Law versus technology: Blockchain, GDPR, and tough tradeoffs

Tatar, Unal; Gökçe, Yasir; Nussbaum, Brian

doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105454

Cited by 62 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Blockchain has a specific problem with identifying these roles since there is no centralized authority to control all the nodes [30], [31], [41]. Several approaches have been proposed in prior literature, such as defining the participating nodes as controllers [42], [43], data providers as controllers and miners as processors [44], actors who are able to execute a transaction and add a block as the controllers, joint controllers for federated blockchain [45], and developers as processors for smart contracts [46], [47], [48], [49].…”

Section: ) Responsibilities Of Controllers and Processors (Article 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have seen that the right to be forgotten has been explored more and various directions have been proposed [e.g., [28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. Similarly, data processing and controlling role definitions have also been explored vastly [40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49]. In addition to that, privacy by design and their integration has been discussed [e.g., 30,31,35].…”

Section: Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prior works highlighted that some of the compliance issues related to privacy and protection by design exist by default in blockchain [36]- [39]. Therefore, these studies viewed that blockchain services are compliant with article 25 of GDPR [30], [47]. Blockchain provides data immutability, confidentiality, and integrity by default.…”

Section: ) Protection and Privacy By Design (Article 25)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Personal data stored in a local database (off-chain)[38]. • Original data can be stored in the off chain and the proof of existence can be stored on-chain using a hash[28,47,37,42,35]. • Key management protocols can be used that will be linked with the main chain with hashes [59,51,37,44]…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

GDPR Compliant Blockchains–A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although blockchain-based digital services promise trust, accountability, and transparency, multiple paradoxes between blockchains and GDPR have been highlighted in the recent literature. Some of the recent literature also proposed possible solutions to these paradoxes. This article aims to conduct a systematic literature review on GDPR compliant blockchains and synthesize the findings. In particular, the goal was to identify 1) the GDPR articles that have been explored in prior literature; 2) the relevant research domains that have been explored, and 3) the research gaps. Our findings synthesized that the blockchains relevant GDPR articles can be categorized into six major groups, namely data deletion and modification (Article 16, 17, and 18), protection by design by default (Article 25), responsibilities of controllers and processors (Article 24, 26, and 28), consent management (Article 7), data processing principles and lawfulness (Article 5,6 and 12), and territorial scope (Article 3). We also found seven research domains where GDPR compliant blockchains have been discussed, which include IoT, financial data, healthcare, personal identity, online data, information governance, and smart city. From our analysis, we have identified a few key research gaps and present a future research direction.

show abstract

Section: ) Responsibilities Of Controllers and Processors (Article 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: ) Protection and Privacy By Design (Article 25)mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

GDPR Compliant Blockchains–A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to get a better understanding of the impact of blockchain on this layer, it is crucial to focus on the respective feature(s) of interest rather than on the technology as such. To give just one example, this could be the immutability of personal data stored on distributed ledgers and their potential clash with privacy legislation such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) [27]. Conversely, on this layer, it is pointless to measure constructs such as "Ease of Use" or "Usefulness" as applied in the highly popular Technology Acceptance Model (TAM).…”

Section: Impact Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Next Wave of Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Technology: The Overlooked Potential of Scenario Analysis

Treiblmaier

2021

Future Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blockchain is predicted to disrupt industries, economies, and societies. The properties of distributed ledgers allow the creation of immutable data structures that facilitate shared access in real time and enable a plethora of innovative applications. However, blockchain is not a uniform technology but rather a bundle of evolving components whose implications are notoriously hard to predict. At present, it is not clear how current trends will evolve, with technical evolution, legislation, and public policy being three contingency factors that make ongoing disruptive transformations particularly hard to predict. In light of blockchain’s potential disruptive impact, it is surprising that scenario analysis has hitherto been largely ignored in academic research. Therefore, in this paper, we introduce the technique, clarify several misconceptions, and provide examples illustrating how this method can help to overcome the limitations of existing technology impact research. We conclude that if applied correctly, scenario analysis represents the ideal tool to rigorously explore uncertain future developments and to create a comprehensive foundation for future research.

show abstract