A game theoretic framework for analyzing re-identification risk

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2015, Pages

  Wan, Zhiyu ^a   Vorobeychik, Yevgeniy ^a   Xia, Weiyi ^a   Clayton, Ellen Wright ^b   Kantarcioglu, Murat ^c   Ganta, Ranjit ^c   Heatherly, Raymond ^d   Malin, Bradley A ^d  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c The University of Texas at Dallas   (United States)

^d VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; GAME THEORETIC FRAMEWORK; HISTOGRAM; HUMAN; LINEAR SYSTEM; MALE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; PROBABILITY; RACE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; FACTUAL DATABASE; HEALTH INSURANCE; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; PRIVACY; RISK; SEARCH ENGINE; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES;

DATABASES, FACTUAL; HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PRIVACY; RISK; SEARCH ENGINE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84926339039     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120592     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. National Institutes of Health. Final NIH Statement on Sharing Research Data. NOT-OD-03-032. National Institutes of Health; 2003. Available from: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-03-032.html [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
2. National Science Foundation. Data Management & Sharing Frequently Asked Questions. National Science Foundation; 2010. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmpfaqs.jsp [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
3. Fiske ST, Hauser RM. Protecting human research participants in the age of big data. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014; 111(38):13675-13676. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1414626111 PMID: 25157175
4. Polonetsky J, Tene O. Privacy and big data: making ends meet. Stanford Law Review Online. 2013; 66:25.
5. US Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights. Standards for privacy and individually identifiable health information. Final rule. Federal Register. 2002; 67(157):53181.
6. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Official Journal of the European Communities L 281. 1995 Nov; 38:0031-0050. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31995L0046 [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
7. Golle P. Revisiting the Uniqueness of Simple Demographics in the US Population. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM Workshop on Privacy in Electronic Society. WPES'06. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2006. p. 77-80.
8. Koot, MR, van't Noordende, G, de Laat, C. A study on the re-identifiability of Dutch citizens. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Hot Topics in Privacy Enhancing Technologies. HotPETs 2010; 2010. p. 35-49. Available from: http://petsymposium.org/2010/hotpets.php [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
9. Sweeney L. Weaving technology and policy together to maintain confidentiality. J Law Med Ethics. 1997; 25(2-3):98-110. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.1997.tb01885.x PMID: 11066504
10. Gymrek M, McGuire AL, Golan D, Halperin E, Erlich Y. Identifying personal genomes by surname inference. Science. 2013 Jan; 339(6117):321-324. doi: 10.1126/science.1229566 PMID: 23329047
11. Homer N, Szelinger S, Redman M, Duggan D, Tembe W, Muehling J, et al. Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density SNP genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genet. 2008 Aug; 4(8):e1000167. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000167 PMID: 18769715
12. de Montjoye YA, Hidalgo CA, Verleysen M, Blondel VD. Unique in the Crowd: The privacy bounds of human mobility. Sci Rep. 2013; 3:1376. doi: 10.1038/srep01376 PMID: 23524645
13. Crandall DJ, Backstrom L, Cosley D, Suri S, Huttenlocher D, Kleinberg J. Inferring social ties from geographic coincidences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Dec; 107:22436-1. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1006155107 PMID: 21148099
14. Kosinski M, Stillwell D, Graepel T. Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Apr; 110:5802-5805. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1218772110 PMID: 23479631
15. Narayanan A, Shmatikov V. Myths and fallacies of "Personally Identifiable Information". Commun ACM. 2010 Jun; 53(6):24-26. doi: 10.1145/1743546.1743558
16. Rothstein MA. Is deidentification sufficient to protect health privacy in research? Am J Bioeth. 2010 Sep; 10(9):3-11. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2010.494215 PMID: 20818545
17. Dwork, C. The promise of differential privacy: A tutorial on algorithmic techniques. In: Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on. IEEE. IEEE; 2011. p. 1-2.
18. Gellman R. The Deidentification dilemma: a legislative and contractual proposal. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media, & Entertainment Law Journal. 2010-2011; 21:33-62.
19. Ohm P. Broken promises of privacy: Responding to the surprising failure of anonymization. UCLA Law Review. 2010 Aug; 57(6):1701-1777.
20. Department of Health and Human Services U. Human subjects research protections: Enhancing protections for research subjects and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. Federal Register. 2011; 76(143):44512-44531.
21. El Emam K, Jonker E, Arbuckle L, Malin B. A systematic review of re-identification attacks on health data. PLoS One. 2011 Dec; 6(12):e28071. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028071 PMID: 22164229
22. Elliot M, Dale A. Scenarios of attack: the data intruder's perspective on statistical disclosure risk. Netherlands Official Statistics. 1999; 14(Spring):6-10.
23. Emam KE, Arbuckle L. Anonymizing health data: Case studies and methods to get you started. 2nd ed. 1005 Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol, CA 95472: O'Reilly Medi, Inc.; 2014.
24. Benitez K, Malin B. Evaluating re-identification risks with respect to the HIPAA privacy rule. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010 Mar; 17(2):169-177. doi: 10.1136/jamia.2009.000026 PMID: 20190059
25. Sweeney L. Achieving k-anonymity privacy protection using generalization and suppression. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems. 2002 Oct; 10(05):571-588. doi: 10.1142/S021848850200165X
26. Bache K, Lichman M. UCI Machine Learning Repository. University of California, Irvine, School of Information and Computer Sciences; 2013. Available from: http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
27. US Census Bureau. 2010 Census Summary File 1 Tennessee [machine-readable data files] / prepared by the US Census Bureau. US Census Bureau; 2011. Available from: http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
28. Benitez K, Loukides G, Malin B. Beyond Safe Harbor: automatic discovery of health information de-identification policy alternatives. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Symposium. IHI'10. ACM. New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2010. p. 163-172.
29. National Institutes of Health. Policy for sharing of data obtained in NIH supported or conducted genome-wide association studies. NOT-OD-07-088. National Institutes of Health; 2007. Available from: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-07-088.html [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
30. National Center for Biotechnology Information. The database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP). National Center for Biotechnology Information; 2014. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/projects/gap/cgi-bin/study.cgi?study-id=phs000360.v1.p1 [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
31. Gottesman O, Kuivaniemi H, Tromp G, Faucett WA, Li R, Manolio TA, et al. The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network: past, present, and future. Genetics in Medicine. 2013 Jun; 15(10):761-771. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.72 PMID: 23743551
32. National Institutes of Health. NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT). National Institutes of Health; 2014. Available from: http://projectreporter.nih.gov/reporter.cfm [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
33. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights U. HIPAA Breach Notification Rule. Office for Civil Rights; 2013. Available from: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/administrative/breachnotificationrule [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
34. Tambe M, Jain M, Pita JA, Jiang AX. Game theory for security: Key algorithmic principles, deployed systems, lessons learned. In: Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton), 2012 50th Annual Allerton Conference on. IEEE; 2012. p. 1822-1829.
35. Blocki J, Christin N, Datta A, Procaccia AD, Sinha A. Audit Games. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. IJCAI'13. AAAI Press; 2013. p. 41-47. Available from: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2540137 [cited 20 Oct. 2014].
36. Wang J, Xia C, Wang Y, Ding S, Sun J. Spatial prisoner's dilemma games with increasing size of the interaction neighborhood on regular lattices. Chinese Science Bulletin. 2012 Mar; 57(7):724-728. doi: 10.1007/s11434-011-4890-4
37. Zhu Cj, Sun Sw, Wang L, Ding S, Wang J, Xia Cy. Promotion of cooperation due to diversity of players in the spatial public goods game with increasing neighborhood size. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications. 2014 Jul; 406(C):145-154. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2014.03.035