skip to main content
10.1145/3465481.3469207acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaresConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Approaching the Data Protection Impact Assessment as a legal methodology to evaluate the degree of privacy by design achieved in technological proposals. A special reference to Identity Management systems

Published:17 August 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

The process of digitalization of societies and innovation is involving the fast introduction of new technologies in different sectors. However, the development of technology represents a challenge as it involves technical, legal, economic and social aspects that have to be considered since its conception or design. The aim of this paper is to offer an adaptation of an existing legal methodology, the Data Protection Impact Assessment, as a legal obligation to evaluate technological proposals and assure compliance with privacy by design requirements. For that purpose, we will refer to the specific case of Identity Management technologies. We introduce the main challenges in the sector of Digital Identity Management as well as the importance of covering the “architecture” and “user” sides in the development of safer technologies by citing concrete examples. Finally, in order to provide a more practical view of the methodology to adapt the Data Protection Impact Assessment, we refer to the work developed in the research project OLYMPUS in the evaluation of its privacy implications. By introducing this example, the paper offers a specific methodology directly reusable for the study of technological proposals in IdM but that can be adapted to any other sector.

References

  1. In Cambridge Analytical scandal it was discovered that Facebook provided unauthorized access to personally identifiable information of more than 87 million Facebook users to the data firm Cambridge Analytical. Cambridge Analytica integrated this information with a range of data from social media platforms, browsers, online purchases, voting results, and more. By adding OCEAN analysis to the other private and public data acquired, Cambridge Analytica developed the ability to “micro-target” individual consumers or voters with messages most likely to influence their behavior. The OCEAN analysis was paired with a large number of targeted messages in “Project Alamo,” which was employed for the election campaign of President Trump. Jim Isaak and Mina.J Hanna. 2018. User Data Privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and Privacy Protection”, Computer 51(8), 56–59. 10.1109/MC.2018.3191268  Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jon R. Knight. 2019. The New Normal: Easier Data Breach Standing Is Here to Stay” Cybersecurity L.Rep 1 Feb. 6. Retrieved the 25th 2021 of April from: https://perma.cc/QXZ8-JEH3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Paige Leskin. 2018. The 21 Scariest Data Breaches of 2018.Bus. Insider Dec. 30. Retrieved the 25th of April 2021 from: https://www.businessinsider.com/data-hacks-breaches-biggest-of-2018-2018-12Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Penny Jorna, Russel Smith and Katherine Norman. 2018. Identity crime and misuse in Australia: results of the 2018 online survey [Online statistical report]. Australian Institute of Criminology, 2020. Retrieved the 4th of April 2020 from: https://aic.gov.au/publications/sr/sr19Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. The United States Department of Justice. Identity theft. Official website. Available at the following address: https://www.justice.gov/criminal‐fraud/identity‐ theft/identity‐theft‐and‐identity‐fraud.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Sopna A/P Sinnathamby Sehgar and Zuriati Ahmad Zukarnain, 2021. Online Identity Theft, Security Issues, and Reputational Dam- age. Preprints 1–10, 2021. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202102.0082.v1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Tiffany Hsu, 2017, Data Breach Victims Talk of Initial Terror, Then Vigilance. N.Y. TIMES Sept. 9. Retrieved the 25th of April 2021 from: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/09/business/equifax-data-breach-identity-theft-victims.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Susan Gasson. 2003. Human-centered vs. user-centered approaches to information system design, JITTA 29-46. Retrieved the 26th of April 2021 from: https://aisel.aisnet.org/jitta/vol5/iss2/5/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. https://www.aries-project.eu/ (Grant Agreement 700085)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/257782/es (Grant Agreement 257782)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/216483/es (Grant Agreement 216483)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. https://olympus-project.eu/(Grant Agreement 786725)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Jorge Bernal, Antonio Skarmeta, Rafael Torres . 2019. D3.1- Requirements and Design Templates for OLYMPUS. Horizon 2020 Project OLYMPUS (Oblivious identitY Management for Private and User-friendly Services). Retrieved the 26th of April 2021 from: https://olympus-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Olympus_pu_d3_1_v1.0.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Nabie Y. Conteh1 and Paul J. Schmick. 2016. Cybersecurity: risks, vulnerabilities and countermeasures to prevent social engineering attacks. International Journal of Advanced Computer Research 6(23), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.19101/ijacr.2016.623006Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Hitoshi Kokumai. 2018. Identity Assurance by Our Own Volition and Memory Part 1. Payments Journal 1st August. Retrieved the 26th of January 2021 from: https://www.paymentsjournal.com/identity-assurance-by-our-own-volition-and-memory-part-1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hitoshi Kokumai, 2019. Passwords Made of Unforgettable Images. Payments Journal 30th September. Retrieved the 26th of January 2021 from: https://www.paymentsjournal.com/passwords-made-of-unforgettable-images/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Hitoshi Kokumai, 2021. Detection of Phishing by Episodic Image Memory. Hitoshi Kokumai LinkedIn profileGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Wan Ying Lee. Chee-Seng Tan and Poh Chua Siah. 2017. The Role of Online Privacy Concern as a Mediator between Internet Self-Efficacy and Online Technical Protection Privacy Behavior”, Sains Humanika Vol.9 no.3-2 37-43. Retrieved the 26th of April 2021 from: https://sainshumanika.utm.my/index.php/sainshumanika/article/viewFile/1271/724Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Premier Ministre. 2012. Note technique Recommandations de sécurité relatives aux mots de passe [Technical note]. ANSSI. Retrieved the 26th of April 2021: https://www.ssi.gouv.fr/uploads/IMG/pdf/NP_MDP_NoteTech.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Argyri Pattakou, Aikaterini-Georgia Mavrodei, Vasiliki Diamantopoulou . 2018. Towards the design of usable privacy by design methodologies. In Proceedings - 2018 5th International Workshop on Evolving Security and Privacy Requirements Engineering, ESPRE 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ESPRE.2018.00007Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Communication from the Commission to the European parliament and the Council on Promoting Data Protection by Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) Brussels, 2.5.2007 COM (2007) 228 final. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52007DC0228&from=ENGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Spanish Data Protection Agency. 2019. A Guide to Privacy by Design. Issue October 2019.Retrived the 27th of April from: https://www.aepd.es/sites/default/files/2019-12/guia-privacidad-desde-diseno_en.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Regulation (EU) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) Official Journal of the European Union, Vol.L119 (4th May 2016). Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679&from=ENGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Michèle Finck and Frank Pallas. 2019. They who must not be identified- Distinguishing Personal from Non-Personal Data under the GDPR. Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Research Paper Series No.19- 14, .2-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3462948Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. A29 WP, 2014: “Opinion 05/2014 on Anonymization Techniques.” Adopted on 10th April. WP 216. 0829/14/EN. Available online: https://cnpd.public.lu/dam-assets/fr/publications/groupe-art29/wp216_en.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Spanish Data Protection Agency. 2018. Guía práctica para las evaluaciones de Impacto en la protección de los datos sujetas al RGPD (25th May 2018). Retrieved the 27th of April 2021 from: https://www.aepd.es/sites/default/files/2019-09/guia-evaluaciones-de-impacto-rgpd.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. These risk dimensions sources have been extracted and adapted from the information management tool PILAR. PILAR is a tool for information security management. More information available at National Cryptologic Centre website: https://www.ccn-cert.cni.es/pdf/guias/series-ccn-stic/400-guias-generales/2133-ccn-stic-470-h1-manual-de-la-herramienta-de-analisis-de-riesgos-pilar-6-2/file.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Judge Mohamed Chawki and Dr. Mohamed S. Abdel Wahab. 2006. Identity theft in cyberspace: Issues and solutions. Lex Electronica, vo.11 no.1.Retrived the 27th of April 2021 from: https://papyrus.bib.umontreal.ca/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1866/9563/articles_54.pdf?sequence=1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Ignacio Alamillo, Cristina Timón and Julián Valero 2020. D3.2- “Security and Privacy-aware OLYMPUS Framework Impact Assessment”. Horizon 2020 Project OLYMPUS (Oblivious identitY Management for Private and User-friendly Services, 2020 [Online deliverable] Retrieved the 27th of April 2021: https://olympus-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Olympus_pu_d3_2_v1_0.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Anja Lehmann, Rafael Torres 2020. D3.3 OLYMPUS Blueprint. Horizon 2020 Project OLYMPUS (Oblivious identitY Management for Private and User-friendly Services, 2020 [Online deliverable] Retrieved the 27th of April 2021: https://olympus-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Olympus_pu_d3_3_v1_0.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Directive EU 2016/680 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties. Official Journal of the European Union, Vol.119/89 (27th April 2016). Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32016L0680&from=ENGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ARES '21: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security
    August 2021
    1447 pages
    ISBN:9781450390514
    DOI:10.1145/3465481

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 17 August 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate228of451submissions,51%
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)56
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format