Which Side Are You On? - A New Panopticon vs. Privacy

Miltiadis Kandias, Lilian Mitrou, Vasilis Stavrou, Dimitris Gritzalis

2013

Abstract

Social media and Web 2.0 have enabled internet users to contribute online content, which may be crawled and utilized for a variety of reasons, from personalized advertising to behaviour prediction/profiling. One negative case scenario is the political affiliation profiling. Our hypothesis is that this scenario is nowadays realistic, applicable to social media, and violates civil rights, privacy and freedom. To demonstrate this, we developed a horror story, i.e., a Panopticon method, in order to reveal this threat and contribute in raising the social awareness over it. The Panopticon relies on data/opinion mining techniques; hence it classifies comments, videos and playlists, collected from the popular social medium YouTube. Afterwards, it aggregates these classifications in order to decide over the users’ political affiliation. The experimental test case of the Panopticon is an extensive Greek community of YouTube users. In order to demonstrate our case, we performed an extensive graph theoretical and content analysis of the collected dataset and show how and what kind of personal data (e.g. political attitude) can be derived via data mining on publicly available YouTube data. Then, we provide the reader with an analysis of the legal means that are available today, to a citizen or a society as a whole, so as to effectively be prevented from such a threat.

References

  1. Allmer, T., 2012. Towards a Critical Theory of Surveillance in Informational Capitalism, Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang.
  2. Anderson, J., 1982. Logistic regression, In Handbook of Statistics, pp. 169-191, North-Holland, USA.
  3. Balduzzi, M., Platzer, C., Holz, T., Kirda, E., Balzarotti, D., Kruegel, C., 2010. Abusing social networks for automated user profiling, In Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection, pp. 422-441. Springer..
  4. Barabasi, A., 2005. The origin of bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics, In Nature, vol. 435, no. 7039, pp. 207-211.
  5. Benevenuto, F., Rodrigues, T., Cha, M., Almeida, V., 2009. Characterizing user behaviour in online social networks, In Proc. of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement, pp. 49-62, ACM.
  6. Beyer A., Kirchner M., Kreuzberger G., Schmeling J., 2008. Privacy im Social Web - Zum kompetenten Umgang mit pers?nlichen Daten im Web 2, Datenschutz und Datensicherung (DuD) 9/2008, pp. 597-600
  7. Brignall, T., 2002. The new panopticon: The internet viewed as a structure of social control, In Theory and Science, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 335-348.
  8. Bruns, A., 2006. Towards produsage: Futures for user-led content production, In Proc. of Cultural Attitudes towards Communication and Technology, pp. 275-284.
  9. Cas, I., 2011. Ubiquitous Computing, Privacy and Data Protection: Options and limitations to reconcile the unprecedented contradictions, In Computers, Privacy and Data Protection: An Element of Choice, pp. 139- 170, Springer.
  10. Castelluccia, C., Druschel, P., Hübner, S., Pasic, A., Preneel, B., Tschofenig, H., 2011. Privacy, Accountability and Trust-Challenges and Opportunities, Technical Report, ENISA.
  11. Cohen, J., 2000. Examined Lives: Informational Privacy and the subject as object, In Stanford Law Review, vol. 52, pp. 1373-1438.
  12. Costa, L., Rodrigues, F., Travieso, G., Boas, P., 2007. Characterization of complex networks: A survey of measurements, In Advances in Physics, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 167-242.
  13. De Choudhury, M., Counts, S., 2012. The nature of emotional expression in social media: measurement, inference and utility, In 2012 Human Computer Interaction Consortium (HCIC) Workshop.
  14. Fazekas, C., 2004. 1984 is Still Fiction: Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace and US Privacy Law, In Duke Law & Technology Review, pp. 15-25.
  15. Foucault, M., 1975. Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison, Paris: Gallimard. Alan Sheridan (Trans.), Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison: Penguin.
  16. Fuchs, C., 2011.New Media, Web 2.0 and Surveillance. In Sociology Compass 5/2 (2011), pp. 134-147
  17. Gibson, S., 2004. Open source intelligence, In The RUSI Journal, vol. 149, no. 1, pp. 16-22.
  18. Gritzalis, D., 2001. A digital seal solution for deploying trust on commercial transactions, In Information Management & Computer Security Journal, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 71-79, MCB University Press.
  19. Gutwirth, S., De Hert, P., 2008. Regulating profiling in a democratic constitutional State, In Profiling the European citizen cross-disciplinary perspectives, pp. 271- 302, Springer.
  20. Henderson, S., 2012. Expectations of Privacy in Social Media, In Mississippi College L. Rev., pp. 31 (Symposium Edition)). Available at:
  21. http://works.bepress.com/stephen_henderson/10
  22. Hildebrandt, M., 2009. Who is profiling who? Invisible visibility, In Reinventing Data Protection, pp. 239-252.
  23. Jakobsson, M., Finn, P., Johnson, N., 2008. Why and how to perform fraud experiments, In IEEE Security & Privacy, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 66-68.
  24. Jakobsson, M., Ratkiewicz, J., 2006. Designing ethical phishing experiments: a study of (ROT13) rOnl query features, In Proc. of the 15th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 513-522, ACM.
  25. Joachims, T., 1998. Text categorization with support vec tor machines: Learning with many relevant features, In Machine learning: ECML-98, pp. 137-142.
  26. Jurgenson, N., 2010. Review of Ondi Timoner's We Live in Public. Surveillance & Society 8(3), pp. 374-378. http://www.surveillance-and-society.org
  27. Kandias M., Galbogini K., Mitrou L., Gritzalis D., "Insiders trapped in the mirror reveal themselves in social media", in Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Network and System Security (NSS 2013), pp. 220- 235, Springer (LNCS 7873), Spain, June 2013.
  28. King, I., Li, J., Chan, K., 2009. A brief survey of computational approaches in social computing, In International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, pp. 1625-1632.
  29. Lambrinoudakis, C., Gritzalis, D., Tsoumas V., Karyda, M., Ikonomopoulos, S., 2003. Secure Electronic Voting: The current landscape, In Secure Electronic Voting, Gritzalis, D. (Ed.), pp. 101-122, Springer.
  30. Manning, C., Raghavan, P., Schütze, H., 2008. Introduction to Information Retrieval, Cambridge University Press.
  31. Marias, J., Dritsas, S., Theoharidou, M., Mallios, J. Gritzalis, D., 2007. SIP vulnerabilities and antispit mechanisms assessment, In Proc. of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks, pp. 597-604, IEEE Press.
  32. Marvwick, A., 2012. The Public Domain: Social Surveillance in Everyday Life. In Surveillance & Society 9 (4). 2012, pp. 378-393
  33. McCallum, A., Nigam, K., 1998. A comparison of event models for naive Bayes text classification, In Workshop on learning for text categorization, vol. 752, pp. 41-48.
  34. Mitrou, L., Gritzalis, D., Katsikas, S., Quirchmayr, G., 2003. Electronic voting: Constitutional and legal requirements, and their technical implications, In Secure Electronic Voting, pp. 43-60, Springer.
  35. Mitrou, L., 2009. The Commodification of the Individual in the Internet Era: Informational self-determination or “self-alienation”, In Proc. of the 8th International Conference of Computer Ethics Philosophical Enquiry (CEPE 7809), pp. 466-485.
  36. Mitrou, L., 2010. The impact of communications data retention on fundamental rights and democracy: The case of the EU Data Retention Directive, In Haggerty/- Samatas, pp. 127-147.
  37. Nevrla, J. 2010, Voluntary Surveillance: Privacy, Identity and the Rise of Social Panopticism in the Twenty-First Century, In Commentary - The UNH Journal of Communication Special Issue, 2009-10, pp. 5-13
  38. Pang, B., Lee, L., 2008. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis, in Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, vol. 2, nos. 1-2, pp. 1-135.
  39. Park, N., Kee, K., Valenzuela, S., 2009. Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes, In CyberPsychology & Behaviour, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 729-733.
  40. Schermer, B., 2011. The limits of privacy in automated profiling and data mining, In Computer Law and Security Review, vol. 27, pp. 45-52.
  41. Sebastiani, F., 2002. Machine learning in automated text categorization, In ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 1-47.
  42. Solove, D., 2006. A taxonomy of privacy, In University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 154, no. 3, pp. 477.
  43. Spinellis, D., Gritzalis, S., Iliadis, J., Gritzalis, D., Katsikas, S., 1999. Trusted Third Party services for deploying secure telemedical applications over the web, In Computers & Security, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 627-639.
  44. Tokunaga, R. 2011, Social networking site or social surveillance site? Understanding the use of interpersonal electronic surveillance in romantic relationships. In Computers in Human Behaviour 27, pp 705-713.
  45. Uteck, A., 2009, Ubiquitous Computing and Spatial Privacy, In Kerr I., et al (eds.), Lessons from the identity trail: Anonymity, privacy and identity in a networked society, Oxford University Press 2009, pp. 83-102.
  46. Watts, D., Strogatz, S., 1998. The small world problem, In Collective Dynamics of Small-World Networks, vol. 393, pp. 440-442.
  47. Whitaker, R., 1999. The End of Privacy: How Total Surveillance In Becoming a Reality. New Press, 1999.
  48. Ziegele, M., Quiring, O., 2011. Privacy in social network sites, In Privacy Online: Perspectives on privacy and self-disclosure in the Social Web, pp. 175-189, Springer.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Kandias M., Mitrou L., Stavrou V. and Gritzalis D. (2013). Which Side Are You On? - A New Panopticon vs. Privacy . In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Security and Cryptography - Volume 1: SECRYPT, (ICETE 2013) ISBN 978-989-8565-73-0, pages 98-110. DOI: 10.5220/0004516500980110


in Bibtex Style

@conference{secrypt13,
author={Miltiadis Kandias and Lilian Mitrou and Vasilis Stavrou and Dimitris Gritzalis},
title={Which Side Are You On? - A New Panopticon vs. Privacy},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Security and Cryptography - Volume 1: SECRYPT, (ICETE 2013)},
year={2013},
pages={98-110},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004516500980110},
isbn={978-989-8565-73-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Security and Cryptography - Volume 1: SECRYPT, (ICETE 2013)
TI - Which Side Are You On? - A New Panopticon vs. Privacy
SN - 978-989-8565-73-0
AU - Kandias M.
AU - Mitrou L.
AU - Stavrou V.
AU - Gritzalis D.
PY - 2013
SP - 98
EP - 110
DO - 10.5220/0004516500980110