Adapting Users' Privacy Preferences in Smart Environments

A smart environment is a physical space where devices are connected to provide continuous support to individuals and make their life more comfortable. For this purpose, a smart environment collects, stores, and processes a massive amount of personal data. In general, service providers collect these data according to their privacy policies. To enhance the privacy control, individuals can explicitly express their privacy preferences, stating conditions on how their data have to be used and managed. Typically, privacy checking is handled through the hard matching of users' privacy preferences against service providers' privacy policies, by denying all service requests whose privacy policies do not fully match with individual's privacy preferences. However, this hard matching might be too restrictive in a smart environment because it denies the services that partially satisfy the individual's privacy preferences. To cope with this challenge, in this paper, we propose a soft privacy matching mechanism, able to relax, in a controlled way, some conditions of users' privacy preferences such to match with service providers' privacy policies. At this aim, we exploit machine learning algorithms to build a classifier, which is able to make decisions on future service requests, by learning which privacy preference components a user is prone to relax, as well as the relaxation tolerance. We test our approach on two realistic datasets, obtaining promising results.

[1]  Sotiris B. Kotsiantis,et al.  Supervised Machine Learning: A Review of Classification Techniques , 2007, Informatica.

[2]  Ninghui Li,et al.  Purpose based access control for privacy protection in relational database systems , 2008, The VLDB Journal.

[3]  Lorrie Faith Cranor,et al.  Understanding and capturing people’s privacy policies in a mobile social networking application , 2009, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[4]  Barbara Carminati,et al.  Learning Privacy Habits of PDS Owners , 2017, 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS).

[5]  Martha Palmer,et al.  Verb Semantics and Lexical Selection , 1994, ACL.

[6]  Kristen LeFevre,et al.  Privacy wizards for social networking sites , 2010, WWW '10.

[7]  S. Niwattanakul,et al.  Using of Jaccard Coefficient for Keywords Similarity , 2022 .

[8]  Alessandro Acquisti,et al.  Follow My Recommendations: A Personalized Privacy Assistant for Mobile App Permissions , 2016, SOUPS.

[9]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Privacy and human behavior in the age of information , 2015, Science.

[10]  Siani Pearson,et al.  Taking account of privacy when designing cloud computing services , 2009, 2009 ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering Challenges of Cloud Computing.

[11]  Alfred Kobsa,et al.  Privacy preference modeling and prediction in a simulated campuswide IoT environment , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom).

[12]  Berker Agir,et al.  Adaptive information-sharing for privacy-aware mobile social networks , 2013, UbiComp.

[13]  Heather Richter Lipford,et al.  Understanding Privacy Settings in Facebook with an Audience View , 2008, UPSEC.

[14]  Daniel J. Solove Introduction: Privacy Self-Management and the Consent Dilemma , 2013 .

[15]  Shinsaku Kiyomoto,et al.  Easing the Burden of Setting Privacy Preferences: A Machine Learning Approach , 2016, ICISSP.

[16]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets , 2011, Inf. Sci..

[17]  Barbara Carminati,et al.  A Risk-Benefit Driven Architecture for Personal Data Release (Invited Paper) , 2016, 2016 IEEE 17th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration (IRI).

[18]  Karin Bernsmed,et al.  A Server-side Approach to Privacy Policy Matching , 2011, 2011 Sixth International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security.