Data shuffling - A new masking approach for numerical data

Management Science

Volumn 52, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 658-670

  Muralidhar, Krishnamurty ^a   Sarathy, Rathindra ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Camouflage; Confidentiality; Data masking; Data swapping; Obfuscation; Perturbation; Privacy

Indexed keywords

DATA MASKING; DATA SWAPPING; OBFUSCATION;

CAMOUFLAGE; DATA ACQUISITION; PERTURBATION TECHNIQUES; RISK ASSESSMENT;

SECURITY OF DATA;

EID: 33646367179     PISSN: 00251909     EISSN: 15265501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0503     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Adam, N. R., J. C. Wortmann. 1989. Security-control methods for statistical databases: A comparative study. ACM Comput. Surveys 21 515-556.
2. Burridge, J. 2003. Information preserving statistical obfuscation. Statist. Comput. 13 321-327.
3. Carlson, M., M. Salabasis. 2002. A data swapping technique for generating synthetic samples: A method for disclosure control. Res. Official Statist. 6 35-64.
4. Clemen, R. T., T. Reilly. 1999. Correlations and copulas for decision and risk analysis. Management Sci. 45 208-224.
5. Dalenius, T. 1977. Towards a methodology for statistical disclosure control. Statistisktidskrift 5 429-444.
6. Dalenius, T., S. P. Reiss. 1982. Data-swapping: A technique for disclosure control. J. Statist. Planning Inference 6 73-85.
7. Dandekar, R. A., M. Cohen, N. Kirkendall. 2002. Sensitive microdata protection using Latin hypercube sampling technique. J. Domingo-Ferrer, ed. Inference Control in Statistical Databases. Springer-Verlag, New York.
8. Duncan, G. T., D. Lambert. 1986. Disclosure-limited data dissemination. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 81 10-18.
9. Duncan, G. T., R. W. Pearson. 1991. Enhancing access to microdata while protecting confidentiality: Prospects for the future. Statist. Sci. 6 219-239.
10. Duncan, G. T., S. A. Keller-McNulty, S. L. Stokes. 2001. Disclosure risk vs. data utility: The R-U confidentiality map. Technical report LA-UR-01-6428, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM.
11. Fienberg, S. E. 2002. Comment on paper by Carlson and Salabasis: "A data swapping technique for generating synthetic samples: A method for disclosure control." Res. Official Statist. 6 65-67.
12. Fienberg, S. E., J. McIntyre. 2005. Data swapping: Variations on a theme by Dalenius and Reiss. J. Official Statist. 21 309-323.
13. Fienberg, S. E., U. E. Makov, A. P. Sanil. 1997. A Bayesian approach to data disclosure: Optimal intruder behavior for continuous data. J. Official Statist. 13 75-89.
14. Fienberg, S. E., U. E. Makov, A. P. Steele. 1998a. Disclosure limitation using perturbation and related methods for categorical data. J. Official Statist. 14 485-502.
15. Fienberg, S. E., U. E. Makov, A. P. Steele. 1998b. Rejoinder. J. Official Statist. 14 509-511.
16. Fuller, W. A. 1993. Masking procedures for microdata disclosure limitation. J. Official Statist. 9 383-406.
17. Gopal, R., R. Garfinkel, P. Goes. 2002. Confidentiality via camouflage: The CVC approach to disclosure limitation when answering queries to databases. Oper. Res. 50 501-516.
18. Kooiman, P. 1998. Comment. J. Official Statist. 14 503-508.
19. Liew, C. K., U. J. Choi, C. J. Liew. 1985. A data distortion by probability distribution. ACM Trans. Database Systems 10 395-411.
20. Little, R. J. A. 1993. Statistical analysis of masked data. J. Official Statist. 9 407-126.
21. Moore, R. A. 1996. Controlled data swapping for masking public use microdata sets. Research report series no. RR96/04, U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Research Division, Washington, D.C.
22. Muralidhar, K., R. Sarathy. 2003a. A theoretical basis for perturbation methods. Statist. Comput. 13 329-335.
23. Muralidhar, K., R. Sarathy. 2003b. A rejoinder to the comments by Polettini and Stander. Statist. Comput. 13 339-342.
24. Muralidhar, K., R. Parsa, R. Sarathy. 1999. A general additive data perturbation method for database security. Management Sci. 45 1399-1415.
25. Muralidhar, K., R. Sarathy, R. Parsa. 2001. An improved security requirement for data perturbation with implications for e-commerce. Decision Sci. 32 683-698.
26. Nelsen, R. B. 1999. An Introduction to Copulas. Springer, New York.
27. Raghunathan, T. E., J. P. Reiter, D. B. Rubin, 2003, Multiple imputation for statistical disclosure limitation. J. Official Statist. 19 1-6.
28. Rciss, S. P., M. J. Post, T. Dalenius. 1982. Non-reversible privacy transformations. Proc. ACM Sympos. Principles Database Systems, Los Angeles, CA, 139-146.
29. Rubin, D. B. 1993, Discussion of statistical disclosure limitation. J. Official Statist. 9 461-468.
30. Sarathy, R., K. Muralidhar, R. Parsa. 2002. Perturbing non-normal confidential variables: The copula approach. Management Sci. 48 1613-1627.
31. Wall Street Journal. 2001. Bureau blurs data to keep names confidential. (February 14) B1-B2.
32. Willenborg, L., T. de Waal. 2001. Elements of Statistical Disclosure Control. Springer, New York.
33. Winkler, W. E. 1995a. Advanced methods for record linkage. Prof. Survey Res. Methods Section, American Statistical Association, Alexandria, VA.
34. Winkler, W. E. 1995b. Matching and record linkage. B. G. Cox, ed. Business Survey Methods. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 355-384.
35. Winkler, W. E. 1998. Producing public-user microdata that are analytically valid and confidential. Statistical research report series no. RR98/02, U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Research Division, Washington, D.C.