Applying Contextual Integrity to Open Data Publishing

Open data publishing by both corporate and public bodies has increased significantly in recent years and this type of data could soon be developing into a real commodity. However, not all organisations pay sufficient heed to privacy as part of the decision-making process around open data publication, leaving both the organisation and the users whose data they handle vulnerable to privacy breaches. We present a case study in which we applied contextual integrity in practice, working with a UK local authority using real data. This illustrated how privacy can be incorporated into the decision-making process prior to publication taking place. Our results illustrate the application of Nissenbaum’s Contextual Integrity Framework (CI) to the open data domain, and shows that CI is usable in practice.

Content

Author and article information

Contributors

Jane Henriksen-Bulmer

Shamal Faily

Conference

Publication date: July 2017

Publication date (Print): July 2017

Pages: 1-7

Affiliations

[0001]Bournemouth University

Talbot Campus, Poole, UK

Article

DOI: 10.14236/ewic/HCI2017.95

SO-VID: fd4dab29-2175-481f-92e6-813cb510de94

License:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Conference name: Electronic Visualisation and the Arts (EVA 2017)

Conference acronym: EVA

Conference number:

Conference location: London, UK

Conference date: 11 – 13 July 2017

Conference sponsor: Electronic Workshops in Computing (eWiC)

Conference theme: Electronic Visualisation and the Arts

History

Product

1477-9358 BCS Learning & Development

Self URI (article page): https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14236/ewic/HCI2017.95

Self URI (journal page): https://ewic.bcs.org/

reference

J. AttardF. OrlandiS. ScerriS. Auer 2015 A systematic review of open government data initiatives Government Information Quarterly 32 4 399 418
E. BarryF. Bannister 2014 Barriers to open data release: A view from the top Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age 19 1/2 129 152
H. BeyerK. Holtzblatt 1998 Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems San Francisco, Calif. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers c1998
J. Burton 2002 Mind the gap The New Law Journal 152 152 NLJ 1933
W. CarraraW. S. ChanS. FisherE. van Steenbergen 2015 Creating value through open data: Study on the impact of re-use of public data resources Technical report, Capgemini Consulting on behalf of the European Commission (EC): European Data Portal.
M. ChuiD. FarrellK. Jackson 2014 How government can promote open data Technical report, McKinsey & Company.
G. C. DavisonR. S. VogelS. G. Coffman 1997 Think-aloud approaches to cognitive assessment and the articulated thoughts in simulated situations paradigm Journal Of Consulting And Clinical Psychology 65 6 950 958
C. Dwork 2006 Differential Privacy, pages 1-12. Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin, Heidelberg
C. P. GeigerJ. von Lucke 2012 Open government and (linked) (open) (government) (data) eJournal of eDemocracy & Open Government 4 2 265
J. Heiser A simple method for expressing information criticality and classification [online] Gartner 2008
J. Henriksen-BulmerS. Jeary 2016 Reidentification attacks: A systematic literature review International Journal of Information Management 36 1184 1192
J. ManyikaM. ChuiD. FarrellS. Van KuikenP. GrovesE. Almasi Doshi 2013 Open data: Unlocking innovation and performance with liquid information Technical report, McKinsey & Company.
H. F. Nissenbaum 2010 Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life Stanford Law Books Stanford: California.
B. Obama 2009 Transparency and open government: Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies
P. Ohm 2010 Broken promises of privacy: responding to the surprising failure of anonymization UCLA Law Review 57 6 1701 1777
Open Data Institute 2015 Open data means business: UK innovation across sectors and regions
Open Data Institute 2016 What is open data?
Open Data Institute 2017 The value of open data
Open Government Data Working Group 2016 Open government data
Open Government Working Group 2007 Open government data principles Re: Open Government Working Group Meeting in Sebastopol CA 2007
M. Palmer 2006 Data is the new oil
P. Samarati 2001 Protecting respondents’ identities in microdata release IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 13 6 1010 1027
A. Van’t Spijker 2014 The New Oil: Using Innovative Business Models to Turn Data Into Profit Technics Publications, Basking Ridge NJ e-book edition.

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] J. AttardF. OrlandiS. ScerriS. Auer 2015 A systematic review of open government data initiatives Government Information Quarterly 32 4 399 418

[2] E. BarryF. Bannister 2014 Barriers to open data release: A view from the top Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age 19 1/2 129 152

[3] H. BeyerK. Holtzblatt 1998 Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems San Francisco, Calif. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers c1998

[4] J. Burton 2002 Mind the gap The New Law Journal 152 152 NLJ 1933

[5] W. CarraraW. S. ChanS. FisherE. van Steenbergen 2015 Creating value through open data: Study on the impact of re-use of public data resources Technical report, Capgemini Consulting on behalf of the European Commission (EC): European Data Portal.

[6] M. ChuiD. FarrellK. Jackson 2014 How government can promote open data Technical report, McKinsey & Company.

[7] G. C. DavisonR. S. VogelS. G. Coffman 1997 Think-aloud approaches to cognitive assessment and the articulated thoughts in simulated situations paradigm Journal Of Consulting And Clinical Psychology 65 6 950 958

[8] C. Dwork 2006 Differential Privacy, pages 1-12. Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin, Heidelberg

[9] C. P. GeigerJ. von Lucke 2012 Open government and (linked) (open) (government) (data) eJournal of eDemocracy & Open Government 4 2 265

[10] J. Heiser A simple method for expressing information criticality and classification [online] Gartner 2008

[11] J. Henriksen-BulmerS. Jeary 2016 Reidentification attacks: A systematic literature review International Journal of Information Management 36 1184 1192

[12] J. ManyikaM. ChuiD. FarrellS. Van KuikenP. GrovesE. Almasi Doshi 2013 Open data: Unlocking innovation and performance with liquid information Technical report, McKinsey & Company.

[13] H. F. Nissenbaum 2010 Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life Stanford Law Books Stanford: California.

[14] B. Obama 2009 Transparency and open government: Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies

[15] P. Ohm 2010 Broken promises of privacy: responding to the surprising failure of anonymization UCLA Law Review 57 6 1701 1777

[16] Open Data Institute 2015 Open data means business: UK innovation across sectors and regions

[17] Open Data Institute 2016 What is open data?

[18] Open Data Institute 2017 The value of open data

[19] Open Government Data Working Group 2016 Open government data

[20] Open Government Working Group 2007 Open government data principles Re: Open Government Working Group Meeting in Sebastopol CA 2007

[21] M. Palmer 2006 Data is the new oil

[22] P. Samarati 2001 Protecting respondents’ identities in microdata release IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 13 6 1010 1027

[23] A. Van’t Spijker 2014 The New Oil: Using Innovative Business Models to Turn Data Into Profit Technics Publications, Basking Ridge NJ e-book edition.

Celebrating 65 years of The Computer Journal - free-to-read perspectives - bcs.org/tcj65