Abstract
Data protection legislation requires personal data to be collected and processed only for lawful and legitimate purposes. Unfortunately, existing protection mechanisms are not appropriate for purpose control: they only prevent unauthorized actions from occurring and do not guarantee that the data are actually used for the intended purpose. In this paper, we present a flexible framework for purpose control, which connects the intended purpose of data to the business model of an organization and detects privacy infringements by determining whether the data have been processed only for the intended purpose.
This work has been partially funded by the EU-IST-IP-216287 TAS3 project.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Guarda, P., Zannone, N.: Towards the Development of Privacy-Aware Systems. Information and Software Technology 51(2), 337–350 (2009)
Agrawal, R., Kiernan, J., Srikant, R., Xu, Y.: Hippocratic Databases. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, pp. 143–154. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2002)
Ashley, P., Hada, S., Karjoth, G., Schunter, M.: E-P3P privacy policies and privacy authorization. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, pp. 103–109. ACM, New York (2002)
Byun, J.-W., Li, N.: Purpose based access control for privacy protection in relational database systems. VLDB J 17(4), 603–619 (2008)
Massacci, F., Mylopoulos, J., Zannone, N.: Hierarchical Hippocratic Databases with Minimal Disclosure for Virtual Organizations. VLDB J 15(4), 370–387 (2006)
Catteddu, D., Hogben, G.: Cloud Computing – Benefits, risks and recommendations for information security. European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA), Report (2009)
Daskala, B.: Being diabetic in 2011 – Identifying Emerging and Future Risks in Remote Health Monitoring and Treatment. European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA), Report (2009)
Karjoth, G., Schunter, M., Waidner, M.: Platform for Enterprise Privacy Practices: Privacy-enabled Management of Customer Data. In: Dingledine, R., Syverson, P.F. (eds.) PET 2002. LNCS, vol. 2482, pp. 69–84. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Lovis, C., Spahni, S., Cassoni, N., Geissbuhler, A.: Comprehensive management of the access to the electronic patient record: Towards trans-institutional networks. Int. J. of Medical Informatics 76(5-6), 466–470 (2007)
Lapadula, A., Pugliese, R., Tiezzi, F.: Calculus for Orchestration of Web Services. In: De Nicola, R. (ed.) ESOP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4421, pp. 33–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
OASIS, Web Services Business Process Execution Language – Version 2.0, OASIS Standard (2007), http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/OS/wsbpel-v2.0-OS.html
Object Management Group, Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) Specification (version 1.2), OMG document (2009), http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/1.2/
Rozinat, A., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Inf. Syst. 33(1), 64–95 (2008)
Enterprise Security and Privacy Authorization (XSPA) Profile of XACML v2.0 for Healthcare, Committee Draft (2008), http://xml.coverpages.org/xspa-xacml-profile-CD01-29664.pdf
Plotkin, G.: The origins of structural operational semantics. J. Log. Algebr. Program 60, 3–15 (2004)
Prandi, D., Quaglia, P., Zannone, N.: Formal analysis of BPMN via a translation into COWS. In: Wang, A.H., Tennenholtz, M. (eds.) COORDINATION 2008. LNCS, vol. 5052, pp. 249–263. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology Electronic Health Records and Meaningful Use (2010), http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt/community/healthit_hhs_gov__meaningful_use_announcement/2996
Ma, D., Tsudik, G.: A new approach to secure logging. ACM Trans. Storage 5(1), 1–21 (2009)
Schneier, B., Kelsey, J.: Secure audit logs to support computer forensics. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 2(2), 159–176 (1999)
Rostad, L., Edsberg, O.: A study of access control requirements for healthcare systems based on audit trails from access logs. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, pp. 175–186. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2006)
Fantechi, A., Gnesi, S., Lapadula, A., Mazzanti, F., Pugliese, R., Tiezzi, F.: A model checking approach for verifying COWS specifications. In: Fiadeiro, J.L., Inverardi, P. (eds.) FASE 2008. LNCS, vol. 4961, pp. 230–245. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
He, Q., Antón, A.I.: A Framework for Modeling Privacy Requirements in Role Engineering. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, pp. 137–146 (2003)
Karjoth, G., Schunter, M.: A Privacy Policy Model for Enterprises. In: Proceedings of the 15th IEEE Workshop on Computer Security Foundations, pp. 271–281. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2002)
Backes, M., Karjoth, G., Bagga, W., Schunter, M.: Efficient comparison of enterprise privacy policies. In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 375–382. ACM, New York (2004)
Hilty, M., Basin, D.A., Pretschner, A.: On Obligations. In: di Vimercati, S.d.C., Syverson, P.F., Gollmann, D. (eds.) ESORICS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3679, pp. 98–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
OASIS, eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 2.0, OASIS Standard (2005), http://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/2.0/access_control-xacml-2.0-core-spec-os.pdf
Al-Fedaghi, S.S.: Beyond purpose-based privacy access control. In: Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Australasian Database, pp. 23–32. Australian Computer Society, Inc. (2007)
Fournet, C., Guts, N., Nardelli, F.Z.: A formal implementation of value commitment. In: Gairing, M. (ed.) ESOP 2008. LNCS, vol. 4960, pp. 383–397. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Cederquist, J.G., Corin, R.J., Dekker, M.A.C., Etalle, S., den Hartog, J.I., Lenzini, G.: Audit-based compliance control. Int. J. Inf. Sec. 6(2-3), 133–151 (2007)
Agrawal, R., Bayardo, R., Faloutsos, C., Kiernan, J., Rantzau, R., Srikant, R.: Auditing Compliance with a Hippocratic Database. In: Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases. VLDB Endowment, pp. 516–527 (2004)
Feng, H.H., Kolesnikov, O.M., Fogla, P., Lee, W., Gong, W.: Anomaly detection using call stack information. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 62–75. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)
Kumar, S., Spafford, E.H.: A Pattern Matching Model for Misuse Intrusion Detection. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Computer Security Conference, pp. 11–21 (1994)
van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weijters, T., Maruster, L.: Workflow Mining: Discovering Process Models from Event Logs. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 16(9), 1128–1142 (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Petković, M., Prandi, D., Zannone, N. (2011). Purpose Control: Did You Process the Data for the Intended Purpose?. In: Jonker, W., Petković, M. (eds) Secure Data Management. SDM 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6933. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23556-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23556-6_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23555-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23556-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)