A Generic Privacy Enhancing Technology for Pervasive Computing Environments

  • Stelios Dritsas
  • John Tsaparas
  • Dimitris Gritzalis
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4083)


Pervasive computing is an emerging computing paradigm, which is expected to be part of our everyday life in the foreseeable future. Despite its huge potential value, one can foresee considerable drawbacks and undesirable potential uses of it in terms of privacy. In specific, the pervasive computing paradigm raises the level of the challenge to protect privacy of end-users, mainly due to the fact that devices operating in such an environment will be embedded in the fabric of the everyday life and will exhibit enhanced tracking and profiling capabilities. What is needed, inter alia, is appropriate mechanisms that are able to evolve with the needs of the users and interact with them in order to meet their privacy requirements. In this paper we suggest the foundations of a new Privacy Enhancing Technology (PET), with respect to the basic characteristics and implications introduced by pervasive environments.


Personal Data Ubiquitous Computing Pervasive Computing Trust Level Privacy Requirement 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Weiser, M.: The computer for the 21st Century. Scientific American 265(3), 94–104 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Institute of Standards and Technologies. In: Proc. of the IT Conference on Pervasive Computing (accessed April 2, 2005),
  3. 3.
    Lahlou, S., Langheinrich, M., Rocker, C.: Privacy and trust issues with invisible computers. Com. of the ACM 48(3), 59–60 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Russell, D., Streitz, N., Winograd, T.: Building disappearing computers. Com. of the ACM 48(3), 42–48 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    The Platform for Privacy Preferences 1.0 (P3P1.0) Specification World Wide Web Consortium (September 2001),
  6. 6.
    A P3P Preference Exchange Language 1.0 (Appel 1.0), Working draft, World Wide Web Consortium (April 2002),
  7. 7.
    Myles, G., Friday, A., Davies, N.: Preserving Privacy in Environments with Location-Based Applications. IEEE Pervasive Computing 2(1), 56–64 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher-Hübner, S.: IT Security and Privacy, Sweden (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Muhtadi, A., Campbell, R., Kapadia, A., Mickunas, M., Yi, S.: Routing through the Mist: Privacy Preserving Communication in Ubiquitous Computing Environments. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, Austria (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Langheinrich, M.: A privacy awareness system for ubiquitous computing environments. In: Borriello, G., Holmquist, L.E. (eds.) UbiComp 2002. LNCS, vol. 2498, p. 237. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nguyen, D., Mynatt, E.: Privacy Mirrors: Understanding and Shaping Sociotechnical Ubiquitous Computing Systems, Georgia Institute of Technology, Technical Report GIT-GVU-02-16 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lederer, S., Dey, A., Mankoff, J.: Everyday Privacy in Ubiquitous Computing Environments. In: Proc. of the 4th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jiang, X., Landay, J.: Modelling Privacy Control in Context-aware Systems. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 59–63 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blarkom, G., Borking, J., Olk, J.: Handbook of Privacy and Privacy-Enhancing Technologies. The case of Intelligent Software Agents. In: PISA Project Deliverable, The Hague (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lederer, S., Mankoff, J., Dey, A.: A conceptual model and metaphor of everyday privacy in Ubiquitous Computing, Intel Research, USA (July 2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lessig, L.: The Architecture of Privacy. In: Proc. of the Taiwan NET 1998 Conference, Taipei (March 1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Adams, A.: The Implications of Users Privacy Perception on Communication and Information Privacy Policies. In: Proc. of Telecommunications Policy Research Conference, USA (1999)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Balfanz, D., Golle, P., Staddon, J.: Proactive Data Sharing to Enhance Privacy in Ubicomp Environments. In: Proc. of UbiComp 2004 Privacy Workshop, England (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jensen, C., Tullio, J., Potts, C., Mynatt, E.: STRAP: A Structured Analysis Framework for Privacy, Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center (GVU) Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology (January 2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hong, J., Ng, J., Lederer, S., Landay, J.: Privacy Risk Models for Designing Privacy-Sensitive Ubiquitous Computing Systems. In: Proc. of Designing Interactive Systems, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Langheinrich, M.: When trust does not compute-The role of trust in Ubiquitous Computing. In: Dey, A.K., Schmidt, A., McCarthy, J.F. (eds.) UbiComp 2003. LNCS, vol. 2864. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dornan, A.: Trusted computing: A matter of trust. Network Magazine 19(7), 26–32 (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Seys, S.: Lightweight Cryptography Enabling Secure Wireless Networks. In: Workshop on Security Issues in Mobile and Wireless Heterogeneous Networks, Belgium (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stelios Dritsas
    • 1
  • John Tsaparas
    • 1
  • Dimitris Gritzalis
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Security and Infrastructure Protection Research Group, Dept. of InformaticsAthens University of Economics and BusinessAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations