Big Data should not be a faith-based initiative
Cory Doctorow summarizes the problem with the idea that sensitive personal information can be removed responsibly from big data: computer scientists are pretty sure that's impossible.
The debate is a hot one, and a lot of non-technical privacy regulators have been led on by sweet promises from the companies that they regulate about the possibility of creating booming markets in highly sensitive personal data that is somehow neutralized through a magic "de-identification" process that lets information about, say, the personal lives of cancer patients be bought and sold without compromising the patients' privacy.
The most recent example of this is a report by former Ontario privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian and Daniel Castro from the pro-market thinktank the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. The authors argue that the risk of "re-identification" has been grossly exaggerated and that it is indeed possible to produce meaningful, valuable datasets that are effectively "de-identified."
Princeton's Arvind Narayanan and Ed Felten have published a stinging rebuttal, pointing out the massive holes in Cavoukian and Castro's arguments -- cherry picking studies, improperly generalizing, ignoring the existence of multiple re-identification techniques, and so on.
As Narayanan and Felten demonstrate, the Cavoukian/Castro position is grounded in a lack of understanding of both computer science and security research. The "penetrate-and-patch" method they recommend -- where systems are fielded with live data, broken through challenges, and then revised -- has been hugely ineffective in both traditional information security development and in de-identification efforts. And as Narayanan and Felten point out, there is no shortage of computer science experts who could have helped them with this.
Cavoukian and Castro are rightly excited by Big Data and the new ways that scientists are discovering to make use of data collected for one purpose in the service of another. But they do not admit that the same theoretical advances that unlock new meaning in big datasets also unlock new ways of re-identifying the people whose data is collected in the set.
Re-identification is part of the Big Data revolution: among the new meanings we are learning to extract from huge corpuses of data is the identity of the people in that dataset. And since we're commodifying and sharing these huge datasets, they will still be around in ten, twenty and fifty years, when those same Big Data advancements open up new ways of re-identifying -- and harming -- their subjects.
Narayanan and Felten would like to have a "best of both worlds" solution that lets the world reap the benefits of Big Data without compromising the privacy of the subjects of the datasets. But if there is such a solution, it is to be found through rigorous technical examinations, not through hand-waving, wishful thinking, and bad stats.
The faith-based belief in de-identification is at the root of the worst privacy laws in recent memory. In the EU, the General Data Protection Regulation -- the most-lobbied regulatory effort in EU history -- decided to divide data protection into two categories: identifiable data and "de-identified" data, with practically no limits on how the latter could be bought and sold. The mirrors the existing UK approach, which allows companies to unilaterally declare that the data they hold has been "de-identified" and then treat it as a commodity. In both cases, it's a disaster, as I wrote in the Guardian last year. You can't make good technical regulations by ignoring technical experts, even if the thing those technical experts are telling you is that your cherished plans are impossible.
I recommend you read both Narayanan and Felten's paper, and Cavoukian and Castro's. But in the meantime, Narayanan has helpfully summarized the debate:
Specifically, we argue that:
There is no known effective method to anonymize location data, and no evidence that it’s meaningfully achievable.
Computing re-identification probabilities based on proof-of-concept demonstrations is silly.
Cavoukian and Castro ignore many realistic threats by focusing narrowly on a particular model of re-identification.
Cavoukian and Castro concede that de-identification is inadequate for high-dimensional data. But nowadays most interesting datasets are high-dimensional.
Penetrate-and-patch is not an option.
Computer science knowledge is relevant and highly available.
Cavoukian and Castro apply different standards to big data and re-identification techniques.
Quantification of re-identification probabilities, which permeates Cavoukian and Castro’s arguments, is a fundamentally meaningless exercise.
Facial recognition isn't just bad because it invades privacy: it's because privacy invasions fuel discrimination
Bruce Schneier writes in the New York Times that banning facial recognition (as cities like San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, Brookline and Somerville have done) is not enough: there are plenty of other ways to automatically recognize people (gait detection, high-resolution photos of hands that reveal fingerprints, voiceprints, etc), and these will all be used […]
China: Unsecured facial recognition database leaks, thousands of kids from 20 schools, half are majority Tibetan areas
An unsecured facial recognition database that contained info on thousands of children from 20 schools in China, half of which are located in historically ethnic Tibetan areas, has been found online.
The time is always right to do what is right, that’s true. But the timing of this is a pretty ugly retcon—especially after a new trove of FBI files on Martin Luther King, Jr. were just released six months ago, painting an ugly picture of frequent sexual misconduct.
From OneDrive to Slack, there are numerous ways to store files online. Because many platforms offer a certain amount of free storage, it makes sense to mix and match. However, spreading your files across multiple apps can make things very confusing. Rethink Files offers a simple solution. By connecting to all your other cloud storage […]
Winter can be a difficult time of year for golfers. Between the freezing temperatures and frequent snow showers, maintaining your handicap can seem almost impossible. When the fairways are frozen solid, the PhiGolf simulator lets you practice at home. This device captures every nuance of your swing to provide virtual coaching. Better still, you can […]
Photoshop is one of the most widely used photo editing tools out there, to the point that it’s the default program designers think of whenever they need work done. Small wonder, too: The flagship software in Adobe’s creative suite is very powerful — if you know how to use it. There is a lot to […]