Participatory Sensing through Social Networks: The Tension between Participation and Privacy
Download as PPTX, PDF2 likes1,161 views
This document discusses the relationship between participatory sensing and social networks, focusing on the balance between visibility and privacy. It identifies benefits such as recruiting participants and encouraging active community involvement while addressing challenges like data sharing, user anonymity, and maintaining reputation systems. The conclusion emphasizes the need for anonymity in data submission while highlighting the difficulties in managing user behavior and reputation in such systems.
Participatory Sensing through Social Networks: The Tension between Participation and Privacy
- 1. Participatory Sensing through Social NetworksThe tension between Participation and PrivacyITWDC6-8 September, 2010I. Krontiris, Chair of Mobile BusinessGoethe University Frankfurtioannis.krontiris@m-chair.netF.C. Freiling, LehrstuhlPraktischeInformatik IUniversity of Mannheim
- 2. Paper outlineWhat are the benefits and drawbacks of connecting social network with participatory sensing? We study this relation in 2 dimensions that conflict with each other: Social translucence (visibility) and PrivacyGoal: Identify and discuss research challenges that arise in this new setting.
- 3. Available Sensors Today
- 4. Available Sensors Tomorrow
- 6. NoiseTube
- 8. Research QuestionsShare – How will collected data be shared? What practices of individual ownership will be appropriate and how will privacy be addressed? How can data best be shared with non-experts, urban planers, decision and policy makers, etc.?Change – What tools or frameworks best invite and encourage active participation? What tools and techniques will facilitate the most productive debate and ultimate positive social benefit?
- 9. Utilizing Social NetworksBenefit 1: Recruitment (getting people to join)identify and reach well-suited participants for data collections based on their geographic availability as well as their interests and habits.allow existing participants to invite their friends to join a group, or see what their friends are doing (which group they joined, in which groups they are most active), etc.
- 10. Utilizing Social NetworksBenefit 2: Participation (getting people to participate)No direct benefits for participants. Why should those who can produce the sensing data take the time to engage in such interactions? Why should they wish to?Sense of CommunitySense of efficacy: a sense that they have had some effect on the group.
- 11. Utilizing Social NetworksRecognitionReputation Pointsa user, after submitting a report from his mobile phone, is given a reputation point. reputation points are public and appear on the public profile of that user.
- 12. Utilizing Social NetworksBenefit 3: Acting on the dataNot all data are equally useful / importantPeople could also intentionally submit fault data Pre-evaluation by the usersExample: A system that allows users to submit images of potholes on the street
- 13. location privacy
- 14. Privacy vs. VisibilityKnowing when a particular person was at a particular point in time can be used to infer a lot of personal informationAllow users to make their contributions visible to the online communityAnonymitySocial Translucence
- 15. Research questionSystem model: Users submitting data are anonymous, but at the same time they maintain a public profile in the social network, where they provide details about themselves (e.g. reputation, etc.)Is it possible to offer anonymity to the user, who submits sensing data from the physical environment, while at the same time we maintain properties connected with his public profile, like Reputation andUser revocation?
- 16. \ AnonymityLet’s assume we provide anonymity to protect user’s privacyData are anonymizedHide network identifiers
- 17. ReputationGiving reputation points to an anonymous user is not possibleNeed two independent processes:A pseudonymous user acquires reputation points (one-time pseudonym)A known user updates its reputation in his public profileSolution direction: Use e-cash systemsA pseudonymous user obtains e-coins from the bank for a report submission, which corresponds to a reputation pointAt a later point in time, the user logs-in using his public profile and redeems the e-coin to increase his reputation.Hard: Repetitions of this process should not be linkable!
- 18. User revocationBefore submit, user authenticates anonymously to the service provider This encourages user misbehavior need for user revocationRevocation depends on anonymous authentication mechanism:If use group signatures: A Trusted-Third-Party manages user accounts and has the ability to revoke user’s anonymity at any time. No assurances that TTP is reliable!If use e-cash: Anonymity is revoked if spent an e-coin twiceIf use k-Times Anonymous Authentication: Anonymity is revoked if user authenticates more than k times. None of this appropriate. Need a d-strikes-out revocation systemWhen users are judged to have misbehaved d times, they are revoked by the systemSome protocols exist, but very expensive for power-limited mobile phones
- 19. ConclusionsUtilization of social networks could provide many benefits in urban sensingrecruit more citizens in campaigns and boost their active participation. Example: use of reputation systemsIt is also important to preserve the anonymity of the users submitting dataAnonymity makes it hard to revoke misbehaving users or compute their accumulated reputation pointsAcknowledgment: Thanks to Nicolas Maisonneuve for the inspiring conversations