Trust Information-Based Privacy Architecture for Ubiquitous Health

By Pekka Ruotsalainen, B. Blobel, Antto Seppälä, Pirkko Nykänen. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2013

437 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Background Ubiquitous health is defined as a dynamic network of interconnected systems that offers health services independent of time and location to a data subject (DS). The network takes place in open and unsecure information space. It is created and managed by the DS who sets rules that regulate the way personal health information is collected and used. Compared to health care, it is impossible in ubiquitous health to assume the existence of a priori trust between the DS and service providers and to produce privacy using static security services. In ubiquitous health features, business goals and regulations systems followed often remain unknown. Furthermore, health care-specific regulations do not rule the ways health data is processed and shared. To be successful, ubiquitous health requires novel privacy architecture. Objective The goal of this study was to develop a privacy management architecture that helps the DS to create and dynamically manage the network and to maintain information privacy. The architecture should enable the DS to dynamically define service and system-specific rules that regulate the way subject data is processed. The architecture should provide to the DS reliable trust information about systems and assist in the formulation of privacy policies. Furthermore, the architecture should give feedback upon how systems follow the policies of DS and offer protection against privacy and trust threats existing in ubiquitous environments. Methods A sequential method that combines methodologies used in system theory, systems engineering, requirement analysis, and system design was used in the study. In the first phase, principles, trust and privacy models, and viewpoints were selected. Thereafter, functional requirements and services were developed on the basis of a careful analysis of existing research published in journals and conference proceedings. Based on principles, models, and requirements, architectural components and their interconnections were developed using system analysis. Results The architecture mimics the way humans use trust information in decision making, and enables the DS to design system-specific privacy policies using computational trust information that is based on systems’ measured features. The trust attributes that were developed describe the level systems for support awareness and transparency, and how they follow general and domain-specific regulations and laws. The monitoring component of the architecture offers dynamic feedback concerning how the system enforces the polices of DS. Conclusions The privacy management architecture developed in this study enables the DS to dynamically manage information privacy in ubiquitous health and to define individual policies for all systems considering their trust value and corresponding attributes. The DS can also set policies for secondary use and reuse of health information. The architecture offers protection against privacy threats existing in ubiquitous environments. Although the architecture is targeted to ubiquitous health, it can easily be modified to other ubiquitous applications.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/92983639354c9b71e2b7550270845ccf2bbbe78a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Biomedical Engineering

  1. Yi-Ru Regina Chen
  2. Valerio Persico
  3. Peter Johannes Schulz
  4. Antonio Pescapè
  5. Marc Barthelemy
  6. Giuseppe Aceto

In Information Systems

  1. Anabel Quan-Haase
  2. Meredith Ringel Morris
  3. Barry Wellman
  4. Eszter Hargittai
  5. Amandeep Dhir
  6. Yi-Ru Regina Chen
  7. Valerio Persico
  8. Puneet Kaur

In Sociology and Political Science

  1. Amandeep Dhir
  2. Eszter Hargittai
  3. Puneet Kaur
  4. Anne Marie Piper
  5. Anabel Quan-Haase
  6. Meredith Ringel Morris
  7. Barry Wellman
  8. José J. Ramasco

Citations in the corpus