Abstract
The right to be forgotten results from a ruling of the European Court of Justice. It empowers individuals to control the display of their personal data indexed by a search engine. Specifically, it requires Internet search engine operators to deploy a process for individuals to file requests concerning the removal of their personal data from search indices.
To support the right to be forgotten, search engine operators such as Google, Microsoft and Yahoo currently provide a web form where users submit all relevant information. A subsequent manual process by the search engine operators assesses whether the author of the request is eligible to exercise the right to be forgotten and if the request itself is lawful. However, manual verification is inefficient, unscalable, and prone to subjective judgment. A framework for automated reasoning about case law (“PriCL”) could in principle tell whether some precedents lead to the conclusion that some action is legal or illegal. However, PriCL leverages first order logic, and hence, is insufficient to determine similarity of cases. In this paper, we design a framework that extends PriCL’s logic with similarity measures in order to automate the enforcement of the right to be forgotten. Our implementation of this logic leverages the Z3 theorem prover. We evaluate the framework by performing 10 case studies on the right to be forgotten. Each case was decided correctly in less than 1 s.
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
Notes
- 1.
Synonyms express the word property.
- 2.
If A is synonym to B and C, then B and C are also synonyms to each other.
References
Basin, D., Klaedtke, F., Samuel, M.: Monitoring security policies with metric first-order temporal logic. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies, pp. 23–34. No. 12 in SACMAT 2010. ACM, New York (2010)
Giblin, C., Liu, A.Y, Müller, S., Pfitzmann, B., Zhou, X.: Regulations expressed as logical models (REALM). In: 18th Annual Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX), pp. 37–48. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2005)
Garg, D., Jia, L., Datta, A.: A logical method for policy enforcement over evolving audit logs*. Technical report, CMU-CyLab-11-002 (2011)
Agirre, E., Cer, D., Diab, M., Gonzalez Agirre, A., Guo, W.: Semantic textual similarity, including a pilot on typed similarity. In: The Second Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (2013)
Baader, F., Bauer, A., Lippmann, M.: Runtime verification using a temporal description logic. In: Ghilardi, S., Sebastiani, R. (eds.) FroCoS 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5749, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04222-5_9
Google: European privacy requests for search removals, January 2015. https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europeprivacy/?hl=en
Google: September 2015. https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_eudpa?product=websearch
Google: Word tree, July 2016. https://developers.google.com/chart/interactive/docs/gallery/wordtree?hl=en
DeYoung, H., Garg, D., Jia, L., Kaynar, D., Datta, A.: Experiences in the logical specification of the HIPAA and GLBA privacy laws. In: Proceedings of the 9th Annual ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES), Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp. 12–20. ACM (2010)
Max-Planck Institute: SPASS. http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/departments/automation-of-logic/software/spass-workbench/, July 2017
Finkel, J.R., Grenager, T., Manning, C.: Incorporating non-local information into information extraction systems by Gibbs sampling. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2005), pp. 363–370. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (2005)
Argonne National Laboratory: Otter, August 2004. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/research/projects/AR/otter/
Han, L., Kashyap, A., Finin, T., Mayfield, J., Weese, J.: UMBC EBIQUITY-CORE: semantic textual similarity systems. Technical report. University of Maryland (12)
Metzler, D., Dumais, S., Meek, C.: Similarity measures for short segments of text. In: Amati, G., Carpineto, C., Romano, G. (eds.) ECIR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4425, pp. 16–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71496-5_5
Backes, M., Bendun, F., Hoffmann, J., Marnau, N.: PriCL: creating a precedent, a framework for reasoning about privacy case law. In: Focardi, R., Myers, A. (eds.) POST 2015. LNCS, vol. 9036, pp. 344–363. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46666-7_18
Microsoft: Z3 prover, January 2017. http://rise4fun.com/z3/tutorial
Simeonovski, M., Bendun, F., Asghar, M.R., Backes, M., Marnau, N., Druschel, P.: Oblivion: mitigating privacy leaks by controlling the discoverability of online information. CoRR abs/1506.06033, 01 July 2015
Schulz, S.: E theorem prover, July 2017. http://wwwlehre.dhbw-stuttgart.de/~sschulz/E/E.html
Takale, S.A., Nandgaonkar, S.S.: Measuring semantic similarity between words using web search engines. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 757–766. ACM, New York (2007)
Dao, T.N, Simpson, T.: Wordnet-based semantic similarity measurement (2005). www.codeproject.com. (1 Oct 2011)
Voronkov, A.: Vampire, July 2017. http://www.vprover.org/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering
About this paper
Cite this paper
Tiwari, A., Bendun, F., Hammer, C. (2018). A Formal Logic Framework for the Automation of the Right to Be Forgotten. In: Beyah, R., Chang, B., Li, Y., Zhu, S. (eds) Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. SecureComm 2018. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 254. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01701-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01701-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01700-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01701-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)