Managing Privacy through Accountability

Guagnin, Daniel; Hempel, Leon; Ilten, Carla; Kroener, Inga; Neyland, Daniel; Postiga, H

doi:10.1057/9781137032225

Cited by 20 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The primary constituents of a computer system are the underlying algorithms and data structures (Manovich 1999, 84). As such, algorithms are inert and without meaning; they need to be paired with databases (Gillespie 2012). Before algorithms can produce results, information must have been collected, prepared, i.e.…”

Section: Technical Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Algorithms have been defined as finite, abstract, effective, compound control structures, imperatively given and accomplishing a given purpose under given provisions (Hill, 2016), or even more concisely, as encoded procedures through which input data is being transformed into a usable, and therefore desired, output (Gillespie 2012). Within the information society, algorithms perform a key function: by following a logical and mathematical sequence, algorithms can structure and find additional meaning in a Big Data environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accountability for the use of algorithms in a big data environment

Vedder

Naudts

2017

International Review of Law, Computers & Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Center for IT and IP LawAccountability is the ability to provide good reasons in order to explain and to justify actions, decisions, and policies for a (hypothetical) forum of persons or organizations. Since decision-makers, both in the private and in the public sphere, increasingly rely on algorithms operating on Big Data for their decision-making, special mechanisms of accountability concerning the making and deployment of algorithms in that setting become gradually more urgent. In the upcoming General Data Protection Regulation, the importance of accountability and closely related concepts, such as transparency, as guiding protection principles, is emphasized. Yet, the accountability mechanisms inherent in the regulation cannot be appropriately applied to algorithms operating on Big Data and their societal impact. First, algorithms are complex. Second, algorithms often operate on a random group-level, which may pose additional difficulties when interpreting and articulating the risks of algorithmic decision-making processes. In light of the possible significance of the impact on human beings, the complexities and the broader scope of algorithms in a big data setting call for accountability mechanisms that transcend the mechanisms that are now inherent in the regulation.

show abstract

Section: Technical Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability for the use of algorithms in a big data environment

Vedder

Naudts

2017

International Review of Law, Computers & Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…by Pearson et al [14]. Suggesting accountability as a mechanism to ensure privacy was also the result of the PATS EU project and is detailed in a book edited by Guagnin et al [6]. Xiao et al [17] provide a survey of accountability in computer networks and distributed systems.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Unified Model of Accountability Infrastructures

Kacianka

Kelbert

Pretschner

2016

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accountability aims to provide explanations for why unwanted situations occurred, thus providing means to assign responsibility and liability. As such, accountability has slightly different meanings across the sciences. In computer science, our focus is on providing explanations for technical systems, in particular if they interact with their physical environment using sensors and actuators and may do serious harm. Accountability is relevant when considering safety, security and privacy properties and we realize that all these incarnations are facets of the same core idea. Hence, in this paper we motivate and propose a model for accountability infrastructures that is expressive enough to capture all of these domains. At its core, this model leverages formal causality models from the literature in order to provide a solid reasoning framework. We show how this model can be instantiated for several real-world use cases.

show abstract

“…In the context of digital security governance, accountability is increasingly becoming an umbrella concept to deal with these aforementioned ethical dilemmas (Eijkman, 2012;Gaugnin et al, 2012;Art. 29 Working Party, 2010; Centre for Information Policy and Leadership / Hunton & Williams LLP (CIPL), 2009;OECD, 1980).…”

Section: Accountability In Digital Security Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…29 Working Party, 2010). What mechanisms ensure that the use or processing of digital personal data is adequately protected (Blind, 2011;Gaugnin et al, 2012)? Can the semi-automatic actions by public and/or private entities or the responsible security officials be subject to adequate review or possibly even sanctions?…”

Section: Accountability In Digital Security Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Security Governance and Accountability in Europe: Ethical Dilemmas in Terrorism Risk Management

Eijkman¹

2013

JPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital security governance – the use of digital personal data for threat analysis on the basis of (automated) risk profiling – enhances terrorism risk management in Europe. European security strategies emphasise that information and communication technology increasingly play a key role in preventing and anticipating threats such as terrorism and cyber-crime. It enables, for example, the sharing of personal, financial or travellers’ data with third countries. This article focuses on digital security governance in the context of the Passenger Name Record (PNR), the Advance Passenger Information (API) and the Terrorist Finance Tracking System (TFTP) programmes. Particularly, it considers the ethical dilemmas of using and sharing digital personal data as well as accountability for this type of risk management. Because there are broader socio-political, legal and technological issues connected to the use of information and communication technology for digital security governance, the concept of accountability in this article is holistic.

show abstract

Managing Privacy through Accountability

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Accountability for the use of algorithms in a big data environment

Accountability for the use of algorithms in a big data environment

Towards a Unified Model of Accountability Infrastructures

Digital Security Governance and Accountability in Europe: Ethical Dilemmas in Terrorism Risk Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About