Re: [projectvrm] FT: Companies scramble for consumer data (personal data are so cheap... why bother to protect them)

[Luk Vervenne < >]

only the dynamic cell security.

the rest requires other ecosystem <infra+info>structure

On 13 Jun 2013, at 15:00, Toon Vanagt < "> > wrote:

Hi Luk, 

I'd http://flattr.com/ your response with > 10 cents :)

You "full circle" includes former White House cybersecurity strategy director Ely Khan, who is now the CEO of http://www.sqrrl.com/. Khan started Sqrrl with six former NSA employees and commercializes Accumulo (which the NSA submitted to the Apache Foundation last year). "The reason NSA built Accumulo and didn't go with another open source project, like HBase or Cassandra, is that they needed a platform where they could tag every single piece of data with a security label that dictates how people can access that data and who can access that data," said Khan in an interview with InformationWeek.

This 'cell-level security' is at the core of the US government Prism response to reassure citizens that "numerous safeguards that protect privacy and civil liberties" were build in.

Did any VRM geek look into Accumulo/Cell-level security and could estimate which of Luk's 10 points are covered by it? 

@Toon

2013/6/13 Luk Vervenne < " target="_blank"> >

My 2 cents for an alternative and a winwin4all scenario:

1. First of all I do not want to be part of any old school 'provider-driven' game of collecting data, whatever their good intentions or promises. With personal data ecosystems this is simply is no longer needed.

2. Personal data should be shared predominantly within ecosystem registered processes having a clear purpose and a proper data minimisation policy.

3. However I know for a fact that "my intent" (not necessary my personal data), for buying insurance is worth at least 90 euro / 120$ 

4. If I trust the ecosystems' anonymous analytics service, I might agree for my intent and/or (some) of my data to be analysed 

5. The results of this analysis are then provided as a core , trusted ecosystem service (how else can companies get the market insight to drive their business)

6. However, the data I will provide might well be temporary & partially available, since my data provisioning would be intent-driven.

7. Any ecosystem-registered service provider using the core ecosystem analytics service can now find "my intent or my "interesting profile", still without knowing my identity. (companies need business not identities.)

8. As such, the inner working of the ecosystem itself NEVER requires disclosing identities. That is an absolute prerogative of the individual.

9. Now, if, for instance, an insurer is interested in my casted intent or anonymous profile, he can propose to my pseudonym. 

10. If I agree and we get to close a deal, only then will I disclose my identity and provide ONLY those data elements needed to close the transaction. 

So ...intent and analytics is what counts - disclosing personal data should only serve closing a transaction. 

However in order to get there, one needs not only end2end trust assurance of but also the trust perception of end-users.

Given that this works out, the need for businesses to collect data becomes moot.

It's all there, anonymously, verified and provided foremost by those that have a genuine intent to deal - or by those that want to be inspired by serendipitous proposals.

Strangely http://accumulo.apache.org/, which is the core component in the NSA Prism programme, might well be fitting such scenario.

Full circle, Obama!

Now, that'll be 10 cents, thank you

Luk

On 13 Jun 2013, at 12:18, Toon Vanagt < " target="_blank"> > wrote:

I stumbled on this FT article with 'volume pricing' for personal data and a convenient estimation tool: 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f0b6edc0-d342-11e2-b3ff-00144feab7de.html#axzz2W5QWgUuR

Basically, if you're a millionaire, your personal data is worth about $ 0.123 (if you're not, you start at: $ 0.007).

The FT has build an interactive data value estimation tool. For example by adding ADHD to my profile I gained a stunning $ 0.200. Consider it extra money for 'salting data set' :)

3 Quick thoughts:

• "The Financial Times will not collect, store or share the data users input into the calculator." Despite this disclaimer I wonder what the FT really does with the harvested data on its web servers or considered the risk of 'leaking logs'? At the end of their 'game', I'm invited to share my private 'data worth' on Twitter, which exposes how much Marketers would pay approximately for your data: and conveniently allows third parties to identify me... When linked with their identifiable FT subscriber profile, there's no need for a tweet to link the results to a person. 
• Check https://twitter.com/search?q=%23FTdataworth&src="typd <- public search result. Great for marketeers. Also has the potential to reverse engineer profiles.. 
• Prices in the article & calculator seem very low and suggest that your 'personal data' are not really valuable to companies in a consumer society  That is if you're not obese, don't subscribe to a gym, don't own a plane... Due to competition the broker prices are said to trending towards 'worthless'.. Data brokers seem to suggest we should not bother to protect something of so little economic value...

Let me know if my reading between the lines is wrong.

Does anybody know about a personal data value calculator that is not based on broker volume pricing, but reveals how much companies pay for qualified leads in different industries (mortgage, insurance, cruise travel, fitness, car test drive, hotel booking,...) The outcome of such an 'intent cast valuator' would be much higher and more of an economic incentive to raise awareness of data value.

Cheers,

@Toon