Smart Technologies – Workshop on Challenges and Trends for Privacy in a Hyper-connected World

  • Andreas Baur-Ahrens
  • Felix Bieker
  • Michael Friedewald
  • Christian Geminn
  • Marit Hansen
  • Murat Karaboga
  • Hannah Obersteller
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 476)


In this workshop we addressed what it means to live in a smart world with particular regard to privacy. Together with the audience, we discussed the impacts of smart devices on individuals and society. The workshop was therefore interdisciplinary by design and brought together different perspectives including technology, data protection and law, ethics and regulation. In four presentations, a range of issues, trends and challenges stemming from smart devices in general and smart cars in particular – as one example of an emerging and extensive smart technology – were raised. In the discussion, it became clear that privacy and its implementation are at the core of the relationship between users on the one side and smart appliances as well as the technical systems and companies behind them on the other and that there is an ongoing need to broaden the understanding of privacy in the direction of a social and collective value.


Data protection Ethics Internet of things Regulation Smart cars Privacy Smart devices 



This work is partially funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research within the project “Forum Privacy and Self-determined Life in the Digital World”. For more information see:


  1. 1.
    Hansen, M.: Das Netz im Auto & das Auto im Netz. Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 6(2015), 367–371 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hansen, M.: Zukunft von Datenschutz und Privatsphäre in einer mobilen Welt. Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 7(2015), 435–439 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    U.S. Government Accountability Office: In-Car Location-Based Services: Companies Are Taking Steps to Protect Privacy, but Some Risks May Not Be Clear to Consumers, GAO-14-81 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kelly, T.: Consumers are in the Connected Car’s Driver Seat in 2015, Wired, 28 Jan 2015 (2015). Accessed 24 Nov 2015
  5. 5.
    Troncoso, C., et al.: On the difficulty of achieving anonymity for vehicle-2-X communication. Comput. Netw. 55(14), 3199–3210 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weichert, T.: Datenschutz im Auto – Teil 1. Straßenverkehrsrecht, pp. 201–207 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Urry, J.: Inhabiting the car. Sociol. Rev. 54(s1), 17–31 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Roßnagel, A.: Grundrechtsausgleich beim vernetzten Automobil. Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 6(2015), 353–358 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rieß, J., Greß, S.: Privacy by Design für Automobile auf der Datenautobahn. Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 6(2015), 391–396 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lüdemann, V.: Connected cars. Zeitschrift für Datenschutz 6(2015), 247–254 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Buchner, B.: Datenschutz im vernetzten Automobil. Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 6(2015), 372–377 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mielchen, D.: Verrat durch den eigenen PKW – wie kann man sich schützen? Straßenverkehrsrecht, pp. 81–87 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lüdemann, V., Sengstacken, C.: Lebensretter eCall: Türöffner für neue Telematik-Dienstleistungen. Recht der Datenverarbeitung, pp. 177–182 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    British Columbia Freedom of Information and Privacy Association: The Connected Car: Who is in the Driver’s Seat?. FIPA, Vancouver (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Inc. and Association of Global Automakers, Inc.: Consumer Privacy Protection Principles, Privacy Principles for Vehicle Technologies and Services, Washington, D.C. (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sörup, T., Marquardt, S.: Datenschutz bei Connected Cars. Zeitschrift für Datenschutz 7(2015), 310–314 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chevrolet. Accessed 23 Nov 2015
  18. 18.
    Krauß, C., Waidner, M.: IT-Sicherheit und Datenschutz im vernetzten Fahrzeug. Datenschutz und Datensicherheit 6(2015), 383–387 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lemke, K., Paar, C., Wolf, M. (eds.): Embedded Security in Cars. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Corkery, M., Silver-Greenberg, J.: Miss a Payment? Good Luck Moving That Car. The New York Times, New York edition, 25 September 2014. A1Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hubig, C.: Die Kunst des Möglichen II. Ethik der Technik als provisorische Moral. Bielefeld, transcript (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Barnett, M., Duvall, R.: Power in global governance. In: Barnett, M., Duvall, R. (eds.) Power in Global Governance, pp. 1–32. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Foucault, M.: Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Penguin Books, London (1991/1977)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Latour, B.: Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Acuto, M., Curtis, S. (eds.): Reassembling International Theory: Assemblage Thinking and International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Morozov, E.: The rise of data and the death of politics. The Guardian (2014) Accessed 17 Nov 2015
  27. 27.
    Bohn, J., Coroamă, V., Langheinrich, M., Mattern, F., Rohs, M.: Living in a world of smart everyday objects – Social, economic, and ethical implications. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 10(5), 763–785 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gandy, O.H.: engaging rational discrimination: exploring reasons for placing regulatory constraints on decision support systems. Ethics Inf. Technol. 12(1), 29–42 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lyon, D. (ed.): Surveillance as Social Sorting: Privacy, Risk, and Digital Discrimination. Routledge, London/New York (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Himma, K.E.: Artificial agency, consciousness, and the criteria for moral agency: what properties must an artificial agent have to be a moral agent? Ethics Inf. Technol. 11, 19–29 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Johnson, D.G., Miller, K.W.: A dialogue on responsibility, moral agency, and IT systems Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on Applied computing – SAC 2006, pp. 272–276. ACM Press (2006)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ashton, K.: That ‘Internet of Things’ Thing. RFID J. (2009) Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  33. 33.
    Bajarin, T.: The next big thing for tech: the internet of everything. In: Time (2014) Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  34. 34.
    Weber, R.H.: The digital future – A challenge for privacy? Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 31(2), 234–242 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weiser, M.: The computer for the 21st century. Sci. Am. 265(9), 66–75 (1991)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fleisch, E., Mattern, F.: Das Internet der Dinge. Ubiquitous Computing und RFID in der Praxis: Visionen, Technologien, Anwendungen, Handlungsanleitungen. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sprenger, F., Engemann, C.: Internet der Dinge: Über smarte Objekte, intelligente Umgebungen und die technische Durchdringung der Welt, Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld, pp. 7–58 (2015)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gartner: Gartner says a Typical Family Home Could Contain More Than 500 Smart Devices by 2022. In: Gartner Press Release, 08 Sept 2014 (2014) Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  39. 39.
    Swan, M.: Sensor Mania! The Internet of Things, wearable computing, objective metrics, and the quantified self 2.0. J. Sensor Actuator Netw. 1(3), 217–253 (2012)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Newman, A.L.: The governance of privacy. In: Levi-Faur, D. (ed.): The Oxford Handbook of Governance, pp. 599–611. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bennett, C.J., Raab, C.D.: The Governance of Privacy: Policy Instruments in Global Perspective, 2nd and updated edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Samuelsohn, D.: What Washington really knows about the Internet of Things. A Politico investigation. In: Politico (2015). Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  43. 43.
    Politico Staff: The Internet of Things: What’s Washington’s Role? A politico working group report. In: Politico (2015) Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  44. 44.
    Romm, T.: Round 1 goes to the lobbyists: A barely there technology is already winning the influence battle in Washington. Here’s how. In: Politico (2015) Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  45. 45.
    Peppet, S.R.: Regulating the internet of things: First steps toward managing discrimination, privacy, security & consent. In: Texas Law Review (forthcoming, 2014)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Federal Trade Commission: Internet of Things. Privacy & Security in a Connected World. FTC Staff Report, January 2015Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gross, G.: FTC calls on IoT vendors to protect privacy. PCWorld (2015) Accessed 24 Nov 2015
  48. 48.
    Diallo, A.: Do smart devices need regulation? FTC examines Internet of Things, Forbes (2013). Accessed 24 Nov 2015
  49. 49.
    The White House: Big Data: Seizing opportunities, preserving values, May 2014Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology: Report to the President. Big Data and Privacy: A technological perspective, May 2014Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gabriel, P., Gaßner, K., Lange, S.: Das Internet der Dinge – Basis für die IKT-Infrastruktur von morgen. Anwendungen, Akteure und politische Handlungsfelder. Institut für Innovation und Technik. Feller, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    European Commission: Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) in Europe: steps towards a policy framework. 15 March 2007, Com(2007) 96 final (2007)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    European Commission: Internet of Things – An action plan for Europe. Brussels, 18 June 2009, COM(2009) 278 final (2009a)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    European Commission: Commission recommendation of 12.5.2009 on the implementation of privacy and data protection principles in applications supported by radio-frequency identification. Brussels, 12 May 2009, C(2009) 3200 final (2009b)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    European Commission: A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe. SWD(2015) 100 final (2015)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    European Commission: Digital Agenda: Commission consults on rules for wirelessly connected devices - the “Internet of Things”. Press Release, 12 April 2012, IP/12/360 (2012)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Article 29 Data Protection Working Party (2014): Opinion 8/2014 on the on [sic] Recent Developments on the Internet of Things, 16 September 2014, 14/EN, WP 223Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Järvinen, H. (2015): Privacy and Data Protection under threat from EU Council agreement. 15.06.2015, Press Release by European Digital Rights and Privacy International. Accessed 19 Nov 2015
  59. 59.
    Regulation (EU) 2015/758 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 concerning type-approval requirements for the deployment of the eCall in-vehicle system based on the 112 service and amending Directive 2007/46/EC. O.J. L 123, 19 May 2015Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Baur-Ahrens
    • 1
  • Felix Bieker
    • 2
  • Michael Friedewald
    • 3
  • Christian Geminn
    • 4
  • Marit Hansen
    • 2
  • Murat Karaboga
    • 3
  • Hannah Obersteller
    • 2
  1. 1.International Centre for Ethics in the Sciences and HumanitiesUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany
  2. 2.Unabhängiges Landeszentrum für Datenschutz Schleswig-HolsteinKielGermany
  3. 3.Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISIKarlsruheGermany
  4. 4.Research Center for Information System DesignKassel UniversityKasselGermany

Personalised recommendations