Join us at the upcoming Portland Tech Jam ’19 where we’ll present our forthcoming paper that addresses Smart Cities privacy and innovation challenges with pragmatic policy-informed technology solutions: Look for the full article in the ACM Conference Proceedings (Isaac Potoczy-Jones, Erin Kenneally, John Ruffing, “Encrypted Dataset Collaboration- Intelligent Privacy for Smart Cities, SCC’19, September 2019, Portland, Oregon USA). In summary:
The past year has seen increasing scrutiny of Smart Cities efforts with regard to privacy. Privacy advocates have criticized Smart City data collection on the whole and critiqued specific city efforts that they feel have crossed a line.
Cities are struggling with a number of privacy issues, including how to address third parties’ collection of Smart City data, how cities consume personally identifying information from third-parties, and how public records laws intersect with privacy concerns.
The majority of data that cities collect are subject to disclosure under public record laws, with an attendant obligation to anonymize sensitive private information. However, as the amount and availability of data increases, the ability to cross-reference, correlate, and de-anonymize or re-sensitize datasets also increases. This leads to re-identification attacks that infringe the privacy of individuals in those datasets, and fosters mistrust in city governments and technology vendors. A fundamental challenge is that open data and privacy interact in complex and unpredictable ways. Some cities may choose to allow third parties to collect and manage that data in an effort to encourage innovation in the delivery of city services, while simultaneously wrestling with the legal and policy implications, such as privacy and public records law compliance. Unfortunately, this also may have undesirable privacy outcomes depending on a third-party’s use of that data and the city’s role in encouraging its collection.
In this paper, we will discuss concrete approaches to smart cities data privacy governance including collection and management, and specifically, an innovative pilot project supported by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Science & Technology Directorate aimed at demonstrating how privacy technology can help harmonize data sensitivity risks with intended benefits.
How should the NIST Data blueprint address privacy, innovation, Open Data? Sidewalk Labs has revealed part of their plan for smart city development in Toronto.
Expansive public spaces, roads that can change in colour and use, and buildings that act as open malls are some of the design ideas Google affiliate Sidewalk Labs shared in a public meeting Tuesday evening, as part of the consultation process for its proposed “smart city” development on Toronto’s waterfront.
We’re working to better understand the licensing of data produced by sensors installed and owned by the Alphabet/Google project designed by their Sidewalk Labs.
Sidewalk Labs will reveal their plan for smart city technology.
What are your questions about this effort? Should all the sensor data be available to on an Open and Free basis?
Which new Privacy and Security regulations will be tested here? How will Citizens participate? Will Google collect data as they do online, without total transparency?
Will you be required to wear a ‘cookie’ when you enter the region?
Is the goal of community leaders of smart city experiments run by private industry, to achieve benefits to Citizens, Businesses, Government, Education, Public Safety, and other stakeholders?
The L-shaped parcel of land on Toronto’s eastern waterfront known as Quayside isn’t much to look at. There’s a sprawling parking lot for dry-docked boats opposite aging post-industrial space, where Parliament Street becomes Queens Quay. To its south is one of the saddest stretches of the Martin Goodman trail, an otherwise pleasant running and biking route that spans the city east to west.