Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What is Differential Privacy?

blog.cryptographyengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 108 posts

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#41

Post by kbenson »

anshukla wrote: post #35
guelo wrote: post #27

Apple backed themselves into a corner by marketing themselves as the super-privacy company in contrast to Google. The problem is that all the data collection lets you do some really useful stuff that benefits the user. So now they're spreading FUD while trying to pretend that they're not collecting the same type of data that Google does. Google has been using differential privacy for a while in different projects.

How do you explain their insistence, then, on doing object recognition in photos on-device? Is it possible that they have understood the affordances of various data collection and obfuscation techniques and will apply the appropriate ones after taking into account their desire to protect privacy? Google indeed has RAPPOR (and other projects, I'm sure), but the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy…

> the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy in everything we do"

I'm pretty sure that should be interpreted as "we've determined privacy is a differentiator in the market, so as of some indeterminate time in the past, ranging from a few years ago to our inception, we consider privacy in everything we do."

Now, there's nothing wrong with that, and that's not to say they haven't been privacy conscious in the past, but let's not confuse the current stance as entirely altruistic, when there are are multiple incentives at play, one of which is concern for the user.

Edit: s/months/years/, that's much more accurate.

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#42

Post by Twisell »

techie64 wrote: post #36
Twisell wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I can't forget that Google is the company that somehow managed to suggest ads on my personal phone based on browsing on my professional PC. Theses devices are never on the same network, the only shared parameters is an exchange account. As a rule I always log-out of the only Google service I rarely use, so this must be some cookie/tracker dark magic. Sadly I have no proof, but I use gosthery to block trackers sin…

It's fairly straight forward - cookies + Google's ad network + Analytics on your phone allow them to track you across devices.

Ok, so maybe we are talking about the same field of science, but it seems that, from what they say there is two very distinct approach.

1.Collect personal data, send them to mainframe, use them to profile and deliver custom tailored services. When sharing hash so that individual records can't be extrapolated

2.Collect personal data, use them locally sometimes using mainframe provided 'models'. Return to mainframe hashed records to improve models.

Google is clearly using 1. while Apple claim to target 2. (I don't think it's actually the case now because I though Siri actually store some personal data on the cloud so far)

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#43

Post by denzil_correa »

conradev wrote: post #22
frankmcsherry wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The database still has to exist on Apple's servers. It doesn't, which is part of the reason Apple wants to do this. You can still do differential privacy without collecting all the data, you just get less accurate results. See page 232 in [1], re "The Local Model". [1]: http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~aaroth/Papers/privacybook.pdf Edit: the article even says this down when it talks about RAPPOR.

Even though the technique doesn't require collecting all of the data, Apple still does collect a huge well of data. They store all iCloud sync material (backups, photos, contacts, calendars, mail, documents, etc.) without end to end encryption, and have all of the iMessage metadata.

> Apple still does collect a huge well of data.

I don't think Apple has ever claimed it does not collect data.

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#44

Post by cel1ne »

guelo wrote: post #27

Apple backed themselves into a corner by marketing themselves as the super-privacy company in contrast to Google. The problem is that all the data collection lets you do some really useful stuff that benefits the user. So now they're spreading FUD while trying to pretend that they're not collecting the same type of data that Google does. Google has been using differential privacy for a while in different projects.

Apple is a hardware company. The not as dependant on data as Google is.

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#45

Post by denzil_correa »

applester wrote: post #4
hfsbtnye wrote: post #2

I have to admit, I'm really starting to like the direction that Apple is heading despite being previously disenchanted. I only wish that they would go ahead and put everything under a free software license, since they're in the business of selling hardware that's coincidentally bundled with their software.

To paint another viewpoint, Apple initially went all gung ho about privacy and wanted to make not collecting data a big play (and fairly so, full respect to them). The recent WWDC obviously shows a big shift towards AI and ML applications within the company. Some things are possible on the device, but many neural nets just cannot be served from an iPhone reasonably. Hence, the move towards more data collection. I rea…

> Apple initially went all gung ho about privacy and wanted to make not collecting data a big play

My impression always has been that Apple does not collect data that can lead you to be personally identified. I never got any impression that "Apple does not collect data".

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#46

Post by spullara »

kbenson wrote: post #41
anshukla wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain their insistence, then, on doing object recognition in photos on-device? Is it possible that they have understood the affordances of various data collection and obfuscation techniques and will apply the appropriate ones after taking into account their desire to protect privacy? Google indeed has RAPPOR (and other projects, I'm sure), but the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy…

> the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy in everything we do" I'm pretty sure that should be interpreted as "we've determined privacy is a differentiator in the market, so as of some indeterminate time in the past, ranging from a few years ago to our inception, we consider privacy in everything we do." Now, there's nothing wrong with that, and that's not to say they haven't been privacy consciou…

Steve Jobs was pretty passionate about this and they are continuing on with it.

http://www.recode.net/2016/2/21/11588068/heres-what-steve-jo...

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#47

Post by Twisell »

bla2 wrote: post #40
techie64 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly straight forward - cookies + Google's ad network + Analytics on your phone allow them to track you across devices.

How would the cookie from the work get to the phone?

I must have been connected to the same Gmail or Facebook account at some point on both devices. However as I said I purposely never stay logged in to google services. Yeah, I can flush all cookies (thus annoyingly resetting all legit cookies as well).

But this is not how privacy should work, cause there is a lot of people out there that don't read HN and only recently found out that there is a lot pastry inside their computers.

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#48

Post by arnarbi »

bo1024 wrote: post #14

I've read a couple articles and haven't seen any details about how they're going to apply DP (differential privacy). It's important to clearly distinguish what DP can and cannot do. DP is just a technique for taking a database and outputting some statistic or fact about it. The output has some noise added to it. The guarantee of DP is (roughly) that anyone looking at the output alone won't learn much about anyone in…

> The output has some noise added to it.

You can also add noise to the input samples, so your database doesn't contain statistically significant information about any single individual. But aggregate queries will work as the noise evens out. See http://research.google.com/pubs/pub42852.html

Edit: Just saw that the linked article actually explains this in the last section as well.

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#49

Post by kbenson »

spullara wrote: post #46
kbenson wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy in everything we do" I'm pretty sure that should be interpreted as "we've determined privacy is a differentiator in the market, so as of some indeterminate time in the past, ranging from a few years ago to our inception, we consider privacy in everything we do." Now, there's nothing wrong with that, and that's not to say they haven't been privacy consciou…

Steve Jobs was pretty passionate about this and they are continuing on with it. http://www.recode.net/2016/2/21/11588068/heres-what-steve-jo...

Sure. But you can replace Apple in my comment with Jobs, and it would apply equally as well, had Jobs not passed away. The article you reference points this out specifically:

> His comments arrived as Apple started to identify Google, and its ascending Android operating system, as its chief competitor. Here we see the first signs of the hardware seller deploying its privacy position as a branding and competitive tactic, a strategy that has come to the fore during its current standoff with the feds.

Re: What is Differential Privacy?

#50

Post by Twisell »

kbenson wrote: post #41
anshukla wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you explain their insistence, then, on doing object recognition in photos on-device? Is it possible that they have understood the affordances of various data collection and obfuscation techniques and will apply the appropriate ones after taking into account their desire to protect privacy? Google indeed has RAPPOR (and other projects, I'm sure), but the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy…

> the cultural difference Apple claims is "we consider privacy in everything we do" I'm pretty sure that should be interpreted as "we've determined privacy is a differentiator in the market, so as of some indeterminate time in the past, ranging from a few years ago to our inception, we consider privacy in everything we do." Now, there's nothing wrong with that, and that's not to say they haven't been privacy consciou…

Whoa you just opened my eyes I always believed big company were fundamentally altruistic!

What a bummer!

Post reply on HN