Skip to main content

Buying Data from Privacy-Aware Individuals: The Effect of Negative Payments

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Web and Internet Economics (WINE 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10123))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We study a market model where a data analyst uses monetary incentives to procure private data from strategic data subjects/individuals. To characterize individuals’ privacy concerns, we consider a local model of differential privacy, where the individuals do not trust the analyst so privacy costs are incurred when the data is reported to the data analyst. We investigate a basic model where the private data are bits that represent the individuals’ knowledge about an underlying state, and the analyst pays each individual according to all the reported data. The data analyst’s goal is to design a payment mechanism such that at an equilibrium, she can learn the state with an accuracy goal met and the corresponding total expected payment minimized. What makes the mechanism design more challenging is that not only the data but also the privacy costs are unknown to the data analyst, where the costs reflect individuals’ valuations of privacy and are modeled by “cost coefficients.” To cope with the uncertainty in the cost coefficients and drive down the data analyst’s cost, we utilize possible negative payments (which penalize individuals with “unacceptably” high valuations of privacy) and explore interim individual rationality. We design a family of payment mechanisms, each of which has a Bayesian Nash equilibrium where the individuals exhibit a threshold behavior: the individuals with cost coefficients above a threshold choose not to participate, and the individuals with cost coefficients below the threshold participate and report data with quality guarantee. By choosing appropriate parameters, we obtain a sequence of mechanisms, as the number of individuals grows large. Each mechanism in this sequence fulfills the accuracy goal at a Bayesian Nash equilibrium. The total expected payment at the equilibrium goes to zero; i.e., this sequence of mechanisms is asymptotically optimal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bassily, R., Smith, A.: Local, private, efficient protocols for succinct histograms. In: Proceedings of the Annual ACM on Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), Portland, OR, pp. 127–135 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cai, Y., Daskalakis, C., Papadimitriou, C.: Optimum statistical estimation with strategic data sources. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Learning Theory (COLT), Paris, France. pp. 280–296. July 2015

    Google Scholar 

  3. Chen, Y., Chong, S., Kash, I.A., Moran, T., Vadhan, S.: Truthful mechanisms for agents that value privacy. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic commerce (EC), Philadelphia, PA. pp. 215–232 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, Y., Sheffet, O., Vadhan, S.: Privacy games. In: Liu, T.-Y., Qi, Q., Ye, Y. (eds.) WINE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8877, pp. 371–385. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-13129-0_30

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cummings, R., Ligett, K., Roth, A., Wu, Z.S., Ziani, J.: Accuracy for sale: aggregating data with a variance constraint. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS), Rehovot, Israel. pp. 317–324 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dasgupta, A., Ghosh, A.: Crowdsourced judgement elicitation with endogenous proficiency. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, pp. 319–330, May 2013

    Google Scholar 

  7. Duchi, J.C., Jordan, M.I., Wainwright, M.J.: Local privacy and minimax bounds: sharp rates for probability estimation. In: Advances Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), Lake Tahoe, NV, pp. 1529–1537, December 2013

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dwork, C.: Differential privacy. In: Bugliesi, M., Preneel, B., Sassone, V., Wegener, I. (eds.) ICALP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4052, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11787006_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Dwork, C., McSherry, F., Nissim, K., Smith, A.: Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In: Halevi, S., Rabin, T. (eds.) TCC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3876, pp. 265–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). doi:10.1007/11681878_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Dwork, C., Roth, A.: The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy. Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci. 9(3–4), 211–407 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Erlingsson, Ú., Pihur, V., Korolova, A.: RAPPOR: randomized aggregatable privacy-preserving ordinal response. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communication Security (CCS), Scottsdale, AZ, pp. 1054–1067 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fanti, G.C., Pihur, V., Erlingsson, Ú.: Building a RAPPOR with the unknown: privacy-preserving learning of associations and data dictionaries. arXiv:1503.01214 [cs.CR] (2015)

  13. Fleischer, L.K., Lyu, Y.: Approximately optimal auctions for selling privacy when costs are correlated with data. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), Valencia, Spain, pp. 568–585 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ghosh, A., Ligett, K.: Privacy and coordination: computing on databases with endogenous participation. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), Philadelphia, PA, pp. 543–560 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ghosh, A., Ligett, K., Roth, A., Schoenebeck, G.: Buying private data without verification. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), Palo Alto, CA, pp. 931–948 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ghosh, A., Roth, A.: Selling privacy at auction. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), San Jose, CA, pp. 199–208 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hsu, J., Khanna, S., Roth, A.: Distributed private heavy hitters. In: Czumaj, A., Mehlhorn, K., Pitts, A., Wattenhofer, R. (eds.) ICALP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7391, pp. 461–472. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31594-7_39

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Kairouz, P., Oh, S., Viswanath, P.: Extremal mechanisms for local differential privacy. In: Advances Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), Montreal, Canada, pp. 2879–2887, December 2014

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kasiviswanathan, S.P., Lee, H.K., Nissim, K., Raskhodnikova, S., Smith, A.: What can we learn privately? SIAM J. Comput. 40(3), 793–826 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Ligett, K., Roth, A.: Take it or leave it: running a survey when privacy comes at a cost. In: Goldberg, P.W. (ed.) WINE 2012. LNCS, vol. 7695, pp. 378–391. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-35311-6_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu, Y., Chen, Y.: Learning to incentivize: eliciting effort via output agreement. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), July 2016, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  22. McSherry, F., Talwar, K.: Mechanism design via differential privacy. In: Proceedings of the Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), Providence, RI, pp. 94–103 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Miller, N., Resnick, P., Zeckhauser, R.: Eliciting informative feedback: the peer-prediction method. In: Golbeck, J. (ed.) Computing with Social Trust. Human-Computer Interaction Series, pp. 185–212. Springer, London (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Nissim, K., Vadhan, S., Xiao, D.: Redrawing the boundaries on purchasing data from privacy-sensitive individuals. In: Proceedings of the Conference Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS), Princeton, NJ, pp. 411–422 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pai, M.M., Roth, A.: Privacy and mechanism design. SIGecom Exch. 12(1), 8–29 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Roth, A., Schoenebeck, G.: Conducting truthful surveys, cheaply. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference Electronic Commerce (EC), Valencia, Spain, pp. 826–843 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shokri, R.: Privacy games: optimal user-centric data obfuscation. In: Proceedings of the Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETS), Philadelphia, PA, pp. 299–315 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wang, W., Ying, L., Zhang, J.: On the relation between identifiability, differential privacy, and mutual-information privacy. In: Proceedings of the Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control and Computing, Monticello, IL, pp. 1086–1092, September 2014

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wang, W., Ying, L., Zhang, J.: A game-theoretic approach to quality control for collecting privacy-preserving data. In: Proceedings of the Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control and Computing, Monticello, IL, pp. 474–479, September 2015

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wang, W., Ying, L., Zhang, J.: A minimax distortion view of differentially private query release. In: Proceedings of the Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems, and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, pp. 1046–1050, November 2015

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wang, W., Ying, L., Zhang, J.: Buying data from privacy-aware individuals: the effect of negative payments. Technical report, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wang, W., Ying, L., Zhang, J.: The value of privacy: strategic data subjects, incentive mechanisms and fundamental limits. In: Proceedings of the Annual ACM SIGMETRICS Conference on Antibes Juan-les-Pins, France, June 2016

    Google Scholar 

  33. Warner, S.L.: Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 60(309), 63–69 (1965)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Witkowski, J., Bachrach, Y., Key, P., Parkes, D.C.: Dwelling on the negative: incentivizing effort in peer prediction. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing (HCOMP), Palm Springs, CA, November 2013

    Google Scholar 

  35. Xiao, D.: Is privacy compatible with truthfulness? In: Proceedings of the Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS), Berkeley, CA, pp. 67–86 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledegments

This work was supported partially by NSF grant CNS-1618768.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weina Wang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wang, W., Ying, L., Zhang, J. (2016). Buying Data from Privacy-Aware Individuals: The Effect of Negative Payments. In: Cai, Y., Vetta, A. (eds) Web and Internet Economics. WINE 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10123. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54110-4_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54110-4_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-54109-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-54110-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics