Abstract
In this paper, we propose a layered model for the understanding and enforcing of information privacy. The proposed model consists of three levels. At the lowest level, called the Read/Write Layer, privacy is defined as the resistance and resilience to Read or Write violations in the information or information source. At the middle level, the sharing layer, a logical privacy connection can be set up between a source and sink based on an embedded privacy agreement (EPA). At the highest layer, the trust layer, privacy is determined based on the history of sharing between directly connected network entities. We describe how the privacy metrics differ at each layer and how they can be combined to have a three-layer information privacy model. This model can be used to assess privacy in a single-hop network and to design a privacy system for sharing data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ahmad, A., et al. (2016) Information privacy domain. International Journal of Information Privacy, Security and Integrity. To appear. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPSI.2016.082124.
Sweeney, L. (2002). Achieving k-anonymity privacy protection using generalization and suppression. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 10(05), 571–588.
Machanavajjhala, A., Kifer, D., Gehrke, J., & Venkitasubramaniam, M. (2007). l-diversity: Privacy beyond k-anonymity. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD), 1(1), 3.
Li, N., Li, T. and Venkatasubramanian, S. (2007, April). t-closeness: Privacy beyond k-anonymity and l-diversity. In 2007 I.E. 23rd International Conference on Data Engineering (pp. 106–115). IEEE. Istanbul.
Xiao, X. and Tao, Y. (2006, September). Anatomy: Simple and effective privacy preservation. In Proceedings of the 32nd international conference on Very Large Data Bases (pp. 139–150). VLDB Endowment. Seoul.
Xiao, X. and Tao, Y. (2007, June). M-invariance: towards privacy preserving re-publication of dynamic datasets. In Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of Data (pp. 689–700). ACM. Beijing.
Rajagopalan, S. R., Sankar, L., Mohajer, S., and Poor, H. V. (2011, October). Smart meter privacy: A utility-privacy framework. In Smart Grid Communications (SmartGridComm), 2011 I.E. International Conference on (pp. 190–195). IEEE. Brussel.
Makhdoumi, A., Salamatian, S., Fawaz, N., and Médard, M. (2014, November). From the information bottleneck to the privacy funnel. In Information Theory Workshop (ITW), 2014 IEEE (pp. 501–505). IEEE. Hobart.
Bezzi, M. (2010). An information theoretic approach for privacy metrics. Transactions on Data Privacy, 3(3), 199–215.
Blanchard, J., Guillet, F., Gras, R., and Briand, H. (2005, November). Using information-theoretic measures to assess association rule interestingness. In Fifth IEEE international conference on Data Mining (ICDM’05) (pp. 8–pp). IEEE.
Solove, D. J. (2008). Understanding privacy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Available at http://understanding-privacy.com.
Fromholz, J. M. (2000). The European Union data privacy directive. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 15, 461–484.
O’Herrin, J. K., Fost, N., & Kudsk, K. A. (2004). Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations: Effect on medical record research. Annals of Surgery, 239(6), 772–778.
Cuaresma, J. C. (2002). The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 17, 497–517. Boca Raton.
Inan, A., Kantarcioglu, M., Ghinita, G., and Bertino, E. (2010, March). Private record matching using differential privacy. International conference on Extending Database Technology (pp. 123–134). ACM. Lausanne.
He, X., Machanavajjhala, A., and Ding, B. (2014, June). Blowfish privacy: Tuning privacy-utility trade-offs using policies. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of Data (pp. 1447–1458). ACM. Snowbird.
Kessler, S., Buchmann, E., and Böhm, K. (2015). Deploying and evaluating pufferfish privacy for smart meter data. Karlsruhe Reports in Informatics, 1, 229–238.
Kifer, D., & Machanavajjhala, A. (2014). Pufferfish: A framework for mathematical privacy definitions. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 39(1), 3.
Mukkamala, R., Ahmad, A. and Nvuluri, K. (2016). Privacy-aware big data warehouse architecture. IEEE International Congress on Big Data, San Francisco, June 2016.
Rutten, W., Rutten, W., Blaas-Franken, J., Blaas-Franken, J., Martin, H., & Martin, H. (2016). The impact of (low) trust on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(2), 199–214.
Papadopoulos, S., Bontcheva, K., Jaho, E., Lupu, M., & Castillo, C. (2016). Overview of the special issue on trust and veracity of information in social media. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 34(3), 14.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ahmad, A., Mukkamala, R. (2018). A Layered Model for Understanding and Enforcing Data Privacy. In: Latifi, S. (eds) Information Technology - New Generations. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 558. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54978-1_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54978-1_29
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54977-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54978-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)