Skip to main content

Defining Privacy Based on Distributions of Privacy Breaches

  • Chapter
Number Theory and Cryptography

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 8260))

Abstract

In contrast to classical cryptography, the challenge of privacy in the context of databases is to find a trade-off between a security guarantee and utility. Individuals in a database have to be protected while preseving the usefullnes of the data. In this paper, we provide an overview over the results in the field of database privacy with focus on privacy notions. On the basis of these notions, we provide a framework that allows for the definition meaningful guarantees based on the distribution on privacy breaches and sesitive predicates. Interestingly, these notions do not fulfill the privacy axioms defined by Kifer et al. in [1,2].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Kifer, D., Lin, B.R.: An axiomatic view of statistical privacy and utility. Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 4(1), Article 2

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kifer, D., Lin, B.R.: Towards an axiomatization of statistical privacy and utility. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2010, pp. 147–158. ACM, New York (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Demirel, D., Henning, M., van de Graaf, J., Ryan, P.Y.A., Buchmann, J.: Prêt à voter providing everlasting privacy. In: Heather, J., Schneider, S., Teague, V. (eds.) Vote-ID 2013. LNCS, vol. 7985, pp. 156–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Langer, L., Schmidt, A., Volkamer, M., Buchmann, J.: Classifying privacy and verifiability requirements for electronic voting. In: Fischer, S., Maehle, E., Reischuk, R. (eds.) GI Jahrestagung. LNI, vol. 154, pp. 1837–1846. GI (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Buchmann, J., Demirel, D., van de Graaf, J.: Towards a publicly-verifiable mix-net providing everlasting privacy. In: Sadeghi, A.-R. (ed.) FC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7859, pp. 197–204. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Sweeney, L.: k-anonymity: a model for protecting privacy. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. -Based Syst. 10, 557–570 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Dwork, C.: Differential privacy. In: Bugliesi, M., Preneel, B., Sassone, V., Wegener, I. (eds.) ICALP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4052, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Hacigümüş, H., Iyer, B., Li, C., Mehrotra, S.: Executing sql over encrypted data in the database-service-provider model. In: SIGMOD 2002: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pp. 216–227. ACM, New York (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Popa, R.A., Redfield, C., Zeldovich, N., Balakrishnan, H.: CryptDB: Protecting Confidentiality with Encrypted Query Processing. In: Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP), Cascais, Portugal (October 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lin, B.R., Kifer, D.: A framework for extracting semantic guarantees from privacy. CoRR abs/1208.5443 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dwork, C., Kenthapadi, K., McSherry, F., Mironov, I., Naor, M.: Our data, ourselves: privacy via distributed noise generation. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 486–503. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Samarati, P., Sweeney, L.: Protecting privacy when disclosing information: k-anonymity and its enforcement through generalization and suppression. Technical report, CMU SRI (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Machanavajjhala, A., Gehrke, J., Kifer, D., Venkitasubramaniam, M.: l-diversity: Privacy beyond k-anonymity. In: ICDE, vol. 24 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Li, N., Li, T., Venkatasubramanian, S.: t-closeness: Privacy beyond k-anonymity and l-diversity. In: ICDE, pp. 106–115 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  15. LeFevre, K., DeWitt, D.J., Ramakrishnan, R.: Incognito: Efficient full-domain k-anonymity. In: SIGMOD Conference, pp. 49–60 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Meyerson, A., Williams, R.: On the complexity of optimal k-anonymity. In: PODS, pp. 223–228 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bayardo Jr., R.J., Agrawal, R.: Data privacy through optimal k-anonymization. In: ICDE, pp. 217–228 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tian, H., Zhang, W.: Extending l-diversity to generalize sensitive data. Data Knowl. Eng. 70(1), 101–126 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ganta, S.R., Kasiviswanathan, S.P., Smith, A.: Composition attacks and auxiliary information in data privacy. In: KDD, pp. 265–273 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Heidinger, C., Buchmann, E., Huber, M., Böhm, K., Müller-Quade, J.: Privacy-aware folksonomies. In: Lalmas, M., Jose, J., Rauber, A., Sebastiani, F., Frommholz, I. (eds.) ECDL 2010. LNCS, vol. 6273, pp. 156–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Dwork, C., Kenthapadi, K., McSherry, F., Mironov, I., Naor, M.: Our data, ourselves: Privacy via distributed noise generation. In: Vaudenay, S. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4004, pp. 486–503. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Dwork, C., McSherry, F., Nissim, K., Smith, A.: Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In: Halevi, S., Rabin, T. (eds.) TCC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3876, pp. 265–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Gehrke, J., Lui, E., Pass, R.: Towards privacy for social networks: A zero-knowledge based definition of privacy. In: Ishai, Y. (ed.) TCC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6597, pp. 432–449. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Gehrke, J., Hay, M., Lui, E., Pass, R.: Crowd-blending privacy. In: Safavi-Naini, R., Canetti, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2012. LNCS, vol. 7417, pp. 479–496. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Kifer, D., Machanavajjhala, A.: No free lunch in data privacy. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data, SIGMOD 2011, pp. 193–204 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Duan, Y.: Privacy without noise. In: CIKM, pp. 1517–1520 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bhaskar, R., Bhowmick, A., Goyal, V., Laxman, S., Thakurta, A.: Noiseless database privacy. In: Lee, D.H., Wang, X. (eds.) ASIACRYPT 2011. LNCS, vol. 7073, pp. 215–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Blum, A., Dwork, C., McSherry, F., Nissim, K.: Practical privacy: the sulq framework. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2005, pp. 128–138 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Chaudhuri, K., Mishra, N.: When random sampling preserves privacy. In: Dwork, C. (ed.) CRYPTO 2006. LNCS, vol. 4117, pp. 198–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Evfimievski, A., Fagin, R., Woodruff, D.P.: Epistemic privacy. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2008, pp. 171–180 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Blum, A., Ligett, K., Roth, A.: A learning theory approach to non-interactive database privacy. In: STOC, pp. 609–618 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Blum, A., Ligett, K., Roth, A.: A learning theory approach to noninteractive database privacy. J. ACM 60(2), 12 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Kifer, D., Machanavajjhala, A.: A rigorous and customizable framework for privacy. In: Proceedings of the 31st Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, PODS 2012, pp. 77–88 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Warner, S.L.: Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association 60(309), 63–69 (1965)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Huber, M., Müller-Quade, J., Nilges, T. (2013). Defining Privacy Based on Distributions of Privacy Breaches. In: Fischlin, M., Katzenbeisser, S. (eds) Number Theory and Cryptography. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8260. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-42001-6_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-42001-6_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-42000-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-42001-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics