Privacy at Scale: Local Dierential Privacy in Practice

Local differential privacy (LDP), where users randomly perturb their inputs to provide plausible deniability of their data without the need for a trusted party, has been adopted recently by several major technology organizations, including Google, Apple and Microsoft. This tutorial aims to introduce the key technical underpinnings of these deployed systems, to survey current research that addresses related problems within the LDP model, and to identify relevant open problems and research directions for the community.

[1]  Sanjeev Khanna,et al.  Distributed Private Heavy Hitters , 2012, ICALP.

[2]  Raef Bassily,et al.  Local, Private, Efficient Protocols for Succinct Histograms , 2015, STOC.

[3]  Janardhan Kulkarni,et al.  Collecting Telemetry Data Privately , 2017, NIPS.

[4]  Ninghui Li,et al.  Locally Differentially Private Protocols for Frequency Estimation , 2017, USENIX Security Symposium.

[5]  Hongxia Jin,et al.  Private spatial data aggregation in the local setting , 2016, 2016 IEEE 32nd International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE).

[6]  Ninghui Li,et al.  Locally Differentially Private Frequent Itemset Mining , 2018, 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP).

[7]  Úlfar Erlingsson,et al.  RAPPOR: Randomized Aggregatable Privacy-Preserving Ordinal Response , 2014, CCS.

[8]  A. Chaudhuri,et al.  Randomized Response: Theory and Techniques , 1987 .

[9]  Úlfar Erlingsson,et al.  Building a RAPPOR with the Unknown: Privacy-Preserving Learning of Associations and Data Dictionaries , 2015, Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol..

[10]  Uri Stemmer,et al.  Heavy Hitters and the Structure of Local Privacy , 2017, PODS.

[11]  S L Warner,et al.  Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. , 1965, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[12]  Yin Yang,et al.  Generating Synthetic Decentralized Social Graphs with Local Differential Privacy , 2017, CCS.

[13]  Raef Bassily,et al.  Practical Locally Private Heavy Hitters , 2017, NIPS.

[14]  Divesh Srivastava,et al.  Marginal Release Under Local Differential Privacy , 2017, SIGMOD Conference.

[15]  Yin Yang,et al.  Heavy Hitter Estimation over Set-Valued Data with Local Differential Privacy , 2016, CCS.

[16]  Ninghui Li,et al.  Locally Differentially Private Heavy Hitter Identification , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing.

[17]  Martin J. Wainwright,et al.  Local privacy and statistical minimax rates , 2013, 2013 51st Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton).

[18]  Elaine Shi,et al.  Differentially Private Continual Monitoring of Heavy Hitters from Distributed Streams , 2012, Privacy Enhancing Technologies.

[19]  Nina Mishra,et al.  Privacy via pseudorandom sketches , 2006, PODS.

[20]  Alexandre V. Evfimievski,et al.  Limiting privacy breaches in privacy preserving data mining , 2003, PODS.

[21]  H. Storkel.  Learning New Words , 2001 .

[22]  Ninghui Li,et al.  On sampling, anonymization, and differential privacy or, k-anonymization meets differential privacy , 2011, ASIACCS '12.

[23]  Li Zhang,et al.  Learning Differentially Private Language Models Without Losing Accuracy , 2017, ArXiv.

[24]  Yin Yang,et al.  Collecting and Analyzing Data from Smart Device Users with Local Differential Privacy , 2016, ArXiv.

[25]  Ashwin Machanavajjhala,et al.  Differential Privacy in the Wild: A Tutorial on Current Practices & Open Challenges , 2016, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[26]  Benjamin Livshits,et al.  BLENDER: Enabling Local Search with a Hybrid Differential Privacy Model , 2017, USENIX Security Symposium.