Content uploaded by Troy Nachtigall
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Troy Nachtigall on May 11, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Making Secret Pockets
Troy Robert Nachtigall
Eindhoven University of
Technology (TU/e)
Eindhoven, NL
T.R.Nachtigall@tue.nl
Kristina Andersen
Eindhoven University of
Technology (TU/e)
Eindhoven, NL
kristina@tinything.com
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or
classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or
distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and
the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work
must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Copyright is held by the owner/author(s).
CHI’18 Extended Abstracts, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
© 2018 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s).
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-5621-3/18/04
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188611
Abstract
This paper describes an early design research exploration
into the potential of folds and pockets to serve as places for
safekeeping and secrecy in wearables. We explore what
such secrecy may mean through woven data codes. We re-
port on early material exploration, a pilot study with ten par-
ticipants, and the personalization of a data object. We then
outline, how we will make use of these early indications to
build future stages of the project.
Author Keywords
Wearables, fashion, data, security, fitting
ACM Classification Keywords
H.1.2 [User/Machine Systems]: Human Factors
Context
Almost all clothing has hidden folds and pockets in some
sense. However, pockets are not equally distributed in our
clothes. Work wear and garments for outdoor activities,
such as carpentry, fishing and mountaineering provide a
plethora of dedicated pockets, while women’s clothing and
in particular formal outfits have few, if any. The traditional
suit sits somewhere in between with formal and dedicated
pockets that are nevertheless often sewn shut. In this way,
pockets can be associated with traditional power and skill,
while the absence of pockets in practice means that the
CHI 2018 Late-Breaking Abstract
CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
LBW574, Page1
wearer will be improvising to carry important items, like
keys, cards, etc [2]. As a result, even a garment with no
pockets is often used to hold something next to the body, a
cell phone in a bra or a credit card in a sock.
Figure 1: Conceptual overview of
the project.
Wearable technology practitioners know these spaces well,
they are used to run cables or hide boards/batteries [3], but
the designs have traditionally tended to focus on creating
garments that sense the wearer or display data [9], with
less attention paid to unseen folds and spaces as sites of
meaning and importance. However, folds and pockets adds
depth to the space immediately around us. Rather than sur-
face area, pocket and folds form a kind of interstitial zone,
not clearly belonging to the body, the intimate self, or to the
public, communal self. [1]
At the same time, the current mainstream technological
object defies our understanding, and can increasingly be
addressed as a magic device itself [6]. This approach to
technology as a magical unknown (which might very well be
addressed through cursing, tokenism and ceremony), is not
that far from currently emergent practices of air-gapping,
caging, and physical key verification. This project proposes
that we might in a similar way rethink material practices in
the light of security, sensing, big data and IoT: How can we
make use of physical objects as a carrier/creator of data
that secures communication, financial transactions, and
civic status, but also captures daily activity, like shopping
and personal expression?
Figure 2: The three pocket types.
Pockets and Folds
If fashion is an expression of who we are, then the act of
hiding something is as important as what we choose to
show. The shifting of necklines, hemlines, waists, shoulders
and busts exemplifies social values. ‘Through the artifice
of apparel, the less than perfect can camouflage perceived
deficiencies and in some instances project an appeal be-
yond those gifted with characteristics accepted an ideal
in their culture and time.’ [5] The need for apparel design
to hide and accentuate parts of the body has also made it
adept at hiding things close to the body.
Pockets are an example of this: ‘Hidden away amongst
folds of fabric, unlike the outfit as a whole, pockets do not
appear to fit the usual narrative of early modern dress, that
of display and the proclamation of an individual’s actual
or desired identity through their clothing.’ [7]. As we ap-
proached this project, we decided that an exploration of the
form and use of pockets might cast a light on both the prac-
tice and the materiality of the pocket itself, but also what it
may conceal and keep safe (see fig.1).
Making Process
We decided to explore this design space through an initial
material exploration of pockets, which lead us to the design
and construction of three typical pocket types, made as
separate objects (see fig.2).
• Double Welt pocket - An external pocket typically
found on the outside of a coat.
• Hidden pocket - An internal or external pocket that
appears only as a single slit, typically found in the
lining of a coat.
• Lining pocket - An internal pocket typically used in the
front pocket of a jeans pant.
We selected textiles that would enhance the internal/external
aspect of the pockets, and made them with techniques typ-
ical to their type. The double welt is in a classic plaid using
a refined Merino wool fiber used to make suits. The hid-
den pocket is made from a polished linen single weave with
CHI 2018 Late-Breaking Abstract
CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
LBW574, Page2
a textile is appropriate for internal lining or external fabric
and is sewn using over-locking to move it visually towards
the inside of a garment. The lining pocket is made from a
polyester plaid weave as is typically used in pocket linings.
Figure 3: Modifying the code.
In order to address the data security aspect of the project,
we created a traditional clothing tag with a series of num-
bers generated by an Elliptic-curve Diffie-Hellman algo-
rithm. This was selected as an industry standard encryption
algorithm to help convey the importance of the data. The
string of numbers were woven into a fabric clothing tag to
symbolize a physical/virtual data object.
Figure 4: Choosing the Pocket.
Outcomes: Fitting the Pocket
In order to begin gathering impressions and material, we
engaged 10 participants in a feedback process. Partici-
pants were selected at random from a University popula-
tion. We let each participant modify a woven code label with
a marker, and then choose and place a pocket on their own
garment. During these session we recorded the conversa-
tion, and after 2-3 days the participants answered an online
questionnaire. We processed the interviews, images and
surveys with thematic analysis to gather a set of initial feed-
back and create correlations between thoughts and actions.
Figure 5: The ten placements.
Modifying the Code
Participants were more or less willing to accept the string
of numbers as a physical artifact. Many accepted the fact
that this number could secure important things in life, much
like a pin code protects a credit card. When modifying the
label, most participants simply crossed out numbers using
a personal logic: “I’m thinking now of which numbers are
also more important for me. For example, the number six,
because we are a family of six.” The exception was the par-
ticipant, who said: “There’s just numbers. I feel like it’s too
... because it’s just numbers, it’s too empty, This is kind of
like a barcode.” He expressed a desire for something more
complicated and driven by drawing. In drawing on top of the
numbers he redesigned the tag entirely (see fig.3).
Choosing the Pocket
Although we prepared ten of each type of pocket, the linen
hidden pocket was the most popular. The pocket choice of
the grey linen seems to have been partially aesthetic and
partially functional. Of the eight respondents that chose it,
the sentiment can be summarized as: “I would go for the
middle one because it’s quite invisible but still it’s big.” 48
hours later, when answering the online questionnaire, this
group seemed still satisfied with their selection: “(The grey
linen) has a minimalistic look and you can take your stuff
out without having to open your jacket.” A few of the partic-
ipants chose the black and white lining pocket: “(The black
and white tartan lining) wasn’t flashy as others. I know what
it meant to me, but would be regarded as less important by
others.” None of the participants chose the Red Tartan Dou-
ble Welt, which was surprising to the researchers as it was
the one with the finest fabric and the highest level of finish
(see fig.4).
Placing the Pocket
When looking at the placement of the pockets, we clearly
see two groups become apparent. The first group (top row
in fig.5) placed the pocket in a place where it was external
or mostly external. All five had chosen the hidden pocket
and placed it in a place that was easily accessible: “Like on
the outside? Yes because otherwise I have to open it, and I
have to take something from it... This one seems it’s more
handy for me.” The second group (bottom row of fig.5) con-
sists the participants, who wanted the pocket to be internal
or mostly internal: “I think I would like that idea for the more
secret pockets, but not for this one (referring to Red Tartan
external pocket). Because then everybody will see it and
CHI 2018 Late-Breaking Abstract
CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
LBW574, Page3
they will be curious and they will certainly know your secret
and because it’s sticking out everybody will see that there’s
something in there.” It was interesting to note that the par-
ticipants in this group were more likely to choose the lining
pocket as well.
Figure 6: Overview of user
engagement.
Wearing the Pocket
Two days after fitting the pocket, we asked the participants
to complete a questionnaire. Most of the respondents were
still wearing their pocket as one respondent said: “(The
pocket)’s become part of me.” Another respondent, who
also still was wearing the pocket, noted that the color, his
was the grey version, was still too bold. “The pocket is now
still in my jacket, but it is not attached yet. I would like to
change the color to black because than it would be a less
obvious pocket.” Overall the participants were still engaged
with their pocket intervention, still wearing it after a few days
and expressing mild regret, if it is left behind: “I changed
clothes, so I did not wear the pocket the other days. but
I would have liked to have a pocket on the inside of my
jacket.”
Figure 7: Wearing the pocket.
Keeping a Secret
As observed in the previous sections, many participants
were concerned with keeping not just the code but the
pocket secret (see fig.7). One participant struggled with
this: “When I don’t want to have stuff on the outside part,
I just put it here. I think I prefer this one because it’s more
hidden somehow, and I will hide it.” Another participant
went even further and placed the code in the smaller upper
part of the pocket saying: “I would replace the code in the
top part of the pocket, so it is more like a secret, only I know
about.” The majority of respondents felt that by wearing it
they had a secret, and in general the pockets have become
part of their garments: “The pocket is almost invisible.” and:
“I forget most of the time that I’m wearing it. I’m just sur-
prised sometimes, figuring out it is there on me.” All of the
respondents reported still having the code label in the pock-
ets: “I didn’t touch it. I remember the code. I actually didn’t
even have a look at it to see if it is still there. But I guess it
is okay, still in it.” and some of them began having ideas of
what it might be used for: “Maybe to remember things. Like,
if you use the string to underline a number, and than you
see the number again, you remember.”
What happened?
For this early part of the project, we gathered feedback in
three stages (see fig.6): during the making of the pockets,
during the fitting process, and through the online question-
naire - and the outcomes were surprising in a number of
ways:
• The making process was conducted as a collabora-
tion between the authors, where skill were shared,
and the basis of the overall project was discussed.
Through this process we arrived at the form and ma-
terial choices for the first prototypes.
• The preference for the least elaborate pocket was
a surprise, the grey material was considered ‘less
flashy’ and in retrospect better fitting to the notion
of secrets and safekeeping. These concerns over-
rode the superior design and craftsmanship in the red
external pocket, and instead it was clear that the sim-
pler pockets were more fitting to the concerns of the
participants.
• In a similar way, we were surprised and charmed by
the strategies employed to modify the code label: “I
generally get rid of everything except zeros, ones,
and fives.” We are interested in how this combina-
tion of machine code and human whimsy might be
explored further.
CHI 2018 Late-Breaking Abstract
CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
LBW574, Page4
• The participants were split evenly between keeping
the pocket internal or external to their garment. This
tension between hiding and showing should also be
investigated.
• The role of the data on the woven tag was ques-
tioned, and discussing it in the interview lead to new
ideas. This includes how the data can change over
time, with or without direct interaction.
Figure 8: One modified code label.
Next Steps
This early set of material leads us to a number of concerns
that we will address in future steps of the project.
It is clear that we must continue to refine the way we in-
volve our participants, one option would be to conduct a
session where we interview each participant, while they
construct their own hiding place for a secret. In such a pro-
cess, we would follow Wallace et all in their description of
a probe process as one of bi-directional reciprocity, where
the reciprocity brings conversation: ‘we are not just asking
someone a question and gaining an answer, we are asking
someone to reflect, share, surprise and reveal things to us
in a cycle of atypical gestures.’ [8] One such gesture might
be the active construction of a design exemplar together
with participants.
We would also like to engage our participants in longitudinal
interaction with the code over time (see fig.8). It might be
changed by the participant, and the use of it might change.
Numbers could be cut off, modified or placed in a matrix
and read in a different way. Along the lines of a one time
password, but repeatable. Also, what if the material is in
someway memorizing codes that will be used to change the
object the next time it is generated for the wearer, individ-
ualizing it to them. In that way we might be able to let the
magic of the device lie in the material itself.
By engaging participants like this, we will be taking a further
step towards personalization and tailoring. This would be in
the spirit of the project, both in terms of the way that pock-
ets have naturally adapted over time to the needs of the ob-
jects being placed inside of them, and in terms of our own
commitment of involving our participants as co-researchers
and co-designers. As a design object, the pocket is a con-
tainer not yet filled. By being re-conceptualized and placed
in a garment, it is activated by the actions and wishes of
the wearer: What does it mean for pockets to contain data?
What does it mean for pockets to hide a data object?
These data objects can be thought of as passwords and
code strings, but also the key to our houses, which stores
height data of the tumblers in locks, or the usb keys which
hold the information to our bitcoin. Most recently we have
seen the rise of objects like the Yubikey that provide a phys-
ical layer of security to digital data, while email hacking and
the rise of financial transactions has given rise to the even
greater need for secure access to digital assets. We spec-
ulate that when such objects are not in use, they might be
kept close to the body, as parametric objects that encode
data emerging as wearables [4].
The basis for this project, lies in the field between these two
concerns: making use of garment archetypes in in wear-
ables with particular attention paid to secrets, security and
keys. As such we aim to rethink wearable garments and
devices as digital safes, or as sites for the safekeeping of
digital objects.
Conclusions
Our contribution here, is the report from a pilot study that
outlines a larger future inquiry into both the garment aspect
of wearables and the physicalization of keys in the form of
codes and tokens of security.
CHI 2018 Late-Breaking Abstract
CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
LBW574, Page5
By keeping possessions hidden from view, pockets give
their owners a sense of privacy and protection for their be-
longings. The proximity of a pocket to the body not only
implies a potential emotional attachment to its contents, but
what people store in their pockets can also provide a sense
of what they believe to be important or necessary to carry
on their person. Though we tend to think of a person’s iden-
tity being expressed through the more external and visible
aspects of dress, pockets demonstrate their wearer’s indi-
viduality through their contents and the very matter of their
inclusion in garments, as they allow people a space in their
clothing, which is truly their own to use at will.
By re-addressing the pocket from a data secrecy point of
view, we attempt to address and design for the unknown
and unknowable technological object. With this project, we
will be exploring physical making as a method for develop-
ing new ideas, both within a Research through Design pro-
cess and in collaborations with users. As materials become
more complex and the technological body becomes smaller
and more distributed across increasingly ubiquitous nodes,
we feel that such approaches will allow us to consider and
address the increasing complexity of our lives with digital
and post-digital matter.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the participants for their
patience. The project received funding from the European
Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme
under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No.
642328.
REFERENCES
1. Kristina Andersen and Joanna Berzowska. 2006. Worn
Technology: Altering Social Spaces. Open, Hybrid
Space 11 (2006), 148–157.
2. Steven Connor. 2002. Men in Skirts. Women: a cultural
review 13, 3 (2002), 257–271.
3. Lucy Dunne, Aaron Toney, Susan Ashdown, and Bruce
Thomas. 2004. Subtle garment integration of
technology: A case study of the business suit. Ph.D.
Dissertation. Universitat Bremen.
4. Joep Frens, Jodi Forlizzi, and John Zimmerman. 2017.
New Challenges when Teaching UX Students to Sketch
and Prototype. Proceedings of ISADR’17 (2017), 1–26.
5. Harold Koda. 2001. Extreme beauty: the body
transformed. Yale University Press.
6. Audrey Samson and Kristina Andersen. 2013.
Tassophonics: Nanotechnology as the Magical
Unknown. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin,
Heidelberg, 548–557. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39238- 2_60
7. Rebecca Unsworth. 2017. Hands Deep in History:
Pockets in Men and Women’s Dress in Western
Europe, c. 1480–1630. Costume 51, 2 (2017),
148–170.
8. Jayne Wallace, John McCarthy, Peter C. Wright, and
Patrick Olivier. 2013. Making Design Probes Work. In
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’13). ACM, New
York, NY, USA, 3441–3450. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466473
9. Clint Zeagler. 2017. Where to Wear It: Functional,
Technical, and Social Considerations in On-body
Location for Wearable Technology 20 Years of
Designing for Wearability. In Proceedings of the 2017
ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers
(ISWC ’17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 150–157. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3123021.3123042
CHI 2018 Late-Breaking Abstract
CHI 2018, April 21–26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada
LBW574, Page6
