Practical Assignments for Teaching Contextual Integrity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah Apthorpe
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Nick ◽  
Taylor Martin ◽  
Yasmin Eady ◽  
Justin Zhang ◽  
Albert Esterline
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Nissenbaum

Abstract According to the theory of contextual integrity (CI), privacy norms prescribe information flows with reference to five parameters — sender, recipient, subject, information type, and transmission principle. Because privacy is grasped contextually (e.g., health, education, civic life, etc.), the values of these parameters range over contextually meaningful ontologies — of information types (or topics) and actors (subjects, senders, and recipients), in contextually defined capacities. As an alternative to predominant approaches to privacy, which were ineffective against novel information practices enabled by IT, CI was able both to pinpoint sources of disruption and provide grounds for either accepting or rejecting them. Mounting challenges from a burgeoning array of networked, sensor-enabled devices (IoT) and data-ravenous machine learning systems, similar in form though magnified in scope, call for renewed attention to theory. This Article introduces the metaphor of a data (food) chain to capture the nature of these challenges. With motion up the chain, where data of higher order is inferred from lower-order data, the crucial question is whether privacy norms governing lower-order data are sufficient for the inferred higher-order data. While CI has a response to this question, a greater challenge comes from data primitives, such as digital impulses of mouse clicks, motion detectors, and bare GPS coordinates, because they appear to have no meaning. Absent a semantics, they escape CI’s privacy norms entirely.


Author(s):  
Yan Shvartzshnaider ◽  
Zvonimir Pavlinovic ◽  
Ananth Balashankar ◽  
Thomas Wies ◽  
Lakshminarayanan Subramanian ◽  
...  

Thesis Eleven ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 107 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Dawes

This essay reviews Helen Nissenbaum’s Privacy in Context (2010), focusing in particular on her dismissal of the public/private dichotomy. Taking issue with the problem she constructs of ‘privacy in public’, her unitary reading of the dichotomy and ‘socializing’ of the value of privacy, or what she calls ‘contextual integrity’, and her treatment of technology in the abstract, the essay then goes on to argue that the framework she proposes is incapable of addressing the contemporary incursion of market logic into every other aspect of social and political life in the digital economy, and therefore of protecting privacy at all. The essay concludes with an insistence on the need to approach contextual privacy problems from a political economic perspective and with a political conception of privacy, and for that to be founded upon a protean appreciation of the public/private dichotomy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 67 ◽  
pp. 101748
Author(s):  
Marijn Martens ◽  
Ralf De Wolf ◽  
Karel Vadendriessche ◽  
Tom Evens ◽  
Lieven De Marez

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 205630512094825
Author(s):  
Jessica Vitak ◽  
Michael Zimmer

The global coronavirus pandemic has raised important questions regarding how to balance public health concerns with privacy protections for individual citizens. In this essay, we evaluate contact tracing apps, which have been offered as a technological solution to minimize the spread of COVID-19. We argue that apps such as those built on Google and Apple’s “exposure notification system” should be evaluated in terms of the contextual integrity of information flows; in other words, the appropriateness of sharing health and location data will be contextually dependent on factors such as who will have access to data, as well as the transmission principles underlying data transfer. We also consider the role of prevailing social and political values in this assessment, including the large-scale social benefits that can be obtained through such information sharing. However, caution should be taken in violating contextual integrity, even in the case of a pandemic, because it risks a long-term loss of autonomy and growing function creep for surveillance and monitoring technologies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document