Cross-disciplinary lessons for the future internet

There are many societal concerns that emerge as a consequence of Future Internet (FI) research and development. A survey identified six key social and economic issues deemed most relevant to European FI projects. During a SESERV-organized workshop, experts in Future Internet technology engaged with social scientists (including economists), policy experts and other stakeholders in analyzing the socio-economic barriers and challenges that affect the Future Internet, and conversely, how the Future Internet will affect society, government, and business. The workshop aimed to bridge the gap between those who study and those who build the Internet. This chapter describes the socio-economic barriers seen by the community itself related to the Future Internet and suggests their resolution, as well as investigating how relevant the EU Digital Agenda is to Future Internet technologists

Evaluating the Contextual Integrity of Privacy Regulation: Parents' IoT Toy Privacy Norms Versus COPPA

Increased concern about data privacy has prompted new and updated data protection regulations worldwide. However, there has been no rigorous way to test whether the practices mandated by these regulations actually align with the privacy norms of affected populations. Here, we demonstrate that surveys based on the theory of contextual integrity provide a quantifiable and scalable method for measuring the conformity of specific regulatory provisions to privacy norms. We apply this method to the U.S. Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), surveying 195 parents and providing the first data that COPPA's mandates generally align with parents' privacy expectations for Internet-connected "smart" children's toys. Nevertheless, variations in the acceptability of data collection across specific smart toys, information types, parent ages, and other conditions emphasize the importance of detailed contextual factors to privacy norms, which may not be adequately captured by COPPA.Comment: 18 pages, 1 table, 4 figures, 2 appendice

Tell the Smart House to Mind its Own Business!: Maintaining Privacy and Security in the Era of Smart Devices

Consumers want convenience. That convenience often comes in the form of everyday smart devices that connect to the internet and assist with daily tasks. With the advancement of technology and the “Internet of Things” in recent years, convenience is at our fingertips more than ever before. Not only do consumers want convenience, they want to trust that their product is performing the task that they purchased it for and not exposing them to danger or risk. However, due to the increasing capabilities and capacities of smart devices, consumers are less likely to realize the implications of what they are agreeing to when they purchase and begin using these products. This Note will focus on the risks associated with smart devices, using smart home devices as an illustration. These devices have the ability to collect intimate details about the layout of the home and about those who live within it. The mere collection of this personal data opens consumers up to the risk of having their private information shared with unintended recipients whether the information is being sold to a third party or accessible to a hacker. Thus, to adequately protect consumers, it is imperative that they can fully consent to their data being collected, retained, and potentially distributed. This Note examines the law that is currently in place to protect consumers who use smart devices and argues that a void ultimately leaves consumers vulnerable. Current data privacy protection in the United States centers on the self-regulatory regime of “notice and choice.” This Note highlights how the self-regulatory notice-and-choice model fails to ensure sufficient protection for consumers who use smart devices and discusses the need for greater privacy protection in the era of the emerging Internet of Things. Ultimately, this Note proposes a state-level resolution and calls upon an exemplar state to experiment with privacy protection laws to determine the best way to regulate the Internet of Things

Investigating the tension between cloud-related actors and individual privacy rights

Historically, little more than lip service has been paid to the rights of individuals to act to preserve their own privacy. Personal information is frequently exploited for commercial gain, often without the person’s knowledge or permission. New legislation, such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation Act, has acknowledged the need for legislative protection. This Act places the onus on service providers to preserve the confidentiality of their users’ and customers’ personal information, on pain of punitive fines for lapses. It accords special privileges to users, such as the right to be forgotten. This regulation has global jurisdiction covering the rights of any EU resident, worldwide. Assuring this legislated privacy protection presents a serious challenge, which is exacerbated in the cloud environment. A considerable number of actors are stakeholders in cloud ecosystems. Each has their own agenda and these are not necessarily well aligned. Cloud service providers, especially those offering social media services, are interested in growing their businesses and maximising revenue. There is a strong incentive for them to capitalise on their users’ personal information and usage information. Privacy is often the first victim. Here, we examine the tensions between the various cloud actors and propose a framework that could be used to ensure that privacy is preserved and respected in cloud systems

Platforms and Protocols for the Internet of Things

Building a general architecture for the Internet of Things (IoT) is a very complex task, exacerbated by the extremely large variety of devices, link layer technologies, and services that may be involved in such a system. In this paper, we identify the main blocks of a generic IoT architecture, describing their features and requirements, and analyze the most common approaches proposed in the literature for each block. In particular, we compare three of the most important communication technologies for IoT purposes, i.e., REST, MQTT, and AMQP, and we also analyze three IoT platforms: openHAB, Sentilo, and Parse. The analysis will prove the importance of adopting an integrated approach that jointly addresses several issues and is able to flexibly accommodate the requirements of the various elements of the system. We also discuss a use case which illustrates the design challenges and the choices to make when selecting which protocols and technologies to use