Exploring a Warrior Paradigm to Design Out Cybercrime

Bargh, Mortaza S.; Choenni, Sunil; Mulder, Ingrid; Pastoor, Roland

doi:10.1109/eisic.2012.40

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Information systems that process, e.g., collect, enhance, store, and share, privacy sensitive information (like names, email and postal addresses, dates of birth, geo-locations, bank account numbers, photos and political/personal opinions) are fairly vulnerable to information leakage and thus to privacy breaches [2]. This information leakage stems from, for example, cyber attacks, compromised systems, or (un)intentional disclosure of privacysensitive information through fusing the information with the information of other sources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Privacy and information sharing in a judicial setting

Bargh

Choenni

Meijer

2015

Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information sharing has become a means of gaining public trust for institutions such as governmental and scientific organizations. The transparency sought through information sharing contributes to the trust of various stakeholders such as citizens, other organizations and enterprises in such institutions. Information sharing, on the other hand, may increase the chance of privacy breaches due to, for example, information leakage and information fusion. Such privacy breaches can undermine stakeholders' trust and thus work against the purpose of gaining trust through transparency. Moreover, fear of potential privacy breaches compels information disseminators to share minimum or no information. In this contribution we show that creating transparency through sharing information in the context of our public judiciary organization is a typical wicked problem. Subsequently we explain (the outcomes of) our designerly approach to design and intervene three artifacts within our organization. These artifacts are aimed at disseminating our judiciary data in a privacy preserving way, as privacy preservation contributes positively to the information sharing. Through addressing the privacy problem we try to address the transparency problem.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Privacy and information sharing in a judicial setting

Bargh

Choenni

Meijer

2015

Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Information systems (ISs) that process, e.g. collect, enhance, store and share, privacy-sensitive information (like names, email and postal addresses, dates of birth, geo-locations, bank account numbers, photos and political/personal opinions) are fairly vulnerable to information leakage and thus to privacy breaches (Bargh et al , 2012). Information leakage stems from, for example, cyber attacks, compromised systems or (un)intentional disclosure through fusing the information with other information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On addressing privacy in disseminating judicial data: towards a methodology

Bargh

Choenni

Meijer

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Information dissemination has become a means of transparency for governments to enable the visions of e-government and smart government, and eventually gain, among others, the trust of various stakeholders such as citizens and enterprises. Information dissemination, on the other hand, may increase the chance of privacy breaches, which can undermine those stakeholders’ trust and thus the objectives of transparency. Moreover, fear of potential privacy breaches compels information disseminators to share minimum or no information. The purpose of this study is to address these contending issues of information disseminations, i.e. privacy versus transparency, when disseminating judicial information to gain (public) trust. Specifically, the main research questions are: What is the nature of the aforementioned “privacy–transparency” problem and how can we approach and address this class of problems? Design/methodology/approach To address these questions, the authors have carried out an explorative case study by reconsidering and analyzing a number of information dissemination cases within their research center for the past 10 years, reflecting upon the whole design research process, consulting peers through publishing a preliminary version of this contribution and embedding the work in an in-depth literature study on research methodologies, wicked problems and e-government topics. Findings The authors show that preserving privacy while disseminating information for transparency purposes is a typical wicked problem, propose an innovative designerly model called transitional action design research (TADR) to address the class of such wicked problems and describe three artifacts which are designed, intervened and evaluated according to the TADR model in a judicial research organization. Originality/value Classifying the privacy transparency problem in the judicial settings as wicked is new, the proposed designerly model is innovative and the realized artifacts are deployed and still operational in a real setting.

show abstract