Amplifying victim vulnerability: Unanticipated harm and consequence in data breach notification policy

Abstract

Loss of control over one’s identity through identity usurpation, or identity theft, results in victimization characterized by multiple species of harm: material harms such as financial loss; medical harms such as psychological distress and consequential physiological illness; and moral harms such as infringement of autonomy. Digital data breaches are a common means by which identity can be usurped and laws have been enacted requiring data-holders to notify data subjects when their personal information held on digital databases has been compromised. The intention is that victims should then be able to undertake their own mitigation measures. This paper explores the efficacy of this approach as a solution and argues that this policy – particularly in the light of new digital criminal methodologies – creates a conflict of victims’ interests. It is an unintended outcome of policy that exacerbates, rather than resolves, identity usurpation and associated victimization in the digital environment.

Cybersecurity challenges across sustainable development goals: A comprehensive review

“…Many poverty alleviation programs rely on this system to target beneficiaries and deliver services efficiently [7].The adoption of Aadhaar, India's biometric population database, within the national food security program showed that datafication can enhance the effectiveness of anti-poverty schemes but also resulted in data injustice and exclusion of entitled households [8]. A large-scale experiment in India's subsidized food program found that requiring biometric authentication did not reduce leakage but increased transaction costs and reduced benefits for beneficiaries who had not previously registered an ID [9].…”

Privacy Essentials

“…Where it is found that harm has potentially been done to an individual whose data were breached, the organisation may be liable to compensate the individual for that harm, which may prove costly, depending on the severity of the harm [32]. Recovery expenses, compensation, legal fees, reputational damage, regulatory fines, etc., are just some of the potential costs.…”

Blockchain assisted blind signature algorithm with data integrity verification scheme

“…Various solutions are currently available to manage these problems; however, they are centralized through certain reliable third‐party organizations. Still, there are a few other challenges regarding data access with respect to third parties 18,19 . Hence, the data integrity should be tested by the user to check whether the data kept in the cloud is secure or not.…”

“…Still, there are a few other challenges regarding data access with respect to third parties. 18,19 Hence, the data integrity should be tested by the user to check whether the data kept in the cloud is secure or not. The recent introduction of blockchain technology to endorse security of data uploaded to the network has drawn research attention.…”