Privacy Value Networks


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Privacy Value Networks

  1. 1. Privacy Value Networks Project • Research Project funded by TSB/EPSRC/ESRC, £2m, 09/08-08/11 • Oxford Internet Institute • Bath University • St Andrews University • University College London • Consult Hyperion • BT •
  2. 2. Project Aims • To account for value (and devalue) of data items from the perspective of all stakeholders • Company/government and customer/citizen • Secondary users (e.g. other family members, neighbours) • To account for individual, commercial and societal costs and benefits • Immediate and long-term • To model impact of data quality and transparency
  3. 3. Reality: Value and De-value • Customers/citizens feel privacy is violated even when data is handled in accordance with DPA • Take action to protect themselves, e.g. • Abandoning forms when phone number requested • False DOB on social networking sites • Decreasing data quality • Discrepancy between customer/citizen and “data shadow” • Value networks – impact on 3rd parties?
  4. 4. Payment e ft t it y t h do Third Id e n w hat I ID thief am , ID data W ho I Parties L im Brand damage Facebook SN i S N te d se User P e S e rv rv i rs o ic e ce w it na hh lo y ld e ld a ta a lt e n ts in f y Who I am, what I do paym Advertisers Who I am, what I do o, de CPM ce t is in g p ti A dver on Facebook r g e t in g ,P ET io u ra l ta s Behav Org A ased C P ni ty C TR, incre mu Reduced m Co a dat S N Regulator v ic e Potential Friends Ser Insurance SN employer Tangible Devalue Tangible Value Knowledge Devalue Knowledge Value Intangible Devalue Intangible Value
  5. 5. Case studies 1. Biographical data (Identity and Passport Service) 2. Communications usage data on families and geographical groups (BT) 3. Sensor-enhanced Facebook (students and young professionals) 4. Longitudinal data families (MORI) 5. Financial data 6. HIV+ patient records
  6. 6. Mobile social sensing
  7. 7. Financial Services • Methods #1 of 2 • Interview financially excluded people • Seeking • Role of personal information and privacy in service uptake? • Value of protecting/ sharing personal financial info. w.r.t. • Other family members • Friends / neighbours / community • Service providers • Desired properties of services • Recruitment • Approaching voluntary credit support agencies (Citizens Advice, CCCS, etc.) to recruit for us, so • Trusted party engages the family member that deals with financial management, at the point of doing it
  8. 8. Financial Services • Methods #2 of 2 • Interview service providers • Seeking • What information is used to assess service provision risk? • What information would allow ‘better’ decisions? • How could existing information be better used to provide services the users want? • Values of personal information providers hold about customers w.r.t. • The customers • The providers themselves • Their competitors / other service providers • Recruitment • In talks with a high street bank • Looking for wider range of service providers
  9. 9. Conclusions • Time to re-think approach to data collection, processing and retention • Applying DPA, and beyond • Consider value and de-value for all stakeholders • Wider and long-term impacts for value networks • Tool for impact modelling • Can be used to facilitate Privacy Impact Assessments (PIA) • Improved data quality will benefit all stakeholders