在隐私与效用之间:论理论与实践中的差异隐私

Jeremy Seeman, Daniel Susser
{"title":"在隐私与效用之间:论理论与实践中的差异隐私","authors":"Jeremy Seeman, Daniel Susser","doi":"10.1145/3626494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Differential privacy (DP) aims to confer data processing systems with inherent privacy guarantees, offering strong protections for personal data. But DP’s approach to privacy carries with it certain assumptions about how mathematical abstractions will be translated into real-world systems, which—if left unexamined, and unrealized in practice—could function to shield data collectors from liability and criticism, rather than substantively protect data subjects from privacy harms. This paper investigates these assumptions and discusses their implications for using DP to govern data-driven systems. In Parts 1 and 2, we introduce DP as, on one hand, a mathematical framework and, on the other hand, a kind of real-world sociotechnical system, using a hypothetical case study to illustrate how the two can diverge. In Parts 3 and 4, we discuss the way DP frames privacy loss, data processing interventions, and data subject participation, arguing it could exacerbate existing problems in privacy regulation. In part 5, we conclude with a discussion of DP’s potential interactions with the endogeneity of privacy law, and we propose principles for best governing DP systems. In making such assumptions and their consequences explicit, we hope to help DP succeed at realizing its promise for better substantive privacy protections.","PeriodicalId":329595,"journal":{"name":"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing","volume":"299 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between Privacy and Utility: On Differential Privacy in Theory and Practice\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Seeman, Daniel Susser\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3626494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Differential privacy (DP) aims to confer data processing systems with inherent privacy guarantees, offering strong protections for personal data. But DP’s approach to privacy carries with it certain assumptions about how mathematical abstractions will be translated into real-world systems, which—if left unexamined, and unrealized in practice—could function to shield data collectors from liability and criticism, rather than substantively protect data subjects from privacy harms. This paper investigates these assumptions and discusses their implications for using DP to govern data-driven systems. In Parts 1 and 2, we introduce DP as, on one hand, a mathematical framework and, on the other hand, a kind of real-world sociotechnical system, using a hypothetical case study to illustrate how the two can diverge. In Parts 3 and 4, we discuss the way DP frames privacy loss, data processing interventions, and data subject participation, arguing it could exacerbate existing problems in privacy regulation. In part 5, we conclude with a discussion of DP’s potential interactions with the endogeneity of privacy law, and we propose principles for best governing DP systems. In making such assumptions and their consequences explicit, we hope to help DP succeed at realizing its promise for better substantive privacy protections.\",\"PeriodicalId\":329595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing\",\"volume\":\"299 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3626494\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Journal on Responsible Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3626494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

差分隐私(DP)旨在赋予数据处理系统固有的隐私保障,为个人数据提供强有力的保护。但是,DP的隐私保护方法带有一些假设,即数学抽象将如何转化为现实世界的系统,如果不加以检验,在实践中无法实现,可能会起到保护数据收集者免受责任和批评的作用,而不是实质性地保护数据主体免受隐私损害。本文研究了这些假设,并讨论了它们对使用DP来管理数据驱动系统的影响。在第1部分和第2部分中,我们介绍了DP,一方面是一个数学框架,另一方面是一种现实世界的社会技术系统,并使用一个假设的案例研究来说明两者是如何分离的。在第3部分和第4部分中,我们讨论了DP框架隐私丢失、数据处理干预和数据主体参与的方式,认为它可能加剧隐私监管中的现有问题。在第5部分中,我们最后讨论了隐私保护与隐私法内生性的潜在相互作用,并提出了最佳治理隐私保护系统的原则。通过明确这些假设及其后果,我们希望帮助DP成功实现其对更好的实质性隐私保护的承诺。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Between Privacy and Utility: On Differential Privacy in Theory and Practice
Differential privacy (DP) aims to confer data processing systems with inherent privacy guarantees, offering strong protections for personal data. But DP’s approach to privacy carries with it certain assumptions about how mathematical abstractions will be translated into real-world systems, which—if left unexamined, and unrealized in practice—could function to shield data collectors from liability and criticism, rather than substantively protect data subjects from privacy harms. This paper investigates these assumptions and discusses their implications for using DP to govern data-driven systems. In Parts 1 and 2, we introduce DP as, on one hand, a mathematical framework and, on the other hand, a kind of real-world sociotechnical system, using a hypothetical case study to illustrate how the two can diverge. In Parts 3 and 4, we discuss the way DP frames privacy loss, data processing interventions, and data subject participation, arguing it could exacerbate existing problems in privacy regulation. In part 5, we conclude with a discussion of DP’s potential interactions with the endogeneity of privacy law, and we propose principles for best governing DP systems. In making such assumptions and their consequences explicit, we hope to help DP succeed at realizing its promise for better substantive privacy protections.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信