2 ms·

Ok but what on earth good is identifiable data to PHAC? Why would PHAC try and de-anonymize this data? What could they possibly do with it? Canadian government

Ok but what on earth good is identifiable data to PHAC? Why would PHAC try and de-anonymize this data? What could they possibly do with it? Canadian government entities tend to be well intentioned even if not always the most efficient.

robbedpeter 5y ago
When, not if, they have a data breach, those records are trivially deanonymized by malicious third parties. They shouldn't have the data, they don't need it, and storing it long term is completely unnecessary. Collection of private data is only ever appropriate directly from an individual with informed consent, with strict and mutually agreed upon limits on how long it can be stored and the uses to which it can be put. Permanent or long-term data retention should be rare and have intense oversight. Almost everything else should be ephemeral on the level of minutes to hours. Legislation will catch up after this bites us in the ass, and the longer it takes, the worse it's going to be.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  > They shouldn't have the data, they don't need it, and storing it long term is completely unnecessary. I mean, I completely disagree. If the job of a public health agency isn't to use anonymous data to make informed decisions about public health what on earth is their job?
  - robbedpeter 5y ago
    They don't need location tracking. It's inherently not anonymous.
    - arcticbull 5y ago
      That’s a good opinion haha, but I do trust them to make the determination around what existing data set they need to be effective. That’s why we have them.
  - sneak 5y ago
    There is no way to anonymize movement data. Anyone telling you that location data is "de-identified" or "anonymized" is lying to you.
    - arcticbull 5y ago
      My point isn't that it's not possible to de-anonymize the data in general, but rather that this organization doesn't have datasets that they can correlate it with, they don't have any incentive to do so, they don't have any mandate to do so, and this data is also available to anyone willing to cut a check. My point is they are using data to make data-driven decisions and do their jobs. This is the kind of thing you want from a government. So again, I ask. If the job of a public health agency isn't to use anonymous data to make informed decisions about public health what on earth is their job?
sneak 5y ago
Other parts of the Canadian federal government would love this data as an aid in criminal investigations, up to and including fishing expeditions against innocent people. Police are not known for willingly making their own jobs harder in the name of preserving civil rights, as the police-worldview is that police are inherently trustworthy. Once they have the dataset, they can legally volunteer it to RCMP or CSIS. (CSIS may/probably already has it, but we don't have an Eduardo Snodienne yet.)
- arcticbull 5y ago
  Probably a solid Edward Snowed-in joke in there somewhere : )I do agree, although I suspect that give this dataset is available to anyone willing to cut a cheque, that RCMP and CSIS probably already have it.

robbedpeter 5y ago

When, not if, they have a data breach, those records are trivially deanonymized by malicious third parties. They shouldn't have the data, they don't need it, and storing it long term is completely unnecessary. Collection of private data is only ever appropriate directly from an individual with informed consent, with strict and mutually agreed upon limits on how long it can be stored and the uses to which it can be put. Permanent or long-term data retention should be rare and have intense oversight. Almost everything else should be ephemeral on the level of minutes to hours. Legislation will catch up after this bites us in the ass, and the longer it takes, the worse it's going to be.

arcticbull 5y ago
> They shouldn't have the data, they don't need it, and storing it long term is completely unnecessary. I mean, I completely disagree. If the job of a public health agency isn't to use anonymous data to make informed decisions about public health what on earth is their job?
- robbedpeter 5y ago
  They don't need location tracking. It's inherently not anonymous.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    That’s a good opinion haha, but I do trust them to make the determination around what existing data set they need to be effective. That’s why we have them.
- sneak 5y ago
  There is no way to anonymize movement data. Anyone telling you that location data is "de-identified" or "anonymized" is lying to you.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    My point isn't that it's not possible to de-anonymize the data in general, but rather that this organization doesn't have datasets that they can correlate it with, they don't have any incentive to do so, they don't have any mandate to do so, and this data is also available to anyone willing to cut a check. My point is they are using data to make data-driven decisions and do their jobs. This is the kind of thing you want from a government. So again, I ask. If the job of a public health agency isn't to use anonymous data to make informed decisions about public health what on earth is their job?

sneak 5y ago

Other parts of the Canadian federal government would love this data as an aid in criminal investigations, up to and including fishing expeditions against innocent people. Police are not known for willingly making their own jobs harder in the name of preserving civil rights, as the police-worldview is that police are inherently trustworthy. Once they have the dataset, they can legally volunteer it to RCMP or CSIS. (CSIS may/probably already has it, but we don't have an Eduardo Snodienne yet.)

arcticbull 5y ago
Probably a solid Edward Snowed-in joke in there somewhere : )I do agree, although I suspect that give this dataset is available to anyone willing to cut a cheque, that RCMP and CSIS probably already have it.