情境下这种差异加剧，65-90%的旁观者会采取防御性行动。研究2评估了十二种隐私增强技术，揭示了削弱当前方法的四个根本性权衡：可见性与干扰性、赋权与负担、保护与自主性、问责与暴露风险。这些差距反映了结构性不兼容而非善意不足，情境成为隐私可接受性的首要决定因素。我们提出了动态调整保护策略的情境自适应路径：公共场所的低摩擦可见性、半公共环境中的结构化协商以及敏感情境下的自动保护。我们的研究结果贡献了一个用于评估隐私机制的诊断框架，并对普适传感中的情境感知设计提出了启示。