ArticlePDF Available

Privacy and fair information practices in ubiquitous environments: Research challenges and future directions



Purpose – This paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse about the nature of privacy and its role in ubiquitous environments and provide insights for future research. Design/methodology/approach – The paper analyses the privacy implications of particular characteristics of ubiquitous applications and discusses the fundamental principles and information practices used in digital environments for protecting individuals' private data. Findings – A significant trend towards shifting privacy protection responsibility from government to the individuals is identified. Also, specific directions for future research are provided with a focus on interdisciplinary research. Research limitations/implications – This paper identifies key research issues and provides directions for future research. Originality/value – This study contributes by identifying major challenges that should be addressed, so that a set of “fair information principles” can be applied in the context of ubiquitous environments. It also discusses the limitations of these principles and provides recommendations for future research.
Privacy and Fair Information Practices in Ubiquitous
Environments: Research Challenges and Future
Maria Karyda
, Stefanos Gritzalis
, Jong Hyuk Park
, and Spyros Kokolakis
Dept. of Information & Communication Systems Engineering, University of the Aegean,
{mka, sgritz, sak}
School of Computer Engineering, Kyungnam University, Masan-si, Kyungnam-do, Korea
Purpose This paper aims to contribute to the on-going discourse about the nature of
privacy and its role in ubiquitous environments and provide insights for future
Design/methodology/approach - It analyses the privacy implications of particular
characteristics of ubiquitous applications and discusses the fundamental principles
and information practices used in digital environments for protecting individuals'
private data.
Findings A significant trend towards shifting privacy protection responsibility from
government to the individuals is identified. Also, specific directions for future
research are provided with a focus on interdisciplinary research.
Research limitations/implications This paper identifies key research issues and
provides directions for future research.
Originality/Value of paper This study contributes by identifying major challenges
that should be addressed, so that a set of 'fair information principles' can be applied in
the context of ubiquitous environments. It, also, discusses the limitations of these
principles and provides recommendations for future research.
Keywords Ubiquitous Computing, Ambient Intelligence, Privacy Protection, Fair
Information Practice Principles
Paper Type Literature review
1 Introduction
Ubiquitous Computing (UC) refers to environments where most physical objects are
enhanced with digital qualities. It implies that small, often tiny-sized devices, with
computing capabilities which are wirelessly interconnected, are embedded almost
invisibly into most objects used in everyday life. These devices can be anything from
a device that only allows identification or positioning of the user to a fully featured
mobile device that is capable of intense interaction with the user. The concept of
ubiquitous computing draws on the ideas introduced by Weiser (1991) and refers to a
digital world where electronic devices are embedded into distributed networks.
Ambient intelligence (AmI) is an extension of the idea of UC describing digital
environments that are aware of and, most importantly, responsive to the presence of
people through intelligent and friendly user interfaces. AmI environments are focused
on users and their interaction with electronic devices, and their primary aim is to
respond, or even better, to foresee, users' needs and preferences. In the AmI vision
humans are empowered and their everyday life is improved through interaction with
their 'smart environment' resulting in time and cost savings, increased convenience,
safety and security, and more entertainment.
Ubiquitous or ambient intelligence environments introduce a range of new
fundamental problems related not only to technology (for instance, designing
unobtrusive devices, dynamic networks, and natural user interaction) but also to
social, ethical and legal considerations, such as privacy protection, social cohesion
and control ISTAG (2001). Violations against individuals' privacy, more specifically,
are considered unavoidable in such environments (Solove, 2004) due to the
application of invasive technologies, whereas, at the same time regulatory provisions
are constantly outpaced by technological developments. In a digitized world that is
populated of intelligent devices that communicate with each other keeping one's
seclusion is very difficult. Critics to UC and AmI even suggest that these technologies
could bring a Big Brother type of society where all human actions, even thoughts, are
recorded to become reality (Brey, 2005).
This paper aims to address the question whether or if, invasive/intrusive usage of
ubiquitous technologies can be prevented and explores how privacy protection, in
terms of commonly accepted fair information practice principles can be
accommodated in these applications. It contributes to the exploration of UC
implications for society and especially implications on individuals' fundamental
rights, such as the right to privacy. It also demonstrates the importance of a
multidisciplinary approach and the value of input from related fields. Furthermore,
this paper identifies a number of privacy challenges that should be overcome before
ubiquitous applications become reality. These challenges are based on the analysis of
research in progress and the analysis of fundamental practices for privacy protection.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows: Section two discusses the concept of
privacy and describes the basic principles and information practices for privacy
protection. Section three focuses on the particular characteristics of ubiquitous
environments and their privacy related implications and presents an overview of
privacy research in ubiquitous computing. Section four identifies major privacy
challenges in ubiquitous environments which arise in the effort to apply fair
information practices for privacy protection. Finally, section five presents our
conclusions and provides suggestions for future research.
2. Privacy
2.1 The concept of privacy
The concept of privacy can generally be defined as the individuals’ ability to control
the terms by which their personal information is collected and used. It has also
generally been defined as the right to be left alone”, meaning that it represents a
sphere where it is possible to remain separate from others, anonymous and
unobserved; thus it represents an aspect of freedom and, more specifically, freedom
from interference (Gritzalis, 2004). The need for privacy emerges from within the
society, from the various social relationships that people form with each other, with
private sector institutions and with the government. Thus, privacy is not merely a
right possessed by individuals; it is a form of freedom built into the social structure
(Solove, 2006). Privacy protection is of critical importance both at the individual and
the society level; the right to privacy protection is considered critical for a democratic
society and it is recognized as a fundamental right in all major international treaties
and agreements on human rights (Dumortier and Goemans, 2002). Different aspects
of an individual's privacy that need to be protected include a) bodily privacy; b)
territorial privacy; c) privacy of communications; d) information privacy; and e)
location privacy.
Generally, the basic approaches used to protect an individual’s privacy include the
adoption of regulatory and technical means and their combination. Privacy protection
regulations can take different forms: Within the European Union (EU), privacy is
protected according to the EU Directive 95/46/EC on personal data protection. This
Directive regulates the collection, use and transfer of personal data, the rights data
subjects can exercise and the obligations data controllers have. Compliance is
monitored by independent public supervisory authorities. The United States has a
different approach to personal privacy protection: Sector-specific laws are applied,
each regulating a specific aspect, for instance, communications privacy, financial
privacy etc. In most countries, independently of the type of the existing regulation of
privacy, personal data protection is also pursued through self regulation. The EU
Directive, for example, introduces the concept of 'codes of conduct' that should be
followed by organizations and trade associations. Other types of self regulation
include use of standards, such as privacy enhancing technologies (PETs), and privacy
seals, which are used by web sites to inform their visitors that their data will be
treated according to certain data protection principles, as certified by the trust mark
organization. Approaches to support privacy protection through the use of technical
means primarily involve the use of some type of PETs (Gritzalis, 2004).
It thus becomes evident that the concept of privacy and the subsequent need for its
protection is culture-dependent; different approaches can be traced not only to
legislation, as previously described, but also to other privacy protection schemes such
as self-regulation and privacy enhancing technologies. However, there is a number of
commonly accepted principles and practices that should be followed by entities that
need to manage personal data, while, at the same time, taking individual privacy into
account, as will be shown in the following paragraphs.
2.2 Basic principles and fair information practices for privacy protection
A set of basic principles for respecting an individual’s privacy include the elements of
a) necessity; b) finality; c) transparency; and d) proportionality. Necessity refers to
the identification of purposes and benefits for identifying, or using personal
information and also involves the considerations of possible alternatives. The
principle of finality refers to the collection and use of personal data for specific and
explicit purposes, which must be legitimate. The principle of transparency states that
individuals should be aware of these purposes, as well as of the means used for the
collection of their personal information; thus they should be notified. In some cases it
is also supported that individuals should be able to choose (principle of choice) and
give their consent (principle of consent) to the collection and use of their personal
information. Finally, proportionality refers to the accordance between the type and
the extend of personal data that is collected to the pursued objectives.
Besides the above mentioned fundamental principles, different approaches to
managing personal information in a 'fair way' are currently proposed. These
approaches are known as 'fair information practices' and define the ways and
conditions under which personal information should be collected and treated.
Following one approach, these include notice of users, choice over how their personal
information is used, right to access collected information, reasonable security of the
information and accountability of the collector’s side (Center for Democracy and
Technology, 2000). With regard to the design of privacy-aware ubiquitous systems
the following set of principles for guiding are proposed: a) notice: users should
always be aware of what data is being collected; b) choice and consent: users should
be able to choose whether their personal data is used; c) anonymity and pseudonymity
should apply when identity is not needed; d) security: different levels of protection
depending on the situation; and e) access and recourse: users should have access to
data about them (Langheinrich, 2001).
Overall, the self-regulatory paradigm of fair information practices can be
considered to include the following set of basic information practices: a) notice and
awareness; b) choice and consent; c) access and participation; d) integrity and
security; and (e) enforcement and redress (FTD, 1998). Providing notice to users of
the information practices followed by entities manipulating their personal data is
required essential, so that they can make informed choices about what personal
information they disclose. Thus, individuals should also be made aware of their rights.
Notified users should then provide their consent to their data being manipulated and
be able to choose how this information is used. Individuals should also be able to
access data that have collected about them. In this way they can ensure that data kept
about them is error free and up to date and control its quality. Access to one's personal
data should also be combined with a scheme that allows users to correct any mistakes
or provide updated information to the entity processing their data. For effective
privacy protection, an enforcement scheme should be present to ensure compliance
with fair information practices and relevant guidelines. Enforcement can take the
form of self-regulation, where data processing entities can undergo external audits or
certification procedures, or the form of legislation and regulatory schemes.
The above principles and practices have formed the basis for privacy legislation,
such as the EU Directive 95/46/EC (European Parliament, 1995). Nevertheless,
substantial doubts have been expressed as to whether the attempt to enforce fair
information principles through legislation has actually benefited privacy. Bonner and
Chiasson (2005) argue that the fair information principles that underlie such
legislation paradoxically lead towards reducing privacy, rather than protecting it. This
paradox is mainly attributed to these principles reflecting a procedural approach to
maximizing individual control over data thus placing the burden of protection to the
individual rather than society and its institutions (Cate, 2006).
3. Privacy Related Characteristics of Ubiquitous Environments
3.1 Characteristics with privacy implications
A ubiquitous computing environment is typically envisioned as a space populated
with a large number of invisible, collaborating computers, sensors and actuators
interacting with user-held and/or user-worn devices. Ubiquitous environments
comprise of hardware and software elements, as well as social elements since it is
humans who receive services and interact with each other. Up to now and by far, the
vision of ubiquitous computing is mainly hardware-driven (Eymann and Morito,
2004). Research in software has also been active in the field, with research in smart
agents and web services to prevail. The least researched into aspect of ubiquitous
environments is the social one. The role of human principals in ubiquitous
environments is primarily goal definition, preferences setting and strategies definition.
Ubiquitous applications and AmI environments in particular share some basic
characteristics, including context awareness, user interaction, wireless
communication, massive collection and storage of information and intelligent user
interfaces. In (Langheinrich, 2001) reference is made to the following characteristics
as related to privacy: a) ubiquity: the omnipresence of devices with computing
capabilities; b) invisibility: the technological trend of constructing smaller computing
devices with more functions which are embedded into everyday objects ("the
disappearing computer"); c) sensing: ubiquitous applications make sense of the
environment using sensors and similar context-aware devices; d) memory
amplification: continuous recording of personal data combined with declining costs of
storage make it possible to create 'life-logs' for individuals, containing a complete
record of their past. Brey (2005) adds two more characteristics with privacy related
implications: a) profiling: smart objects can create unique profiles of users they
interact with; and b) connectedness: personal information may move freely over ad
hoc networks which are formed by devices using wireless connections. Overall, our
analysis has showed that ubiquity of devices and communications, context awareness,
intelligent user interaction, dynamic nature of networks and massive information
storage have privacy related implications and that they can affect the application of
privacy preserving approach in ubiquitous and AmI environments.
Context awareness is an important attribute for ubiquitous and AmI applications.
Context is a broad concept and is used to describe the physical, geographical, digital
and social surroundings of a smart device, as well as how it is being used by the user.
Dey describes context as “[a]ny information that can be used to characterize
situation and distinguishes among several types of context, the most important of
which are location, identity, time, and activity (Crowley et al., 2002). In (Persson,
2001) the concept of context is extended so as to include also the history of all
relevant parameters. Context-awareness, in general, refers to the ability of computing
systems to identify and adapt to their environmental context and contextual aware
applications rely on the use of sensors that are seamlessly integrated in the
environment and communicate all information that is needed for the application to
determine that certain events or states have occurred (e.g. a specific person has
entered the room). This information refers to the identification of individuals that can
even extend to biometrics or vital signs of persons, to their location and usually their
preferences, whether these are given explicitly, e.g. through queries, or are inferred by
previous interactions.
Continuous interaction with the user through natural interfaces is another
characteristic of ubiquitous and AmI environments. Designing user-friendly, natural
interfaces for devices that are almost invisibly embedded in everyday objects is a
critical design challenge for their acceptance by users. In AmI environments the
technology is in the background, almost invisible to the user, and interfaces are highly
natural, responding to inputs like voice and gestures. Under this perspective, AmI
applications are user-centric; individuals communicate with their ambient intelligence
surroundings through speech, tactile movements or gestures. Interaction with the user
is accomplished through devices, some of which can be portable, such as personal
digital assistants (PDAs) and mobile phones, or they might be static devices, such as,
for example, storage devices or large servers. These devices can be further
characterised by the source of energy they require, into autonomously-empowered
devices which can empower themselves, such as certain types of tags and sensors and
devices that require external sources such as batteries (battery-empowered) or mains
(net-empowered). Energy supply is directly connected to the information-processing
capabilities of a device; it is thus a central point for designing ubiquitous
environments and their components.
Ubiquitous and AmI environments also rely on the constant interaction among the
different entities; typically wireless communication infrastructures are used so as
devices can exchange any type of information, including data, audio and video.
Furthermore, the dynamic use of services and formation of networks is another
privacy-related characteristic of ubiquitous environments. Mobile and portable
devices, such as smart tags and sensors, personal digital assistants (PDAs) and mobile
phones become parts of different networks, following a person's movements. Finally,
UC is characterized by the ability to learn from the past and to adapt services
accordingly; thus computing systems are required to remember and therefore store
personal data for a long period of time (Čas, 2005). In this way the amount of
information about individuals' everyday movements, actions, and their preferences is
rapidly exceeding, thus augmenting privacy related threats.
Besides these characteristics, it is important to note, that ubiquitous applications
can span without discretion both public spaces (such as outdoors, transportation
means, working places, shopping areas) and private spaces (homes, clothes etc.).
3.2 Privacy Preserving Trends
In this section we analyze some of the basic technologies and methods for privacy
protection proposed by research. The “Platform for Privacy Preferences Project
(P3P)” approach (W3C, 2001) specifies a privacy preserving architecture to be used
by web sites that comprises user agents, privacy reference files, and privacy policies.
Web sites that use the P3P platform announce their privacy practices to visitors and
let them decide to accept or reject interaction. Within the P3P, the World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C) provides guidelines that allow the encoding of privacy policies
into XML, allowing automated processes to read such policies and take actions on
them. P3P uses the APPEL language for capturing user privacy preferences. In
(Myles et al., 2003) a general, component-based platform that functions as a
middleware service is proposed; this framework allows users apply general policies to
control distribution of their information.
PawS (Langheinrich, 2002) is a privacy awareness system for ubiquitous
computing environments, which like P3P, provides users with tools in order to
facilitate them in protecting their personal privacy. Its basis is primarily social and
legal rather than technical. PawS uses privacy beacons that announce the privacy
policies to the user who enters an environment in which services are collecting data.
Users’ privacy proxies, which act similarly to P3P’s user agents, check the announced
policies, with regard to the user’s predefined privacy preferences. If the policies
agree, users utilize the services and their information can be collected; if the policies
are incompatible then users are notified by the system, and can choose their preferred
course of action, which can vary from accepting or not the service, to leaving the area
in which information collection is taking place.
Other approaches to privacy protection in ubiquitous environments include the use
of the idea of trust systems and certification authorities that have been applied in other
fields, such as Digital Rights Management (DRM), the concept of intermediate layers
such as privacy proxies, the introduction of a ‘digital safe’ between citizens and
public authorities as an alternative for traditional access rights, and the use of
anonymity and pseudonymity. Finally, some researchers argue that privacy
expectations vary (Jiang et al., 2002) and depend on context (Kobsa and Schreck,
2003). Therefore, privacy preserving technologies should be flexible and context-
In general, privacy research in ubiquitous computing is characterized by the belief
that it is the individuals who are responsible, and thus should manage, their privacy
and that privacy can be evaluated and exchanged, e.g. for the benefit of receiving
customized, and thus higher-value services. For this reason, it is largely based on
managing user's privacy preferences, i.e. users decide what information is disclosed to
which entity; as, for example, in (Sadeh et al., 2006). However, this approach is better
suited for static environments or environments where components and their
interaction is known in advance; in ubiquitous applications that rely on dynamic,
distributed networks and pervasive devices managing user's preferences can be
Moreover, despite the effort to provide individuals with tools that facilitate them in
protecting their privacy, it is doubtful whether common people will ever be able to
exercise their privacy-related rights effectively. UC technology is too complex for
people without technical training to understand and they are almost always in a weak
position when negotiating with corporations and organizations that operate ubiquitous
Finally, there is a stream of privacy research in ubiquitous environments that
adopts the opinion that user perceptions of risk and benefit can determine their
willingness to adopt technology. Multiple research endeavors explore the hypothesis
that people are more likely to accept potentially invasive technology if they think its
benefits will outweigh its potential risks (Hann et al., 2002; Zugenmaier, 2002).
4 Privacy Challenges in Ubiquitous Environments
Ubiquitous computing is populated both by privacy enhancing technologies and.
Privacy enhancing technologies, mainly based on encryption and anonymization
techniques, allow prevention or reduction of identification. Sensors and RFID
technology are prominent examples of privacy threatening technologies; for instance
RFID tags embedded in badges, clothing or other objects can provide information on
a person’s movements and whereabouts. Ubiquitous sensor networks, combined with
robust data mining techniques and the decreasing cost of information storage amplify
the tracking and profiling capabilities of personal information collectors, thus
augmenting privacy intrusion capabilities. As smart devices increasingly pervade
public as well as private places, it is expected that individuals will implicitly create
continuous streams of personal related information regarding their actions,
preferences and locations.
Currently, major threats to privacy originate from personal data aggregation and
the increasing strength and capacity of search engines. The amplitude of information
sources and the potential to aggregate or combine these sources so as to create a
person’s profile are threatening individual privacy. Other privacy related threats
include theft of personal data, and their manipulation for malevolent causes, such as
blackmailing etc.
Figure 1: The privacy diamond (Beckwith, 2003)
The privacy diamond, depicted in Figure 1 (Beckwith, 2003), shows the interaction
in ubiquitous environments between (smart) devices, the individual, and the
information system or service provider. For this type of interaction to be realized,
some sort of identification is needed. Data collected are mainly personal data, or they
can be easily transformed into personal data. This personal information gathered
typically includes data with regard to the identity, location and activity of a person. In
some cases, the device placed between the user and the information system or service
provider can also be used to provide anonymous or pseudonymous access. However,
it is the individuals who consciously request, or unconsciously launch, the collection
of their personal data to receive services. It should also be noted that authentication
between the device and the user is critical. However, due mainly to technical
limitations (e.g. low computing power or lack of interaction ability) ubiquitous
devices often do not support any authentication scheme.
4.1 Applying information fair practices in ubiquitous environments
A major difficulty for protecting individuals' privacy in ubiquitous computing
applications stems from the fact that regulation based on legislation has very limited
impact and, thus, limited effectiveness. Standardization efforts with regard to privacy
protection are still at an early stage and could more appropriately be characterized as
'recommendations'. The effectiveness of approaches such as privacy seals is also
difficult to be evaluated, since users, as a rule, lack the knowledge and necessary
information to evaluate the protection provided. Codes of conduct, on the other hand,
present varying levels on effectiveness, based on the quality of their content, their
application context and the quality of enforcement and compliance monitoring
schemes. Approaches such as the application of 'fair information practices' are
gaining approval and industry seems to support this type of self-regulation scheme for
privacy protection. Ubiquitous environments, however, have intrinsic characteristics,
as discussed in previous paragraphs that pose challenges to the application of these
4.1.1 Providing notice and awareness
An important issue that should be addressed with regard to users' notification stems
from the fact that ubiquitous environments comprise devices which are often invisible
to them, or devices which are embedded into everyday objects. Furthermore, the use
of natural interfaces that aim to make user interaction acceptable can make
identification of the types of information and the means used for their collection hard
to identify. For the notification of the user to be complete, issues such as the nature of
data required (i.e. required or voluntary), the consequences of declining the provision
of information as well as possible secondary uses and the security measures adopted
for protecting the confidentiality and integrity of the data should also be included in
the communication. Another important issue concerns the fact that notification
implies that uses of personal data (and subsequently entities that will share this data)
are known beforehand, that is before the collection of personal data. This requirement
is obviously hard to be met in ad hoc and dynamic networks.
In digital environments, deciding the level and type of required identification can
be designed. However, in ubiquitous environments, the main question of how much
identification is needed cannot be easily answered. The issue of whether, and which
type of (personal) information is needed for the communication is not straightforward
and depends on the situation. Generally, service providers depend on personal
information to deliver personalized and location-based services. Thus, the everyday
negotiation of privacy through interactive ubiquitous computing systems is considered
an open issue. Furthermore, power supply is a key issue for the computing abilities
and information processing of devices interacting to form an AmI environment. Since
most traditional approaches to privacy preservation are applied through the use of
cryptographic techniques the issue of limited information processing capability is an
issue that should be taken into consideration in designing privacy enhanced AmI
applications (Aarts and Roovers, 2003).
Notification techniques currently applied in Internet applications include banners,
pop-ups and so on. User interaction with ubiquitous devices does not always involve
displays but it is usually based on movements or speech, thus rendering traditional
notification means inappropriate to a large extend. It is also important to note, that all
information should be communicated to users in a clear, concise and understandable
way. Conclusively, user notification and awareness schemes in ubiquitous
environments need to make use of friendly interfaces which will allow the
bidirectional communication of information in a clear but unobtrusive way. Important
technical challenges that should be met refer to the dynamic, possibly real-time
communication of information with regard to new entities joining ad hoc networks
and the protection of personal information propagated through them.
4.1.2 Providing choice and consent
In Internet-based activities, user consent is usually obtained using either the opt-in or
the opt-out scheme. Following the first approach, users provide their explicit consent
allowing the collection and use of their personal data; in the second approach users
are expected to provide their explicit objection to the collection and use of their data.
In most cases, users express their will through a yes/no type of communication; such a
scheme could also be adopted in the interface of smart devices in ubiquitous
environments. In this way, however, users cannot express their choice with regard to
certain conditions, such as for example, that they accept the use of a subset of their
personal information for certain reasons, or that they do not consent to their use for
secondary purposes or by other entities and so on. Privacy preserving approaches in
current ubiquitous applications such as myCampus (Sadeh et al., 2006) use special
entities that handle user expressed privacy preferences. This approach can be effective
in centrally managed networks but it is not suitable for dynamic ad hoc environments.
Finally, it should be mentioned that adopting the principle of choice and consent
implies that users can make an informed choice and can freely express it. It is not
easy, however, for users to make informed choices, since that would mean that they
have full knowledge of technology, of the possible use of their personal data and its
implications, as well as that they are aware of all their privacy rights. In digital
contexts, where asymmetry of information prevails, that is seldom the case. Moreover,
even if users had access to and the capability to comprehend all related information,
their choice would not necessarily be free, since, they would possibly be declined
access to certain services. This effect is called the asymmetry of power, and is usually
experienced by users who employ some privacy enhancing technologies, for instance
cookies blockage, to find out that they cannot have access to all web sites.
Consequently, users should be able to express their privacy preferences free form
technical or other constraints (including issues such as bandwidth availability,
computing capabilities or interface design).
4.1.3 Providing access and participation
Ubiquitous applications users should also be provided with access to the information
stored about them. In this way they can control the quality of stored data, meaning
that data is accurate, complete and up-to-date. This principle poses the need to design
and apply mechanisms that provide users with the required access. Moreover, such
mechanisms should be cost effective and easy to use. Finally the application of this
principle also implies the application of data validation schemes in ubiquitous
Another challenge that should be addressed with regard to providing access to
one's data concerns the amounts of data stored and the need for effectively managing
it. With the declining information storage costs and the exponential growth of
information gathered, data mining technology provides solutions for combining and
locating information that pose further privacy related threats. Finally, issues such as
how and by whom corrective actions should be included, in case errors are found need
also to be resolved.
4.1.4 Providing integrity and security
Generally, both technical and managerial measures are used to protect against loss
and the unauthorized access, destruction, use, or disclosure of personal data. In
ubiquitous environments, as explained in previous paragraphs, technical approaches
Currently, major research efforts in privacy protection with regard to ubiquitous
environments adopt a decentralized approach, mainly by using some sort of
middleware or proxy, that require the participation of the user, who has the ultimate
responsibility to manage her privacy, by setting privacy preferences and by making
decisions, automatically supported in most cases, on whether information practices
are acceptable or not at each case.
4.1.5 Enforcement and redress
In ubiquitous environments the distinction between the private and the public sphere
is blurred; however, fair information practices and legal frameworks for data
protection have a point of reference, which means that they apply in the public or the
private sphere.
If we accept the definition that regards privacy as the individuals’ ability to control
the terms by which their personal information is collected and used, it will be natural
to draw the conclusion that privacy is closely related to the concept of control.
However, in the dynamic and volatile environment of ubiquitous applications, where
individuals often maintain no direct physical contact with the computing devices,
which may be tiny-sized, embedded and often difficult to be spotted, the span of a
user’s control over the information collected is generally very limited.
Thus, in the case of distributed ubiquitous environments depending on legislation
and regulatory schemes for privacy protection appears problematic. On the other
hand, industry self regulation approaches such as the application of fair information
practices can be a feasible solution, provided issues such as compliance mechanisms
and redress schemes are resolved. It is evident that the adoption of a fair information
practice code, such as the one referred to in this paper can only be a suggestive
approach to privacy protection rather than a prescriptive mechanism, since it cannot
ensure compliance with core fair information practice principles. However, a
combined approach including the adoption of self regulation by industry, the
institutionalization of users' initiatives and the adaptation of the relevant legal and
regulatory framework can provide privacy protection mechanisms at multiple levels.
4.2 Discussion
In the previous paragraphs we have presented the technical and social challenges of
preserving privacy in ubiquitous environments. We have discussed the application of
fair information practices and we have shown that there are both technical obstacles
(e.g. computing power limitations of small devices) and social obstacles (e.g.
asymmetry of power). In addition to that several researchers reject the fair
information practices scheme on the basis that it considers privacy as a right
possessed by individuals, rather than a form of freedom built into the social structure.
If the right to privacy is treated as akin to property, meaning that privacy is
bargainable and that it can be exchanged with other rights and privileges, then the
element of individual dignity is totally ignored. However, dignity is inherent in the
concept of privacy: dignity connotes the recognition of an individual’s personality,
respect for other people, non-interference with another’s life choices and the
possibility to act freely in society (Robota, 2004). Human dignity, as source and
expression of privacy, is not generated by the individual (it) “is instead created by
one’s community and bestowed upon the individual. It cannot therefore be bartered
away or exchanged” (Lasprogata et al., 2004).
5. Conclusions
Managing privacy in the physical everyday life is a situated social process, and in
most cases it is intuitively performed. People disclose different versions of personal
information to different parties under different conditions. In ubiquitous environments
this issue is still not resolved, neither technically nor conceptually, meaning that there
is not yet a clear and generally accepted idea of what exactly privacy protection in a
dynamic, pervasive environment means.
Currently, privacy research is dominated by a technical perspective, where the
subtleties and deeper meanings and implications ubiquitous technology can have are
not further examined. This paper has provided a critical analysis in the field of
privacy protection in ubiquitous environments, aiming to bring in the foreground
characteristics that have important privacy implications and identify major challenges
that should be met in order for such environments to accommodate basic information
practices providing privacy protection for personal data.
Ubiquitous environments have intrinsic characteristics, such as pervasiveness of
devices and communications, context awareness, intelligent user interaction, dynamic
nature of networks and massive information storage with privacy implications. These
characteristics make the adoption of widely acceptable privacy protection schemes in
digital environments, such as self-regulation, problematic. This paper has provided an
analysis of the issues that arise when core information practices for privacy protection
in traditional digital environments are applied in ubiquitous environments. It has
identified critical issues that limit the effectiveness of information practices in
ubiquitous environments and should be further investigated. The challenges discussed
in this paper span a wide range of disciplines, from microelectronics and user
interface design to legal and ethical considerations.
For this reason, one of the first conclusions of this paper refers to the need that
privacy research with regard to ubiquitous applications is informed and enriched with
insight from other related fields, for instance law and psychology. A multidisciplinary
approach is needed because researchers should be informed about the different facets
of privacy so as to make informed choices when exploring, designing or evaluating
privacy protection schemes to be applied in the context of ubiquitous environments. It
is also important to note that although these challenges have been divided for the
purposes of discussion, they are interconnected and overlaps can be found among
The second conclusion of this paper concerns the contradiction between the
characteristics of ubiquitous environments, and efforts to apply fair information
practices for privacy protection. We have identified a list of issues that should be
resolved for accommodating core privacy principles in ubiquitous applications; these
include: (a) the need to provide users with all necessary information so that they can
make free and informed choices prior to giving their consent for the collection and
use of their personal data; (b) the question of deciding how much authentication is
needed in each case; (c) the issues of the asymmetry of power and data ownership; (d)
the application of controls of data quality; (e) the problems of managing the privacy
of data in dynamic, ad hoc networks; and (f) the difficulties of applying enforcement
and compliance schemes. These are some of the issues that prohibit, currently, the
application of fair information practices in ubiquitous applications. It is evident, that
solving them will not resolve the issue of privacy protection as a whole, but it is
reasonable to believe that ubiquitous applications designers will be able to face
privacy threats easier and that it will be easier to build users' trust to ubiquitous
This paper has also shown how ubiquitous applications' characteristics and
different privacy aspects are interwoven; this interaction brings us to the conclusion
that privacy protection in ubiquitous environments is a multi-faceted, hard-to-address
problem that requires a multidisciplinary approach.
Finally, the last conclusion of this paper is that we are witnessing a significant
change: up to now, it was the role of the government to provide the framework for
privacy protection, as part of their role in the development of a welfare state for their
citizens (Dumortier and Goemans, 2002); however lately there is a tendency to shift
privacy protection into the hands of the individuals and to provide them with privacy
protection mechanisms and tools. IT industry and related research have adopted the
approach that end-users need to control information disclosure.
The main implication of this approach is that the protection of individual privacy in
ubiquitous environments is envisioned that can be managed, bargained and even
traded. This, however, contradicts with the fundamental principle that privacy is one
of the basic freedoms of people and the protection of privacy is a social responsibility.
Thus, resolving the individual versus social responsibility dilemma is a key issue and
a prerequisite for technical advancement.
For Weiser's vision of ubiquitous computing to come true it is not only technology
that needs to advance computing capabilities and blend them seamlessly into the
fabric of every day life; close cooperation is needed among all stakeholders to resolve
major privacy issues arising from the characteristics of the ubiquitous environment.
Aarts, E. and Roovers, R. (2003), "IC Design Challenges for Ambient Intelligence", in
Proceedings of the Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition
(DATE’03), IEEE.
Beckwith, R. (2003), "Designing for Ubiquity: The Perception of Privacy", IEEE Pervasive
Computing, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 40-46.
Bonner, W. and Chiasson, M. (2005), "If fair information principles are the answer, what was
the question? An actor-network theory investigation of the modern constitution of privacy",
Information and Organization, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 267-293.
Brey, P. (2005), "Freedom and privacy in Ambient Intelligence", Ethics and Information
Technology, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 157-166.
Čas, J. (2005), "Privacy in Pervasive Computing Environments A Contradiction in Terms?",
IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, pp. 24-33.
Cate, F.H. (2006),"The Failure of Fair Information Practice Principles", in Winn, J.K. (Ed.)
Consumer Protection in the Age of the Information Economy, Ashgate Pub Co.
Center for Democracy and Technology (2000), "Fair Information Practices", available at: (accessed 13 August 2008).
Crowley, J.L., Coutaz, J., Rey, G. and Reignier, P. (2002), "Perceptual Components for Context
Aware Computing", in Proceedings of Ubicomp, LNCS, Springer.
Dumortier, J. and Goemans, C. (2002), "Roadmap for European Legal Research in Privacy and
Identity Management", Interdisciplinary Centre for Law and ICT (ICRI), K.U. Leuven,
December 2002; available at:
(accessed 13 August 2008).
European Parliament (1995), "Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and the Council
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, L281/31,
Eymann, T. and Morito, H. (2004), "Privacy Issues of Combining Ubiquitous Computing and
Software Agent Technology in a Life-Critical Environment", in Proceedings of the 2004
IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Press.
FTD (1998), "Privacy Online: A Report to Congress", Federal Trade Commission; available at: (accessed 13 August 2008).
Gritzalis, S. (2004), "Enhancing Web Privacy and Anonymity in the Digital Era", Information
Management and Computer Security, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 255-288.
Hann, I., Hui, K., Lee, T. and Png, I. (2002), "Online Information Privacy: Measuring the Cost-
Benefit Trade-Off", in Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Information
Systems, ACM.
ISTAG (2001), "Scenarios for Ambient Intelligence in 2010", European Commission
Community Research, IST Advisory Group, 2001; available at: (accessed 13 August 2008).
Jiang, X., Hong, J.I. and Landay, J.A. (2002), "Approximate Information Flows: Socially Based
Modeling of Privacy in Ubiquitous Computing", in Proceedings of the 4th International
Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, LNCS 2498, Springer, pp. 176-193.
Kobsa, A. and Schreck, J. (2003), "Privacy through Pseudonymity in User-Adaptive Systems",
ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 149-183.
Langheinrich, M. (2001), "Privacy by design principles of privacy-aware ubiquitous
systems", in Abowd, G., Brumitt, B., Shafer, S., (Eds), Proceedings of Ubicomp 2001,
LNCS 2201, Springer, pp. 273-291.
Langheinrich, M. (2002), "A Privacy Awareness System for Ubiquitous Computing
Environments", in Proceedings of Ubicomp, LNCS 2498, Springer, pp. 237245.
Lasprogata, G., King, N. and Pillay, S. (2004), "Regulation of Electronic Employee
Monitoring: Identifying fundamental principles of employee privacy through a comparative
study of data privacy legislation in the European Union, United States and Canada",
Stanford Technology Law Review 4.
Myles, G., Friday, A. and Davies, N. (2003) "Preserving Privacy in Environments with
Location-Based Applications", IEEE Pervasive Computing, Vol. 2 No.1, pp. 56-64.
Persson, P. (2001), "Social Ubiquitous Computing," in Proceedings of the Workshop on
Building the Ubiquitous Computing User Experience, ACM/SIGCHI, Seattle.
Rodota, S. (2004), "Privacy, freedom and dignity" Closing remarks at the 26th International
Conference on Privacy and Personal Data Protection, Wroclaw; available at: (accessed 13 August 2008).
Sadeh, N., Gandon, F,. and Kwon, O. (2006), "Ambient Intelligence: The MyCampus
Experience", in Vasilakos, T. and Pedrycz, W. (Eds) Ambient Intelligence and Pervasive
Computing, ArTech House.
Solove, D. (2004), "The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age",
NYU Press, NY.
Solove, D. (2006), "A taxonomy of privacy", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 154
No. 3, pp. 477-564.
W3C (2001), "The Platform for Privacy Preferences 1.0 (P3P1.0) Specification", World Wide
Web Consortium; available at (accessed 13 August 2008).
Weiser, M. (1991), "The computer for the Twenty-First Century", Scientific American, Vol.
165 No. 3, pp. 94-104.
Zugenmaier, A. (2002), "Anonymity for Users of Mobile Devices through Location
Addressing", Rhombos Verlag, Berlin.
... Companies could utilize the power of FIPs to shape positive perception toward their data management practices. Existing FIP studies have examined various aspects including origin [16], challenges in the implementation process [12,17,18], companies' compliance [12,[16][17][18][19][20][21], perceptions [6,22,23], and enforcement [24][25][26][27]. From a further inspection of Appendix A, which covers studies on FIPs or closely related variables, most of them focused on fixed platforms or general scenarios, while only five focused on mobile technologies. ...
... Companies could utilize the power of FIPs to shape positive perception toward their data management practices. Existing FIP studies have examined various aspects including origin [16], challenges in the implementation process [12,17,18], companies' compliance [12,[16][17][18][19][20][21], perceptions [6,22,23], and enforcement [24][25][26][27]. From a further inspection of Appendix A, which covers studies on FIPs or closely related variables, most of them focused on fixed platforms or general scenarios, while only five focused on mobile technologies. ...
... As for the studies that focused on mobile platforms, Karyda, Gritzalis, Park, and Kokolakis [17] conducted a descriptive study on the obstacles of implementing FIPs. In the case of Libaque-Saenz, Chang, Kim, Park and Rho [6] and Libaque-Sáenz, Wong, Chang, Ha, and Park [22], although these studies focused on the mobile sector, the scope was the secondary use of personal information by network operators (i.e., a situation faced by users when their data have been already collected), and not user interaction with mobile devices before their data are collected. ...
To capitalize on valuable consumer and transactional data on mobile apps, companies should employ ethical decisions and strategies that can reduce privacy concerns, because such concerns present critical challenges for corporate social responsibility. In this study, we tested the effect of intervention strategies, Fair Information Practices, and the data collection method on privacy-related decisions. The results show that both intervention strategies have a significant effect on perceived data control and perceived risks and in turn on behavioral intention. Our findings have novel theoretical and managerial implications to those who want to promote ethical business practices in the mobile apps industry.
... The price of connectedness must not be compensated by a breach of privacy. To observe the amount of surveillance online, we searched a tool named "Light day by day 2 [4][5][6] , there is a dire need to educate people regarding disadvantages of excessive information disclosure, information control, information visibility, and privacy related issues [7,8] . ...
... Other sources (for minimizing bias): i) ResearchGate 3 ; ii) Scanning references of papers; iii) dblp. 4 Target Items: i) Journal papers; ii) Workshop papers; iii) Conference papers. ...
Full-text available
Context: Recent studies have shown that despite serious concerns regarding online pri- vacy, users usually share their personal information online which may be, in turn, used by third party companies and possibly by strangers or social engineers. There is a discrepancy in what people say and what they actually do regarding their privacy; this behavior is known as “Privacy Paradox.” Excessive online information disclosure is one of the reasons of proliferating concerns regarding privacy and is also helpful for social engineers to easily gather information related to their targets. Objective: The objectives of this study are to: i) gather user privacy concerns reported in the literature and further categorize them by themes or codes; ii) design the serious game using privacy concerns identified; iii) evaluate a consequential game to educate participants regarding dangers associated with excessive online (personal) information disclosure. Method: To achieve the objectives and answer the research questions, we have adopted two research methods. Firstly, we have performed a literature review (109+ studies) to extract user privacy concerns reported in the literature. Secondly, using the privacy concerns, a serious game is designed, developed and empirically (preliminary) evaluated for participants’ awareness regarding dangers associated with excessive online information disclosure. Result: From the results of our study we can summarize that: i) privacy concerns tend to generate a positive long-run impact on users’ tendency to get educated of the dangers associated with excessive information disclosure. This awareness will spillover in controlled information sharing online. On the other hand, in the short-run, social rewards/incentives make users share their information online, dominating the effects of privacy concerns. However, these rewards have short-run impacts. Eventually, in the long-run, users understand the associated dangers. This realization spills-over into controlled online information sharing and strengthens the results of increased Privacy concerns; ii) proposed serious game which has, in its initial phases, shown positive results in its aim to make participants aware of dangers associated with excessive online disclosure.
... These FIPs provide organizations with a basic responsibility for handling and using data collection (Caine & Tierney, 2015;Greenaway & Chan, 2005;Karyda, Gritzalis, Jong Hyung, & Kokolakis, 2009). FIPs also drive the health institutions to develop effective HIP policy and practice (Parks, Chu, & Xu, 2011). ...
... These FIPs provide organizations with a basic responsibility for handling and using data collection (Caine & Tierney, 2015;Greenaway & Chan, 2005;Karyda, Gritzalis, Jong Hyung, & Kokolakis, 2009). FIPs also drive the health institutions to develop effective HIP policy and practice (Parks, Chu, & Xu, 2011). ...
Full-text available
2015 Summary Health information privacy (HIP) is an important component of general privacy, which involves the management and governance of collection and handling of health information. After the introduction of the electronic health records in Oman, HIP practice has been an area of concern in different health care institutions. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to acquire in-depth knowledge of the HIP policies and practices in different healthcare providers in Oman. The 4 research questions that guided the study addressed the current status of HIP practice, the similarities and differences among different healthcare providers' HIP practices, the major factors that affect the implementation of HIP best practice, and the major factors identified by the respondents to be more effectively addressed. Methodology: A qualitative research design was used in this study. Through semi structured interviews, I was able to extract information from key professionals in different healthcare providers in Oman. A 5-step framework analysis was used. The fair information practices guidelines served as a benchmark in analysing HIP practices. Results: The result of the study indicated that the current practice of HIP in Oman encounters many challenges. There are inconsistent privacy practices in different healthcare providers, highlighting the lack of standard privacy laws in Oman. Even though all the different healthcare providers recognize the importance of HIP, the methods and practices used by each healthcare provider may be different. There is a belief that HIP practices in Oman should be standardized in order to be generally consistent across the different healthcare providers in the country. Limitations: Because this study only used interviews as the data collection tool, which means that generalizing to a larger population may not be appropriate. Implications: The results of the study correspond to the assumptions of communication privacy management theory. The knowledge that was generated from this study contributed to the development of insights in HIP research arena and is a valuable baseline to modify, improve, and strengthen HIP policy and practice in Oman.
... Social media providers accumulate and share consumers' information. Thus, fear and susceptibility to malicious social media disruptions (with harm to their well-being), abuse or unauthorised access to their personal information may cause fear and anxiety (Karyda et al., 2009) amongst consumers. Fear negatively affects people's online buying (Ghosh, Varshney & Venugopal, 2014;Lee, Park & Kim, 2013). ...
Full-text available
Despite pervasive use of digital devices, the influence of simultaneous and combined attitudinal components on consumers’ social media adaptation behaviours remains understudied. This research aims to address this gap in the literature by examining the influence of combined attitudinal components on consumers’ continuous interaction with social media platforms. An online survey was conducted to obtain robust quantitative data on consumers’ interaction and engagement with cutting edge technology such as social media. The findings indicate that consumers’ combined cognitive (perceived opportunity, perceived social influence and perceived control) and affective (enjoyment, self-enhancement, trust and fear) attitudinal components are the antecedents to consumers’ positive and negative adaptation behaviours of social media platforms. Consumers continuously engage with cutting edge social media platforms, either in positive adaptation behaviour (exploration to maximise or exploitation to satisfice social media led benefits) or negative adaptation behaviour (explore to revert from or avoid social media platforms) influenced by combined cognitive and affective attitudinal attributes. The study enriches and advances existing literature by identifying and analysing the influence of both cognitive and affective attitudinal attributes influencing consumers’ positive and negative adaptation behaviours of cutting edge digital technology such as social media platforms. The study helps marketers and IS managers in profiling consumers and understanding consumption patterns while interacting with cutting edge social medial platforms.
... Privacy-preserving techniques Information privacy challenges may have a technical nature and also depend on political and judicial decisions [70]. In addition, the gathering of medical data raise ethical privacy questions [24] which are not discussed here due space limitation. ...
Big data analytics in healthcare present a potentially powerful means for addressing public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. A challenging issue for health data to be used, however, is the protection of privacy. Research on big data privacy, especially in relation to healthcare, is still at an early stage and there is a lack of guidelines or best practice strategies for big data privacy protection. Moreover, while academic discourse focuses on individual privacy, research evidence shows that there are cases such as mass surveillance through sensing and other IoT technologies where the privacy of groups needs also to be considered. This paper explores these challenges, focusing on health data analytics; we identify and analyse privacy threats and implications for individuals and groups and we evaluate recent privacy preserving techniques for contact tracing.
... This includes the unlawful access, errors and the alertness of sensitive or personal data [16]. The personal privacy exists pervasively around us such as the location privacy, personal record of communications, private information and physical privacy [17]. In other words, [15] stated that privacy concerns expressed the concerns of enjoyers about the revealing of their personal information. ...
... With the improvement of data sharing, more and more attention has been paid to data privacy and security. To protect individual's privacy, governments and researchers proposed many privacy principles, such as ISO/IEC 29100:2011 [6], Privacy by Design [7], General Data Protection Regulation [8], and Fair Information Practice Principles [9]. However, many researchers doubt whether these principles have benefited privacy, since some of the principles mainly maximizing individual control over the data instead of protecting the data [10]. ...
With the development of Internet of Things (IoT) technology, various types of information, such as social resources and physical resources, are deeply integrated for different comprehensive applications. Social networking, car networking, medical services, video surveillance and other forms of the IoT information service model gradually change people’s daily lives. Facing the vast amounts of IoT information data, IoT search technology is used to quickly find accurate information to meet the real-time search needs of users. However, IoT search requires using a large amount of user private information, such as personal health information, location information and social relations information, to provide personalized services. Employing private information from users will encounter security problems if an effective access control mechanism is missing during the IoT search process. An access control mechanism can effectively monitor the access activities of resources and ensure that authorized users access information resources under legitimate conditions. This survey examines the growing literature on access control for an IoT search. Problems and challenges of access control mechanisms are analyzed to facilitate the adoption of access control solutions in real-life settings. This paper aims to provide theoretical, methodological and technical guidance for IoT search access control mechanisms in large-scale dynamic heterogeneous environments. Based on a literature review, we also analyzed the future development direction of access control in the age of IoT.
Numerous researchers have examined various aspects of privacy concern and information-sharing behaviour for online social networking sites; few past researches stated that social media users' privacy concern behavior influenced by their demographic profile. This article attempts to analyse social networking users’ privacy concerns and information-sharing behaviours for urban and rural areas of India. It additionally investigates privacy concerns among users with distinctive levels of Internet addiction. It has been observed that are most of the respondents are susceptible to privacy infringement because of their online social media awareness. The examination finds that urban and rural users vary in their information-sharing practices and privacy adaption. Urbanites might be at more serious risk to privacy infringement and information sharing on account of their valuable data and their social media practices. Furthermore, social media users are dependent on the privacy alerts and settings available to them while sharing information on the various social media sites. Users with low social media awareness might be powerless against privacy infringement in the absence of such alerts from the site administrators. Potential implications of discoveries are given and advice for future research had been also discussed.
Technology use, adoption and adaptation have been discussed extensively in existing scholarly works but scant consideration is given to technology adoption, adaptation and appropriation. This chapter endeavours to address this gap in the literature by conducting a critical review of the scholarly works to examine the underlying antecedents and discrete adaptation behaviour (the entirety of technology adoption, adaptation and appropriation). The findings of this review reveal that such entirety has the following key underlying joint attitudinal cognitive (perceived opportunity, perceived relative advantage, perceived social influence, perceived control) and affective (enjoyment, self-enhancement, threat, fear and trust) components as antecedents to interaction and leading to discrete adaptation and appropriation behaviour of exploration to maximise and exploitation to satisfice technology benefits on the one hand and exploration to revert from technology to complete abandoning of technology on the other. The conceptual underpinning presented and analysed in this chapter advances the scholarship of technology adoption, adaptation and appropriation in entirety and provides useful direction for future empirical research for both academics and practitioners.
Full-text available
Privacy concerns are increasing, despite considerable government legislation and organizational resources expended in addressing them. In this paper, we explore the historical and contemporary influences on privacy legislation that redirect privacy efforts towards data, and data sharing. Particularly, we use actor-network theory (ANT) to discover and trace the development, translation and subsequent spread of the influence of international privacy principles (fair information principles, FIP) into de facto standards for addressing privacy concerns. Despite the acceptance of the “black box” of FIP, by official actants across 30 years, its enlistment has enhanced rather than prevented, the sharing of data. Our investigation offers insight into the complex interaction among various social, political and technical elements that have influenced the framing and discourse on privacy: from the early conflict among potential possibilities envisioned in emerging information and communication technologies and diverse concerns about those same potentials, to the development of FIP and how through enlistment, drifts, happenstance, convenience and expediency, its influence has been extended to shape the constitution of privacy across time and space.
Full-text available
Over the past five years, the MyCampus group at Carnegie Mellon University has been developing and experimenting with Ambient Intelligence technologies aimed at enhancing everyday life. The project has drawn on multiple areas of expertise, combining the development of an open Semantic Web infrastructure for context-aware service provisioning with an emphasis on issues of privacy and usability. In this paper, we review key motivations behind the project, discuss the MyCampus Semantic Web infrastructure and report on our experience tailoring the architecture for different environments (e.g. everyday campus life applications, office applications, museum tour guide). This includes a discussion of Semantic e-Wallets aimed at reconciling user demands for context awareness and privacy as well as a description of different context-aware applications developed and evaluated during the course of the project. We also discuss our experience using Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) functionality developed to overcome usability issues associated with capturing complex, context-sensitive user preferences. The paper concludes with a summary of lessons learned so far and of challenges still to be addressed.
Taking typical ubiquitous computing settings as a starting point, this chapter motivates the need for security. The reader will learn what makes security challenging and what the risks predominant in ubiquitous computing are. The major part of this chapter is dedicated to the description of sample solutions in order to illustrate the wealth of protection mechanisms. A background in IT security is not required as this chapter is self-contained. A brief introduction to the subject is given as well as an overview of cryptographic tools.
Specialized elements of hardware and software, connected by wires, radio waves and infrared, will be so ubiquitous that no one will notice their presence.
Modern data protection law is built on "fair information practice principles." At their inception in the 1970s and early 1980s, FIPPS were broad, aspirational, and included a blend of substantive (e.g., data quality, use limitation) and procedural (e.g., consent, access) principles. They reflected a wide consensus about the need for broad standards to facilitate both individual privacy and the promise of information flows in an increasingly technology-dependent, global society. As translated into national law in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere during the 1990s and 2000s, however, FIPPS have increasingly been reduced to narrow, legalistic principles (e.g., notice, choice, access, security, and enforcement). These principles reflect a procedural approach to maximizing individual control over data rather than individual or societal welfare. As theoretically appealing as this approach may be, it has proven unsuccessful in practice. Businesses and other data users are burdened with legal obligations while individuals endure an onslaught of notices and opportunities for often limited choice. Notices are frequently meaningless because individuals do not see them or choose to ignore them, they are written in either vague or overly technical language, or they present no meaningful opportunity for individual choice. Trying to enforce notices no one reads has led in the United States to the Federal Trade Commission's tortured legal logic that such notices create enforceable legal obligations, even if they were not read or relied upon as part of the deal. Moreover, choice is often an annoyance or even a disservice to individuals. In addition, many services cannot be offered subject to individual choice. Requiring choice may be contrary to other activities important to society, such as national security or law enforcement, or to other values, such as freedom of communication. Enforcement of notice, choice, and the other FIPPS is uneven at best. Situations likely to threaten greatest harm are often subject to the least oversight, while innocuous or technical violations of FIPPS may be prosecuted vigorously if they are the subject of a specific law or obligation and they can be used to generate popular or political pressure. In short, the control-based system of data protection, with its reliance on narrow, procedural FIPPS, is not working. The available evidence suggests that privacy is not better protected. The flurry of notices may give individuals some illusion of enhanced privacy, but the reality is far different. The result is the worst of all worlds: privacy protection is not enhanced, individuals and businesses pay the cost of bureaucratic laws, and we have become so enamored with notice and choice that we have failed to develop better alternatives. The situation only grows worse as more states and nations develop inconsistent data protection laws with which they attempt to regulate increasingly global information flows. This paper reflects a modest first step at articulating an approach to privacy laws that does not reject notice and choice, but does not seek to rely on it for all purposes. Drawing on other forms of consumer protection, in which standards of protection are not negotiable between providers and consumers, I propose that national governments stop subjecting vast flows of personal data to restraints based on individual preferences or otherwise imposing the considerable transaction costs of the current approach. Instead, the paper proposes that lawmakers reclaim the original broader concept of FIPPS by adhering to Consumer Privacy Protection Principles (CPPPS) that include substantive restrictions on data processing designed to prevent specific harms. The CPPPS framework is only a first step. It is neither complete nor perfect, but it is an effort to return to a more meaningful dialogue about the legal regulation of privacy and the value of information flows in the face of explosive growth in technological capabilities in an increasingly interconnected, global society.