Advertisement

Peer-Based Complex Profile Management

  • Mark Wallis
  • Frans Henskens
  • Michael Hannaford
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 368)

Abstract

The rising popularity of Web 2.0 applications has seen an increase in the volume of user-generated content. Web Applications allow users to define policies that specify how they wish their content to be accessed. In large Web 2.0 applications these policies can become quite complex, with users having to make decisions such as ‘who can access my image library?’, or ‘should my mobile number be made available to 3rd party agencies?’. As the policy size grows, the ability for everyday users to comprehend and manage their policy diminishes. This paper presents a model of policy configuration that harnesses the power of the Internet community by presenting average-sets of policy configuration. These policy “profiles” allow users to select a default set of policy values that line up with the average case, as presented by the application population. Policies can be promoted at an application level or at a group level. An XML approach is presented for representing the policy profiles. The approach allows for easy profile comparison and merging. A storage mechanism is also presented that describes how these policies should be made persistent in a distributed data storage system.

Keywords

Policy Information User Policy Image Library Policy Storage Distribute Data Service 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Besmer, A., Watson, J., Lipford, H.R.: The impact of social navigation on privacy policy configuration. In: Proceeding of the Sixth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clark, J., DeRose, S.: Xml path language (xpath) (1999), W3C http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116/
  3. 3.
    Lipford, H.R., Besmer, A., Watson, J.: Understanding privacy settings in facebook with an audience view. In: Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Usability, Psychology and Security (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McKeon, M.: The evolution of privacy on facebook (2010), Personal Website, http://www.mattmckeon.com/facebook-privacy/
  5. 5.
    O’Reilly, T.: What is web 2.0. O’Reilly Net (2005), http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
  6. 6.
    Strater, K., Lipford, H.R.: Strategies and struggles with privacy in an online social networking community. In: Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction - Volume 1 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vickery, G., Wunsch-Vincent, S.: Participative Web And User-Created Content: Web 2.0 Wikis and Social Networking. Organization for Economic (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wallis, M., Henskens, F.A., Hannaford, M.R.: Component based runtime environment for internet applications. In: IADIS International Conference on Internet Technologies and Society, ITS 2010 (2010a)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wallis, M., Henskens, F.A., Hannaford, M.R.: A distributed content storage model for web applications. In: The Second International Conference on Evolving Internet, INTERNET 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wallis, M., Henskens, F.A., Hannaford, M.R.: Publish/subscribe model for personal data on the internet. In: 6th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies, WEBIST 2010, INSTICC (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Wallis
    • 1
  • Frans Henskens
    • 1
  • Michael Hannaford
    • 1
  1. 1.Distributed Computing Research GroupUniversity of NewcastleAustralia

Personalised recommendations