Co-utility pp 71-85 | Cite as

Co-utile Enforcement of Digital Oblivion

  • Josep Domingo-FerrerEmail author
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 110)


Digital storage in the information society allows perfect and unlimited remembering. Yet, the right of an individual to enforce oblivion for pieces of information about her is part of her fundamental right to privacy. In this chapter, we detail a co-utile solution to digital forgetting based on anonymously fingerprinting expiration dates. Due to co-utility, people who learn information about an individual are rationally interested in helping the individual enforce her oblivion policy. Thanks to this rational involvement, even services for content spreading like Facebook or YouTube would be interested in fingerprinting downloads, thereby effectively enforcing the right of content owners to canceling content.



Funding by the Templeton World Charity Foundation (grant TWCF0095/ AB60 “CO-UTILITY”) is gratefully acknowledged. Also, partial support to this work has been received from the Government of Catalonia (ICREA Acadèmia Prize to J. Domingo-Ferrer and grant 2014 SGR 537), the Spanish Government (projects TIN2014-57364-C2-1-R “SmartGlacis”, TIN2015-70054-REDC and TIN2016-80250-R “Sec-MCloud”) and the European Commission (projects H2020-644024 “CLARUS” and H2020-700540 “CANVAS”). The authors are with the UNESCO Chair in Data Privacy, but the views in this work are the authors’ own and are not necessarily shared by UNESCO or any of the funding bodies.


  1. 1.
    Bo, Y., Piyuan, L., Wenzheng, Z.: An efficient anonymous fingerprinting protocol. In: Computational Intelligence and Security, LNCS 4456, pp. 824–832. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boneh, D., Shaw, J.: Collusion-secure fingerprinting for digital data. In: Advances in Cryptology, LNCS 963, pp. 452–465. Springer, Berlin (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camenisch, J.: Efficient anonymous fingerprinting with group signatures. In: Asiacrypt, LNCS 1976, pp. 415–428. Springer, Berlin (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen, J.E.: DRM and privacy. Berkeley Technol. Law J. 18, 575–617 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cox, I.J., Miller, M.L., Bloom, J.A., Fridrich, J., Kalker, T.: Digital Watermarking and Steganography. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington MA (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J.: Multi-application smart cards and encrypted data processing. Future Gen. Comput. Syst. 13(1), 65–74 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J.: Anonymous fingerprinting of electronic information with automatic identification of redistributors. Electron. Lett. 34(13), 1303–1304 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J.: Anonymous fingerprinting based on committed oblivious transfer. In: Public Key Cryptography-PKC 1999, LNCS 1560, pp. 43–52. Springer, Berlin (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J.: Rational enforcement of digital oblivion. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Privacy and Anonymity in the Information Society, ACM, Art. no. 2 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Martínez, S., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Co-utility: self-enforcing protocols for the mutual benefit of participants. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 59, 148–158 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Megías, D.: Distributed multicast of fingerprinted content based on a rational peer-to-peer community. Comput. Commun. 36, 542–550 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Co-utility: self-enforcing collaborative protocols with mutual help. Prog. Artif. Intell. 5(2), 105–110 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Facebook Terms of Service, revision dated 30 Jan 2015. Checked 2017/05/18 11:59:56.
  14. 14.
    Furon, T., Duhamel, P.: An asymmetric public detection watermarking technique. In: Information Hiding IH’99, LNCS 1768, pp. 88–100. Springer, Berlin (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Furon, T., Duhamel, P.: An asymmetric watermarking method. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 51(4), 981–994 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gui, G.-F., Jiang, L.-G., He, C.: A robust asymmetric watermarking scheme using multiple public watermarks. IEICE Trans. Fundam. E88-A(7):2026–2029 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    ITU-R.: Recommendation BS.1387. Method for Objective Measurements of Perceived Audio Quality (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mayer-Schönberger, V.: Beyond copyright: managing information rights with DRM. Denver Univ. Law Rev. 84, 181–198 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mayer-Schönberger, V.: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Megías, D., Serra-Ruiz, J., Fallahpour, M.: Efficient self-synchronised blind audio watermarking system based on time domain and FFT amplitude modification. Signal Process. 90(12), 3078–3092 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Opticom. Opera software (2015). Accessed 18 Nov 2015
  22. 22.
    Pfitzmann, B., Waidner, M.: Anonymous fingerprinting. In: Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT’96, LNCS 1233, pp. 88–102. Springer, Berlin (1997)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Thiede, T., Treurniet, W.C., Bitto, R., Schmidmer, C., Sporer, T., Beerends, J.G., Colomes, C., Keyhl, M., Stoll, G., Brandeburg, K., Feiten, B.: PEAQ - the ITU standard for objective measurement of perceived audio quality. J. Audio Eng. Soc. 48(1–2), 3–29 (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yan-Jun, H., Xiao-Ping, M., Li, G.: A robust public-key image watermarking scheme based on weakness signal detection using chaos system. In: International Conference on Cyberworlds, pp. 477–480 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    YouTube Terms of Service, revision dated 9 June 2010. Accessed 20 Feb 2017

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UNESCO Chair in Data Privacy, Department of Computer Science and MathematicsUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliTarragona, CataloniaSpain

Personalised recommendations