Date post: | 17-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | lester-blankenship |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Transparency and (dis)honesty Prof. Juliet Lodge
Expert Group, Privacy Committee, Biometrics Institute
Security of e-GovernmentEuropean Parliament
19 February 2013
European Technology Assessment Group
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Transparency & the 60% rule
• Constitutional• Procedural• Practice as deception
‘It’s only a problem of labelling ‘ (UK Min)
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
eGov :Eroding Transparency?
Constitutional: ‘EU Council worse than a papal enclave’.
Duff, MEP
Procedural : … foreign ‘hysteria over EU data protection laws ‘Jan Albrecht MEP
Fundamental rights v. Profits: ‘IT giants ... trying to lobby away right to privacy’ Max Shrems
Does the cyberworld redefine meaning + interaction?
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Back to the future?
• Who benefits?Whose interests are core? EU Citizens? Global Commerce?
• Can T disentangle private – public responsibilities?• Who is honest? No longer a question of what ICTs
can we trust but WHOM can we trust? Can we see and know that face?
Recommendation: understand the importance of Quality of info, and the symbiotic reln between transparency and trust in eGov
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Where do I begin and end?
Physical v. virtual self and identity• Invisible Commodifying private spaceImplications for Vulnerable• Other people’s clips of you without your
consent• Avatars and Advergames; info fusion• Google private ownership of ‘ biometric’ data
collected for public purposes : murky PPPs
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Practice : eGov and T challenge:your body as commerce
Do you (or unknown others and chips) own you and control your data? And your virtual money and goods?
Who’s liable for mistakes and machine malfunctions? You? Chip? PPPs? Redress?
Assistive ICTs and vulnerable
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Transparency challenge
• Is there a contradiction between thedata subject as data controller(social networking) with individual responsibility, and
the data subject as commodity with no individual
right or responsibility for giving consent to the use of his personal data?
Challenge for Govt : be open about who controls PPPs
• Right to be forgotten – depends on the requirement to be known to the ‘authorities’ (usually hidden in PPPs)
• What are the implications of relying on automated (robotic) d-m in all settings, from borders to social networking to ‘know us’ for our understanding of our rights and enforceable laws?
• How Are EU DP and outsourcing laws enforceable in an outside EU?
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Lessons from biometrics: a future in Steering behaviour?
Biometrics for honest purposesRely on credibility of verification and authentication; robust
resilient systems; credibility and trust of users, vendors, ICTs and handling practices; implicit ethical codes
Biometrics for dishonest purposes rely on a breach of trust – multi purpose use
Biometrics to steer behaviour rely on agreement as to the ethical and desirable end purpose (eg honest medical therapeutic purpose) or can be misappropriated for malign intent
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Ethical transparency and trusted eGov
Selling behaviour
• Quantum surveillance in public space (security rationale) and in private and space via m- play (conven+com); vanishing interfaces
• Mining, mash-ups, blending virtual and real (eg virtual currency, like Amazon’s Feb 2013
• Multiple clouds and & data blending; convegent ICTs
• Geo-referencing and map-making
Withstanding q-surveillance
• Privacy as a right • Stronger data protection• PETs/PEDs – pseudo
technical fixes?
= online definition of reality affects real world choices : mediates power; ethicsand societal acceptability of ICT applicatns
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Egov magnifies the ‘who dunnit’ burden of proof and responsibility
Technical fixes– forensic genomics,
biometrics neuro-imaging, digi tracking
– IP, Censorship, Anonymity
Politico-legal agency• Locus of authority+dm by
machine• Responsibility /accountability• DP + Forgetting + linkage• Redefining Private sphere• Morality and Ethics – access• Mobiles and vanishing
interfaces - georeferencing• Netiquette & human dignity• Transhumanism & Roboethics
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Recommendation: Awareness of linkage by potent forensics for multi-purpose/dishonest steering
• Misappropriation of ICTs, apps and info from quantum surveillance to steer behaviour
• Mind-reading/prediction and anticipation • Self-censorship versus open society and total disclosure without your
knowledge or consent?• What is at the basis of trust relationships in ICT moderated or dominated
societies?• What are the limits of regulation? • Transparency exceptions eg security; what is critical and what is not. Protect
vulnerable and cits from abuse
RECOMMENDATION : enforce and require ICT and apps developers to have transparent ethical codes/mores regarding multipurpose use
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Recommendations : review balance of interests
• Cookies: ending denial of service if person objects to cookie tracking
• Education: Helping people see how much information they share; end of privacy
• Control: ensure people know how to control sensitive information• LAW : would a "privacy bill of rights" guarantee greater control
over personal data
Inject realism into real time real life privacy and its protection. Eg tension between personal responsibility v corporate duty v legal requirement
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
T and O for trust or deception?
• constitutional• procedural• practice as deceptionResult (dis)trust and (dis)honestyPushing d-m to machines deceives citizens. It masks a
lack of human analysis and undermines trust in IT, govt and private sector.
What and whom we trust and why. That is the biggest challenge to eGov transparency : failure risks trust in government and authority.
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Conclusion
• Trying to trust technology to act as a privacy guardian is insufficient
• Who’s in control? You or the machine? And does it own you?
• Ethical values and practice must inform info collection, handling etc and can do so only if human intervention is visible, identifiable and accountable. Secure eGov must uphold T accountability to ensure trust when society is permanently online.
Communicating control‘Citizens must be able to understand
the system so that they can identify its problems, criticise it, and
ultimately control it.’
Final report of the Convention on the Future of Europe Working Group IX on Simplification 29 Nov 2002
[CONV 424/02 WGIX 13]
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg
Juliet Lodge , Privacy Committee Biometrics Institute
Research, evidence and publications on• EU freedom, security and justice, Europol, automated
decisionmaking and data exchange, border management and security, biometrics, ethics, compliance with law & democracy
• egov, EU citizenship in e-digital spaces• EP, transparency, legitimacy , accountable egovernance in
security and internal market of EU27• f7p ICT Ethics; BEST; Fp6 (Challenge; r4eGov; ejustice) • Advisory role in RISE;HIDE (& f6p Mediated Citizenship)• EU-China programme (EU funded on multilateralism and soft
diplomacy); 17+ books; 240 published peer reviewed papers
ETAG European Parliament 19/2/13 Room 7C-050 Paul-Henri Spaak Bldg