Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
1–10 of 88 posts
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#2Are tools such as homomorphic encryption, differential privacy, etc. applicable here? There should be a way for users to control their location data, and opt-in to sharing it at times like this, and then opt-out later.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#3Are tools such as homomorphic encryption, differential privacy, etc. applicable here? There should be a way for users to control their location data, and opt-in to sharing it at times like this, and then opt-out later.
Homomorphic encryption is not computationally practical and differential privacy relies on noise which is not ideal when (i) errors compound as is the case of contact tracing where each new node introduces many candidates for exposure and (ii) there is a high cost of false positives or negatives.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#4if this is just logging location, how does it do contact tracing? don't you need everyone's location, or the 'nearby' data like gov.sg's 'trace together'?
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#5Individual privacy is where I draw a line in the sand.
I'm ready to do many things, but that does not include allowing geotracking, geofencing or any other restriction on the freedom of movement and freedom of assembly.
The government can shut businesses, shut public parks and beaches, but what we do in our homes, clubs and other private properties is off limits.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#6Individual privacy is where I draw a line in the sand. I'm ready to do many things, but that does not include allowing geotracking, geofencing or any other restriction on the freedom of movement and freedom of assembly. The government can shut businesses, shut public parks and beaches, but what we do in our homes, clubs and other private properties is off limits.
I agree completely. I found this FT article by Harari a very lucid and accessible essay on how we should handle the crisis.
https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-6858-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcc...
How we decide to strike a balance between privacy and safety today will determine the shape of our world in the coming decades.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#7Summary: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UGY07m8GNrUaj9bGRx07vDMccxT...
Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.08567.pdf
It seems like the way this preserves privacy is that you only upload your location information once you're tested positive, where it is "redacted" (I have very little faith in this) and then sent to everyone else so they can check to see if they were in contact with you. It's better than mass surveillance, sure, but I'm not sure if you can claim that this doesn't give up individual privacy.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#8Are tools such as homomorphic encryption, differential privacy, etc. applicable here? There should be a way for users to control their location data, and opt-in to sharing it at times like this, and then opt-out later.
Homomorphic encryption is not computationally practical and differential privacy relies on noise which is not ideal when (i) errors compound as is the case of contact tracing where each new node introduces many candidates for exposure and (ii) there is a high cost of false positives or negatives.
Perhaps this is a use case for a secure enclave, where location data is stored, a biometric authenticated authorization can be used for releasing it, and there is provably no backdoor for this feature to be used without the user's approval. I hope to see companies like AAPL address this in a way that solves for these types of situations without introducing draconian oversight capabilities.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#9If sharing your location is optional, then there will be people who opt out. Depending on how many people opt out, the data may be useless.
Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?
#10Summary: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UGY07m8GNrUaj9bGRx07vDMccxT... Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.08567.pdf It seems like the way this preserves privacy is that you only upload your location information once you're tested positive, where it is "redacted" (I have very little faith in this) and then sent to everyone else so they can check to see if they were in contact with you. It's better than mass surveilla…
Mandatory or optional? Will the government force me to upload if I am positive? Or can I choose not to?