Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- Article (1)
- Preprint (1)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Security (4) (remove)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (2)
- Informatik (1)
- Mathematik (1)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (1)
We show lower bounds for the signature size of incremental schemes which are secure against substitution attacks and support single block replacement. We prove that for documents of n blocks such schemes produce signatures of \Omega(n^(1/(2+c))) bits for any constant c>0. For schemes accessing only a single block resp. a constant number of blocks for each replacement this bound can be raised to \Omega(n) resp. \Omega(sqrt(n)). Additionally, we show that our technique yields a new lower bound for memory checkers.
The author will deal with the relationship between law and technology from the viewpoint of technology security standard. One of the relationships can be found in that law has been providing a security level of technology. They have been saying that law would often follow technology. Law is too slow to adapt the changing technology through the advancement of technology. Above all, information technology has an electronic rapidity and a legislation technology has a paper one. There might be a big estrangement between law and technology. However, law must provide a security standard of technology. The standard must be based on a relative security level. The relative level would premise on the ordinary, lawful and ethical use of technology. Most technology has been opened to the public without any technology impact assessment. Technology would have some defect, which the producers have overlooked. As a result, the users might often meet with the accidents caused on the defects.
Then law should provide a technology security standard to exclude the defects from the users’ viewpoint as secure as possible. The security standard must be reflected on the architecture standard of technology. The architecture standard may be a yardstick whether the creators can evade the responsibility for the accidents.
The standard would also premise on the ordinary, lawful and ethical use of technology. The ordinary use means that the users should use normally technology within the extent of the architecture standard. The ethical use means that the users should use technology being conscious of the defects in order to avoid accidents.
The relative security level may be the sum of the architecture standard and the ethical use of technology.
With the rapid growth of technology in recent years, we are surrounded by or even dependent on the use of technological devices such as smartphones as they are now an indispensable part of our life. Smartphone applications (apps) provide a wide range of utilities such as navigation, entertainment, fitness, etc. To provide such context-sensitive services to users, apps need to access users' data including sensitive ones, which in turn, can potentially lead to privacy invasions. To protect users against potential privacy invasions in such a vulnerable ecosystem, legislation such as the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) demands best privacy practices. Therefore, app developers are required to make their apps compatible with legal privacy principles enforced by law. However, this is not an easy task for app developers to comprehend purely legal principles to understand what needs to be implemented. Similarly, bridging the gap between legal principles and technical implementations to understand how legal principles need to be implemented is another barrier to develop privacy-friendly apps. To this end, this paper proposes a privacy and security design guide catalog for app developers to assist them in understanding and adopting the most relevant privacy and security principles in the context of smartphone apps. The presented catalog is aimed at mapping the identified legal principles to practical privacy and security solutions that can be implemented by developers to ensure enhanced privacy aligned with existing legislation. Through conducting a case study, it is confirmed that there is a significant gap between what developers are doing in reality and what they promise to do. This paper provides researchers and developers of privacy-related technicalities an overview of the characteristics of existing privacy requirements needed to be implemented in smartphone ecosystems, on which they can base their work.
In this paper I demonstrate the utility of a Values in Design (VID) perspective for the assessment, the design and development of e-democracy tools. In the first part, I give some background information on Values in Design and Value-Sensitive Design and their relevance in the context of e-democracy. In part 2, I analyze three different e-democracy tools from a VID-perspective. The paper ends with some conclusions concerning the merits of VID for e-democracy as well as some considerations concerning the dual tasks of philosophers in assessing and promoting value-sensitive technology design.