2014. 09. 23

(Daming Wu)

Email: wdm1517@gmail.com

SeoulTech UCS Lab 2014-2nd

Copyright ⓒ 2014 by USC Lab All Rights Reserved.

Privacy in Ubiquitous Computing

Contents

3.1 Introduction

– 3.1.1 Why a Privacy Chapter in a Ubicomp Book?

– 3.1.2 Isn’t Privacy the Same as Security?

– 3.1.3 What Is in this Chapter?

3.2 Understanding Privacy

– 3.2.1 Defining Privacy

– 3.2.2 Motivating Privacy: Do People Care about Privacy?

2

3

3.1 Introduction

3.1 Introduction

4

Privacy is by no means a recent addition to the ubicomp research curriculum.

Perhaps key among the social issues that embodied virtuality will engender is

privacy.

privacy is a complex issue,no single solution.

3.1 Introduction

5

Privacy-safe needs to look into each single system and application in great detail

understanding what the system does

what the implications of the system

how reach the right behavior

This chapter provide some guidance :

explaining the concept of privacy

what it is that should be protected

how technology can safeguard personal information

3.1.1 Why Privacy in Ubicomp ?

6

Privacy and technology are closely intertwined.

Shifts in technology require us to rethink our privacy

our abilities to see, hear, detect, record, find, and manipulate others and their lives is

greatly enhanced.

the ability to store, process, and analyze information is at the heart of the privacy

debate.

In order to make meaningful choices within any system parameters, needs to understand

the entirety of the system and its applications

What type of information is collected and in what manner?

Who needs to have access to such information and purpose?

How long should this information be stored and format?

What levels of accuracy and precision?

3.1.2 Isn’t Privacy the Same as Security?

7

Security is the confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity of information.

Security is often a ingredient to privacy, it facilitates the control of information and helps

to ensure the correctness of data.

Security is fails to address questions such as

scope

purpose and use

adequacy

Lifetime

access

It is possible to have high levels of security but no privacy.

8

3.2 Understanding Privacy

3.2.1 Defining Privacy

9

The legal definition of privacy (Warren and Brandeis 1890)

a state of solitude and seclusion that would ensure a “general right to the immunity of

the person, the right to one’s personality.”

Information privacy(Westin, 1967)

Privacy is the claim of individuals, groups, or institutions to determine for themselves

when, how, and to what extent information about them is communicated to others.

3.2.1 Defining Privacy

10

local privacy or physical privacy

territorial privacy : he protection of the home

bodily privacy : the protection from unjustified strip searches or medical tests

Over the past 200 years, the focus of privacy has shifted

Ubicomp has made those seemingly long-solved issues of bodily and territorial privacy

become highly relevant again.

The limitation of both Warren and Brandeis’ and Westin’s definition of privacy is they

do not specify exactly how one’s privacy should be protected.

3.2.1 Defining Privacy

11

Marx differentiates between four such border crossings are perceived as privacy

violations:

Natural borders—Physical limitations of observations, such as walls and doors, clothing,

but also sealed letters and telephone calls.

Social borders—Expectations about confidentiality for members of certain social roles,

such as family members, doctors.

Spatial or temporal borders —the usual expectations of people that parts of their life,

both in time and social space, can remain separated from each other.

Borders due to ephemeral or transitory effects — This describes what is best known as a

fleeting moment, an unreflected utterance or action that one hopes gets forgotten soon.

Privacy violations can be seen as involuntary border crossings, that is, whenever

information permeates barriers without our help.

Privacy Taxonomy is an overview of the activities that might lead to privacy problems.

Activities into four sets

• information collection

• information processing

• information dissemination

• Invasion

3.2.1 Defining Privacy

12

Westin have been many such surveys.

Westin classified the respondents into three categories:

• privacy fundamentalists

• privacy pragmatists

• privacy unconcerned

3.2.2 Motivating Privacy: Do People Care about Privacy?

13

As to the actual data are considered private, answers similarly differ.

Many people wish to control the flow of information about themselves, but they often

differ widely about what types of information they want to control.

3.2.2 Motivating Privacy: Do People Care about Privacy?

14

In the 1960s, William L. Prosser described a set of four privacy tort.

1. Intrusion upon seclusion or solitude, or into private affairs

2. Public disclosure of embarrassing private facts

3. Publicity that places a person in a false light in the public eye

4. Appropriation of name or likeness

3.2.3 Legal Background

15

In the 1980 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and

describe eight measures processing of personal data in its member countries.

1. Collection Limitation Principle

2. Data Quality Principle

3. Purpose Specification Principle

4. Use Limitation Principle

5. Security Safeguards Principle

6. Openness Principle

7. Individual Participation Principle

8. Accountability Principle

3.2.3 Legal Background

16

In the 1970s, Irwin Altman looked at being alone versus joining social interactions

regulate environmental privacy.

Altman saw it as a dynamic boundary negotiation process --“selective control of access

to the self or to one’s group.”

behavioral mechanisms support such privacy regulation: verbal interactions with others

(“inputs and outputs”) spatial interactions

these mechanisms are the tools by which one regulates one’s privacy:

• listening to others (input)

• talking to others (output)

• positioning oneself in relationship to others (personal space )

• choosing one’s location (territory)

3.2.4 Interpersonal Privacy

17

Altman developed theory for real-world interactions, in the context of ubicomp privacy

can be learned from this theory, in the context of ubicomp privacy:

• Privacy as a nonmonotonic function: By conceptualizing privacy not simply as one end

of the social interaction spectrum, applying it to the entire range of interactions.

• Privacy as a social process : Humans do not use one-off policies and rules to manage

their everyday, interpersonal privacy. Instead, they continually adjust their accessibility

along a spectrum of “openness” and “closedness” with a variety of mechanisms.

3.2.4 Interpersonal Privacy

18

Q&A

19

Thanks!

20