The ongoing deprecation of third-party cookies by web browser vendors has sparked the proposal of alternative methods to support more privacy-preserving personalized advertising on web browsers and applications. The Topics API is being proposed by Google to provide third-parties with "coarse-grained advertising topics that the page visitor might currently be interested in". In this paper, we analyze the re-identification risks for individual Internet users and the utility provided to advertising companies by the Topics API, i.e. learning the most popular topics and distinguishing between real and random topics. We provide theoretical results dependent only on the API parameters that can be readily applied to evaluate the privacy and utility implications of future API updates, including novel general upper-bounds that account for adversaries with access to unknown, arbitrary side information, the value of the differential privacy parameter ε, and experimental results on real-world data that validate our theoretical model.

The study of leakage measures for privacy has been a subject of intensive research and is an important aspect of understanding how privacy leaks occur in computer systems. Differential privacy has been a focal point in the privacy community for some years and yet its leakage characteristics are not completely understood. In this paper we bring together two areas of research -information theory and the g-leakage framework of quantitative information flow (QIF)- to give an operational interpretation for the epsilon parameter of local differential privacy. We find that epsilon emerges as a capacity measure in both frameworks; via (log)-lift, a popular measure in information theory; and via max-case g-leakage, which we introduce to describe the leakage of any system to Bayesian adversaries modelled using “worst-case” assumptions under the QIF framework. Our characterisation resolves an important question of interpretability of epsilon and consolidates a number of disparate results covering the literature of both information theory and Quantitative information flow.

We combine Kronecker products, and quantitative information flow, to give a novel formal analysis for the fine-grained verification of utility in complex privacy pipelines. The combination explains a surprising anomaly in the behaviour of utility of privacy-preserving pipelines - that sometimes a reduction in privacy results also in a decrease in utility. We use the standard measure of utility for Bayesian analysis, introduced by Ghosh at al. [1], to produce tractable and rigorous proofs of the fine-grained statistical behaviour leading to the anomaly. More generally, we offer the prospect of formal-analysis tools for utility that complement extant formal analyses of privacy. We demonstrate our results on a number of common privacy-preserving designs.

We study the privacy-utility trade-off in the context of metric differential privacy. Ghosh et al. introduced the idea of universal optimality to characterise the “best” mechanism for a certain query that simultaneously satisfies (a fixed) ε-differential privacy constraint whilst at the same time providing better utility compared to any other ε-differentially private mechanism for the same query. They showed that the Geometric mechanism is universally optimal for the class of counting queries. On the other hand, Brenner and Nissim showed that outside the space of counting queries, and for the Bayes risk loss function, no such universally optimal mechanisms exist. Except for the universal optimality of the Laplace mechanism, there have been no generalisations of these universally optimal results to other classes of differentially-private mechanisms. In this paper, we use metric differential privacy and quantitative information flow as the fundamental principle for studying universal optimality. Metric differential privacy is a generalisation of both standard (i.e., central) differential privacy and local differential privacy, and it is increasingly being used in various application domains, for instance in location privacy and in privacy-preserving machine learning. Similar to the approaches adopted by Ghosh et al. and Brenner and Nissim, we measure utility in terms of loss functions, and we interpret the notion of a privacy mechanism as an information-theoretic channel satisfying constraints defined by ε-differential privacy and a metric meaningful to the underlying state space. Using this framework we are able to clarify Nissim and Brenner’s negative results by (a) that in fact all privacy types contain optimal mechanisms relative to certain kinds of non-trivial loss functions, and (b) extending and generalising their negative results beyond Bayes risk specifically to a wide class of non-trivial loss functions. Our exploration suggests that universally optimal mechanisms are indeed rare within privacy types. We therefore propose weaker universal benchmarks of utility called privacy type capacities. We show that such capacities always exist and can be computed using a convex optimisation algorithm. Further, we illustrate these ideas on a selection of examples with several different underlying metrics.

We study the privacy-utility trade-off in the context of metric differential privacy. Ghosh et al. introduced the idea of universal optimality to characterise the “best” mechanism for a certain query that simultaneously satisfies (a fixed)$\mathcal{E-}$differential privacy constraint whilst at the same time providing better utility compared to any other s-differentially private mechanism for the same query. They showed that the Geometric mechanism is universally optimal for the class of counting queries. On the other hand, Brenner and Nissim showed that outside the space of counting queries, and for the Bayes risk loss function, no such universally optimal mechanisms exist. Except for universal optimality of the Laplace mechanism, there have been no generalisations of these universally optimal results to other classes of differentially-private mechanisms. In this paper we use metric differential privacy and quantitative information flow as the fundamental principle for studying universal optimality. Metric differential privacy is a generali-sation of both standard (i.e., central) differential privacy and local differential privacy, and it is increasingly being used in various application domains, for instance in location privacy and in privacy preserving machine learning. As do Ghosh et al. and Brenner and Nissim, we measure utility in terms of loss functions, and we interpret the notion of a privacy mechanism as an information-theoretic channel satisfying constraints defined by ε-differcntlal privacy and a metric meaningful to the underlying state space. Using this framework we are able to clarify Nissim and Brenner's negative results by (a) that in fact all privacy types contain optimal mechanisms relative to certain kinds of non-trivial loss functions, and (b) extending and generalising their negative results beyond Bayes risk specifically to a wide class of non-trivial loss functions. Our exploration suggests that universally optimal mechanisms are indeed rare within privacy types. We therefore propose weaker universal benchmarks of utility called privacy type ca-pacities. We show that such capacities always exist and can be computed using a convex optimisation algorithm. We illustrate these ideas on a selection of examples with several different underlying metrics.

We present a systematic refactoring of the conventional treatment of privacy analyses, basing it on mathematical concepts from the framework of Quantitative Information Flow (QIF ). The approach we suggest brings three principal advantages: it is flexible, allowing for precise quantification and comparison of privacy risks for attacks both known and novel; it can be computationally tractable for very large, longitudinal datasets; and its results are explainable both to politicians and to the general public. We apply our approach to a very large case study: the Educational Censuses of Brazil, curated by the governmental agency inep, which comprise over 90 attributes of approximately 50 million individuals released longitudinally every year since 2007. These datasets have only very recently (2018–2021) attracted legislation to regulate their privacy — while at the same time continuing to maintain the openness that had been sought in Brazilian society. inep’s reaction to that legislation was the genesis of our project with them. In our conclusions here we share the scientific, technical, and communication lessons we learned in the process.

In this paper we describe, formalize, implement, and experimentally evaluate a novel transaction re-identification attack against official foreigntrade statistics releases in Brazil. The attack’s goal is to re-identify the importers of foreign-trade transactions (by revealing the identity of the company performing that transaction), which consequently violates those importers’ fiscal secrecy (by revealing sensitive information: the value and volume of traded goods). We provide a mathematical formalization of this fiscal secrecy problem using principles from the framework of quantitative information flow (QIF), then carefully identify the main sources of imprecision in the official data releases used as auxiliary information in the attack, and model transaction re-construction as a linear optimization problem solvable through integer linear programming (ILP). We show that this problem is NP-complete, and provide a methodology to identify tractable instances. We exemplify the feasibility of our attack by performing 2,003 transaction re-identifications that in total amount to more than $137M, and affect 348 Brazilian companies. Further, since similar statistics are produced by other statistical agencies, our attack is of broader concern.

Differential Privacy protects individuals’ data when statistical queries are published from aggregated databases: applying "obfuscating" mechanisms to the query results makes the released information less specific but, unavoidably, also decreases its utility. Yet it has been shown that for discrete data (e.g. counting queries), a mandated degree of privacy and a reasonable interpretation of loss of utility, the Geometric obfuscating mechanism is optimal: it loses as little utility as possible [Ghosh et al. [1]].For continuous query results however (e.g. real numbers) the optimality result does not hold. Our contribution here is to show that optimality is regained by using the Laplace mechanism for the obfuscation.The technical apparatus involved includes the earlier discrete result [Ghosh op. cit.], recent work on abstract channels and their geometric representation as hyper-distributions [Alvim et al. [2]], and the dual interpretations of distance between distributions provided by the Kantorovich-Rubinstein Theorem.

In this paper we study the relationship between privacy and accuracy in the context of correlated datasets. We use a model of quantitative information flow to describe the the trade-off between privacy of individuals' data and and the utility of queries to that data by modelling the effectiveness of adversaries attempting to make inferences after a data release. We show that, where correlations exist in datasets, it is not possible to implement optimal noise-adding mechanisms that give the best possible accuracy or the best possible privacy in all situations. Finally we illustrate the trade-off between accuracy and privacy for local and oblivious differentially private mechanisms in terms of inference attacks on medium-scale datasets.

Quantitative Information Flow (QIF) and Differential Privacy (DP) are both concerned with the protection of sensitive information, but they are rather different approaches. In particular, QIF considers the expected probability of a successful attack, while DP (in both its standard and local versions) is a max-case measure, in the sense that it is compromised by the existence of a possible attack, regardless of its probability. Comparing systems is a fundamental task in these areas: one wishes to guarantee that replacing a system A by a system B is a safe operation, that is the privacy of B is no-worse than that of A. In QIF, a refinement order provides strong such guarantees, while in DP mechanisms are typically compared (w.r.t. privacy) based on the ε privacy parameter that they provide. In this paper we explore a variety of refinement orders, inspired by the one of QIF, providing precise guarantees for max-case leakage. We study simple structural ways of characterising them, the relation between them, efficient methods for verifying them and their lattice properties. Moreover, we apply these orders in the task of comparing DP mechanisms, raising the question of whether the order based on ε provides strong privacy guarantees. We show that, while it is often the case for mechanisms of the same "family" (geometric, randomised response, etc.), it rarely holds across different families.