Why Anonymized Data Isn't

Ars has a review of recent research, and a summary of the history, in the field of reidentification — identifying people from anonymized data. Paul Ohm's recent paper is an elaboration of what Ohm terms a central reality of data collection: "Data can either be useful or perfectly anonymous but never both." "...in 2000, [researcher Latanya Sweeney] showed that 87 percent of all Americans could be uniquely identified using only three bits of information: ZIP code, birthdate, and sex. ... For almost every person on earth, there is at least one fact about them stored in a computer database that an adversary could use to blackmail, discriminate against, harass, or steal the identity of him or her. I mean more than mere embarrassment or inconvenience; I mean legally cognizable harm. ... Reidentification science disrupts the privacy policy landscape by undermining the faith that we have placed in anonymization."

Comments

Re:The Only Truly Anonymous Data

[oodaloop]

That's pretty cowardly.

Re:Duh.

[ShieldW0lf]

There are 3 different scenarios.

One is where the facts are embarrassing because of hypocrisy. That scenario is alleviated by loss of anonymity and increased transparency.

Another is where the person is engaged in anti-social behavior because they are in a reactionary state and need assistance because they are going off the rails in isolation. That scenario is also alleviated by the loss of anonymity. People will get the help they need to be happy and self-reliant if society at large is aware that they need it.

The third scenario is when people are engaged in premeditated anti-social behavior because they are amoral and vicious or involved in a conspiracy against the best interests of their peers for ideological reasons. Those people belong in the ground, and we should not be protecting their obscurity.

There is no justification for anonymity, nor for secrecy. Anonymity and secrecy preserve and reinforce the hazards that they purport to protect people from. They need to be abolished in a systematic fashion that doesn't expose early adopters to the dangers of hypocrisy, but tears the veils away for everyone all at once.