Integral Privacy

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10052)

Abstract

When considering data provenance some problems arise from the need to safely handle provenance related functionality. If some modifications have to be performed in a data set due to provenance related requirements, e.g. remove data from a given user or source, this will affect not only the data itself but also all related models and aggregated information obtained from the data. This is specially aggravated when the data are protected using a privacy method (e.g. masking method), since modification in the data and the model can leak information originally protected by the privacy method. To be able to evaluate privacy related problems in data provenance we introduce the notion of integral privacy as compared to the well known definition of differential privacy.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Partial support by the Spanish MINECO (project TIN2014-55243-P) and Catalan AGAUR (2014-SGR-691) is acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Barbier, G., Feng, Z., Gundecha, P., Liu, H.: Provenance Data in Social Media. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San Rafael (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertino, E., Ghinita, G., Kantarcioglu, M., Nguyen, D., Park, J., Sandhu, R., Sultana, S., Thuraisingham, B., Xu, S.: A roadmap for privacy-enhanced secure data provenance. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 43, 481–501 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buneman, P., Khanna, S., Wang-Chiew, T.: A characterization of data provenance. In: International Conference on Database Theory, pp. 316–330. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Das, S.: Functional Fractional Calculus. Springer, Dordrecht (2008)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Torra, V.: A quantitative comparison of disclosure control methods for microdata. In: Doyle, P., Lane, J.I., Theeuwes, J.J.M., Zayatz, L., (eds.) Confidentiality, Disclosure, Data Access: Theory and Practical Applications for Statistical Agencies, North-Holland, pp. 111–134 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    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)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hasan, R., Sion, R., Winslett, M.: (2007) Introducing secure provenance: problems and challenges. In: Proceedings StorageSST. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Muralidhar, K., Sarathy, R.: Generating sufficiency-based non-synthetic perturbed data. Trans. Data Priv. 1(1), 17–33 (2008)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simmhan, Y.L., Plale, B., Gannon, D.: A survey of data provenance in e-science. ACM Sigmod Rec. 34(3), 31–36 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Torra, V., Navarro-Arribas, G.: Data Privacy, WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 4(4), 269–280 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Winkler, W.E.: Re-identification methods for masked microdata. In: Domingo-Ferrer, J., Torra, V. (eds.) PSD 2004. LNCS, vol. 3050, pp. 216–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of InformaticsUniversity of SkövdeSkövdeSweden
  2. 2.Department of Information and Communication EngineeringUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaCataloniaSpain

Personalised recommendations