ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A learning theory approach to non-interactive database privacy
Full text PdfPdf (229 KB)
Source
Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing archive
Proceedings of the 40th annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing table of contents
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
SESSION: 13B table of contents
Pages 609-618  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-60558-047-0
Authors
Avrim Blum  Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Katrina Ligett  Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Aaron Roth  Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Sponsors
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
SIGACT: ACM Special Interest Group on Algorithms and Computation Theory
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 18,   Downloads (12 Months): 147,   Citation Count: 6
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1374376.1374464
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We demonstrate that, ignoring computational constraints, it is possible to release privacy-preserving databases that are useful for all queries over a discretized domain from any given concept class with polynomial VC-dimension. We show a new lower bound for releasing databases that are useful for halfspace queries over a continuous domain. Despite this, we give a privacy-preserving polynomial time algorithm that releases information useful for all halfspace queries, for a slightly relaxed definition of usefulness. Inspired by learning theory, we introduce a new notion of data privacy, which we call distributional privacy, and show that it is strictly stronger than the prevailing privacy notion, differential privacy.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
 
2
3
4
 
5
S. Dasgupta and A. Gupta. An elementary proof of the Johnson-Lindenstrauss Lemma. International Computer Science Institute, Technical Report, pages 99--006, 1999.
6
 
7
C. Dwork. Differential privacy. Proc. ICALP, 2006.
 
8
C. Dwork, K. Kenthapadi, F. McSherry, I. Mironov, and M. Naor. Our Data, Ourselves: Privacy via Distributed Noise Generation. Proceedings of Advances in CryptologyEurocrypt 2006, pages 486--503, 2006.
 
9
C. Dwork, F. McSherry, K. Nissim, and A. Smith. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. Proceedings of the 3rd Theory of Cryptography Conference, pages 265--284, 2006.
10
 
11
C. Dwork and K. Nissim. Privacy-preserving datamining on vertically partitioned databases. Proc. CRYPTO, pages 528--544, 2004.
12
13
 
14
Shiva Kasiviswanathan, Homin K. Lee, Kobbi Nissim, Sofya Raskhodnikova, and Adam Smith. What can we learn privately? http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.0924v1.
 
15
16
 
17
 
18
A. J. Smola and B. Scholkopf. Learning with Kernels. MIT Press, 2002.
 
19


Collaborative Colleagues:
Avrim Blum: colleagues
Katrina Ligett: colleagues
Aaron Roth: colleagues