Negotiating Privacy Constraints in Online Social Networks

Privacy is a major concern of Web systems. Traditional Web systems employ static privacy agreements to notify its users of how their information will be used. Recent social networks allow users to specify some privacy concerns, thus providing a partially personalized privacy setting. However, still privacy violations are taking place because of different privacy concerns, based on context, audience, or content that cannot be enumerated by a user up front. Accordingly, we propose that privacy should be handled per post and on demand among all that might be affected. To realize this, we envision a multiagent system where each user in a social network is represented by an agent. When a user engages in an activity that could jeopardize a user's privacy (e.g., publishing a picture), agents of the users negotiate on the privacy concerns that will govern the content. We employ a negotiation protocol and use it to settle differences in privacy expectations. We develop a novel agent that represents its user's preferences semantically and reason on privacy concerns effectively. Execution of our agent on privacy scenarios from the literature show that our approach can handle and resolve realistic privacy violations before they occur.

[1]  J. Reeve,et al.  Solutions to problematic polypharmacy: learning from the expertise of patients. , 2015, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[2]  Kent E. Seamons,et al.  Or Best Offer: A Privacy Policy Negotiation Protocol , 2008, 2008 IEEE Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks.

[3]  Sadaf Ashtari I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did: Social Networks and the Death of Privacy , 2013 .

[4]  Peter Langendörfer,et al.  Towards automatic negotiation of privacy contracts for Internet services , 2003, The 11th IEEE International Conference on Networks, 2003. ICON2003..

[5]  Srdjan Marinovic,et al.  Collaborative Privacy Policy Authoring in a Social Networking Context , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks.

[6]  Heng Xu,et al.  CoPE: Enabling collaborative privacy management in online social networks , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[7]  Eduardo Mena,et al.  A Semantic Context-Aware Privacy Model for FaceBlock , 2014, PrivOn@ISWC.

[8]  Alessandro Acquisti,et al.  Privacy and rationality in individual decision making , 2005, IEEE Security & Privacy.

[9]  Sean Bechhofer,et al.  The OWL API: A Java API for OWL ontologies , 2011, Semantic Web.

[10]  Yarden Katz,et al.  Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner , 2007, J. Web Semant..

[11]  N. R. Jennings,et al.  To appear in: Int Journal of Group Decision and Negotiation GDN2000 Keynote Paper Automated Negotiation: Prospects, Methods and Challenges , 2022 .

[12]  P. Cochat,et al.  Et al , 2008, Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie.

[13]  G. Hans Note, Privacy Policies, Terms of Service, and FTC Enforcement: Broadening Unfairness Regulation for a New Era , 2012 .

[14]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  There is more to context than location , 1999, Comput. Graph..

[15]  Nigel Shadbolt,et al.  Resource Description Framework (RDF) , 2009 .

[16]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Detecting and predicting privacy violations in online social networks , 2014, Distributed and Parallel Databases.

[17]  H. Lan,et al.  SWRL : A semantic Web rule language combining OWL and ruleML , 2004 .

[18]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[19]  Bernhard Debatin,et al.  Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended Consequences , 2009, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[20]  Pinar Yolum,et al.  Learning opponent’s preferences for effective negotiation: an approach based on concept learning , 2010, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[21]  Agostino Poggi,et al.  Jade - a fipa-compliant agent framework , 1999 .