Xem mẫu
Online Information Privacy
or membership of privacy Web seal programmes. Alternatively, the mistrust may be directed toward the Internet medium. Therefore, the solution may lie within the education of Australian Internet users toward the rights and resources available to them, not only by privacy advocacy organisa-tions, but on e-entrepreneurs’ Web sites and their related industry organisations.
Given that the study found that there is a relationship between information privacy and certain demographic characteristics such as loca-tion and gender, a sound approach for e-entrepre-neurs would be to consider their target population before developing data collection strategies. For LQVWDQFHDVWKHVXUYH\¿QGVWKDWZRPHQDSSHDUHG to be more pragmatic than their concerned male counterparts, Web sites with a female target audi-ence could emphasise the value of data disclosure — what will individuals receive in return, while one targeting men may want to accentuate how consumer information privacy is upheld. Interest-ingly, however, males had the highest reported usage of privacy-enhancing tools (an average of 1.22 tools out of a possible 5, compared to 0.93 reported by females). In fact, over 10% more men than women had used at least one tool.
Finally, the study also found an inverse cor-UHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FRQVWUXFWV ³H[SHULHQFH´ DQG³WRWDOSULYDF\´DVPHDVXUHGE\UHVSRQVHVWR questions regarding the OECD Data Protection Principles). Thus, inexperienced Internet users KDGKLJKHU³WRWDOSULYDF\´YDOXHVWKDQWKHLUH[-perienced counterparts, which is consistent with WKH¿QGLQJVIURPDQXPEHURIVWXGLHV&XOQDQ 1993; Stone & Stone, 1990; NUA, 1998). The LPSOLFDWLRQRIWKLV¿QGLQJLVWKDWHHQWUHSUHQHXUV should give special consideration to new Internet users by introducing them to privacy-enhancing methods and technologies and reinforcing their value.
CONCLUSION
This chapter reports and discusses the results of an empirical study which aimed to identify and model Australian Internet users’ online informa-WLRQSULYDF\RULHQWDWLRQVE\FRPELQLQJVSHFL¿F demographic and attitudinal measurements with behavioural data. The resultant privacy-sophis-tication index clearly illustrates the subjective-ness of online information privacy and groups Australian Internet users according to a range of privacy-related characteristics, which could assist e-entrepreneurs to further understand the role of information privacy in cyberspace and hence better interact with customers in e-busi-ness operations.
$UJXDEO\WKHNH\¿QGLQJIURPWKHVXUYH\LVWKDW the majority of Australian Internet users appear to be highly sensitive toward online information privacy and suggests privacy management must be an ongoing priority for e-entrepreneurs. This VWXG\DOVR¿QGVWKDWWKHUHDUHGLIIHUHQFHVLQSUL-vacy-related attitudes and behaviours between the sexes, although there does not appear to be DVLJQL¿FDQWFRUUHODWLRQZLWKDQ\RWKHUGHPR-graphic factor. Therefore, e-entrepreneurs who run gender-oriented businesses should consider WKHLPSOLFDWLRQVRIWKHVH¿QGLQJVLQUHODWLRQWR their privacy protection strategies.
Although there are methodological limitations which may affect the validity of the results, this study provides e-entrepreneurs with an in-depth insight into Australian Internet users’ attitudes and behaviours toward online information privacy, the knowledge from which, may be applicable cross-culturally.
Some e-businesses may choose to use informa-tion privacy practices as a market segmentation variable (Culnan & Bies, p. 162), and the PSI pro-¿OHVPD\DVVLVWLQWKLVUHVSHFW7KHUHLVHYLGHQFH to suggest that good privacy can actually result in gains to e-commerce, therefore, a proactive approach toward consumer privacy may not only be socially responsible, but strategically sound.
2084
Online Information Privacy
REFERENCES
Allen, A. (2000). Gender and privacy in cyber-space. Stanford Law Review, 52(5), 1175-1200.
Attaran, M. (2000). Managing legal liability of the Net: A ten step guide for IT managers. In-formation Management and Computer Security, 8(2), 98-100.
Bennett, C. (1992). Regulating privacy – Data protection and public policy in Europe and the United States. New York: Cornell University Press.
Clarke, R. (1999). Introduction to dataveillance DQG LQIRUPDWLRQ SULYDF\ DQG GH¿QLWLRQV RI terms. Retrieved May 23, 2002, from www.anu. edu/people/Roger.Clarke/DV/Intro.html
Clarke, R. (2001). Privacy as a means of engen-dering trust in cyberspace. Retrieved June 9, 2001, from www.anu.edu/people/Roger.Clarke/ DV/eTrust.html
Cranor, L., Reagle, J., & Ackerman, M. (1999). Beyond concern: Understanding Net users atti-tudes about online privacy. AT&T Labs-Research Technical Report TR 99.4.3. Retrieved April 14, 1999, from www.research.att.com/library/trs/ TRs/99/99.4/
Culnan, M. (1993). How did they get my name? An exploratory investigation of consumer at-titudes toward secondary information use. MIS Quarterly, 17(3), 341-363.
Culnan, M. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science: A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 10(1), 104-115.
Culnan, M., & Bies, R. (1999). Fair informa-tion practices for marketing. In C. Bennett & R. Grant (Eds.), Visions of privacy: Policy voices for the digital age. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press.
Culnan, M., & Milne, G. (2001, December). The Culnan-Milne survey on consumers and online privacy notices: Summary of responses, joint working paper. Bentley College, MA, and Isen-berg School of Management.
Dembeck, C. (1999, April 8). Report: Online shopping desire overrides privacy concerns. E-Commerce Times.
The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2001). Private investigations: Data privacy and the challenge to business. Available online at www.eiu.com
Fried, C. (1996). In Z. Sardar & J. Ravetz (Eds.), Cyberfutures: Culture & politics on the infor-mation superhighway. New York: New York University Press.
Fukuyama, F. (1999). Building trust online: TRUSTe, privacy and self governance. Retrieved February 5, 2001, from www.truste.org/about/ WUXVWHZKLWHSDSHU¿QDOGRF
Gindin, S. (1997). Lost and found in cyberspace. San Diego Law Review, 1153, 24-79.
Harrison-McKnight, D. & Chervany, N. (2001). What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: An interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(2), 35-39.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultures consequences (2nd ed.). CA: Sage Publications.
Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyber-space. New York: Basic Books.
Long, G., Hogg, M., Hartley, M., & Angold, S. (1999). Relationship marketing and privacy: Ex-ploring the thresholds.Journal of Marketing Prac-tice: Applied Marketing Science, 5(1), 4-20.
Lyon, D., & Zureik, E. (Eds.). (1996). Computers, surveillance & privacy. University of Minnesota Press.
2085
Online Information Privacy
Maslow, A. (1987). Motivation & personality (3rd ed.) New York: Harper & Row.
Meridian Research. (2001). Regulatory compli-ance: The tip of the privacy iceberg. Meridien Research. Retrieved May 16, 2003, from www. keepmedia.com/ShowItemDetails.do?itemID =533026&extID=10030&oliID=226
Michael, J. (1994). Privacy & human rights. UNESCO & Dartmouth, Aldershot.
Milberg, S., Burke, S., Smith, H., & Kallman, E. (1995).Values, personal information privacy, and regulatory approaches. Association for Comput-ing Machinery. Communications of the AGM, 38(12), 65-74.
Milne, G., & Boza, M. (1999). Trust and concern in consumers’ perceptions of marketing informa-tion management practices,Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13(1), 5-24.
Milne, G., & Gordon, M. (1993) Direct mail SULYDF\HI¿FLHQF\WUDGHRIIVZLWKLQDQLPSOLHG social contract framework. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 12(2), 206-215.
NUA. (1998). Shoppers still concerned about privacy. Available online at www.nua.ie/sur-veys/index
Papadopoulou, P., Andreou, A., Kanellis, P., & Matrakos, D. (2001). Trust and relationship build-ing in electronic commerce. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 11(4), 322-332.
Perrolle, J. (1996). Privacy and surveillance in computer-supported cooperative work. In D. Lyon & E. Zuriek (Eds.), Computers, surveillance and privacy (pp. 50-71). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Phelps, J., D’Souza, G., & Nowak, G. (2001). An-tecedents and consequences of consumer privacy concerns: An empirical investigation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(4), 2-17.
Phelps, J., Nowak, G., & Ferrell, E. (2000). Privacy concerns and consumer willingness to provide personal information. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 27-41.
Posch, R. (1993). Don’t take Lou Harris too seri-ously. Direct Marketing, 56(8), 44-48.
Princeton Survey Research. (2002). A matter of trust: What users want from Web sites. Princeton Survey Research.
Rao, C., & Singhapakdi, S. (1997). Marketing ethics: A comparison between services and other marketing professionals. Journal of Services Marketing, 11(6), 409-426.
Reder, A. (1995). ,QSXUVXLWRISULQFLSOHDQGSUR¿W Business success through social responsibility. New York: Putnam.
Scholtz (2001). Privacy@net. Consumers Inter-national. Retrieved March 3, 2002, from www. consumersinternational.org/news/pressreleases/ fprivreport.pdf
Sheehan, K. (1999). An investigation of gender differences in on-line privacy concerns and resul-tant behaviours.Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13(1), 24-38
Sheehan, K. (2002). Toward a typology of Internet users and online privacy concerns. The Informa-tion Society, 18, 21-32.
Sheehan, K., & Grubbs Hoy, M. (1999). Flam-ing, complaining, abstaining: How online users respond to privacy concerns. Journal of Advertis-ing, 28(3), 37-51.
Sheehan, K., & Grubbs Hoy, M. (2000). Dimen-sions of privacy concern among online consum-ers.Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 62-73.
Singhapakdi, A., Rawwas, M., Matra, J., & Ahmed, M. (1999).A cross-cultural study of con-sumer perceptions about marketing ethics. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(3), 257-272.
2086
Online Information Privacy
Smith, H. (1994).Managing privacy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Smith, H., Milberg, S., & Burke, S. (1996). Infor-mation privacy: Measuring individual’s concerns about organisational practices. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.
Smith, R. (1993). CEP’93 – The proper face of privacy. Privacy Journal. Retrieved from July 1, 2002, from www.cpsr.org/conferences/cfp93/ smith.html
Westin, A. (1967). Privacy & freedom.New York: Atheneum.
Wright, R. (1993). Overhearing the Internet. The New Republic, September 13. Available online at www. nua.com/surveys/index.cgi?f=VSandart_id= 905358552andrel=true
ENDNOTE
Taylor, H. (2003). Most people are ‘privacy prag-matists’ who, while concerned about privacy, ZLOOVRPHWLPHVWUDGHLWRIIIRURWKHUEHQH¿WV7KH Harris Poll No. 17. Available online atwww.har-risinteractive.com/harris_poll
1 Many of the Westin-Harris survey reports are available on the Privacy and American Business Web site www.pandab.org.
This work was previously published in Entrepreneurship and Innovations in E-Business: An Integrative Perspective, edited by F. Zhao, pp. 200-222, copyright 2006 by IGI Publishing (an imprint of IGI Global).
2087
2088
Chapter 7.8 Analyzing the Privacy of a
Vickrey Auction Mechanism
Ismael Rodríguez Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
Natalia López
Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
ABSTRACT
This article studies the properties of a distributed mechanism to perform the Vickrey auction. This mechanism, which was originally presented in López, Núñez, Rodríguez, and Rubio (2004), has the main characteristic that most of the informa-tion concerning the bids is kept private for both bidders and the auctioneer without the necessity of any trusted third party. In particular, after the DXFWLRQLV¿QLVKHGRQO\WKHYDOXHRIWKHVHFRQG highest bid and the identity of the highest bidder are publicly revealed. However, in that paper, several questions about the applicability of the protocol were left unanswered. In particular, no implementation was provided. Besides, the analysis of the collusion risk was too brief. In this paper, we address these issues in a deeper way. Let us note that, as it is stated in Brandt and Sandholm (2004), it is impossible to create a completely private mechanism to perform the
Vickrey auction. In particular, we identify a gap between the proposed protocol and the complete privacy: If any n-2 bidders and the winning bid-der collude, the privacy is lost. Besides, some privacy properties can be broken by chance if some VSHFL¿FVLWXDWLRQVDSSHDUWKRXJKWKHSUREDELOLW\ of this threat decreases as the number of bidders increases. In addition, we present and analyze a simple implementation of the protocol, and we consider its practical applicability.
INTRODUCTION
Auctions are very effective ways to allocate re-sources. There exist several auction mechanisms, with the Vickrey auction (Vickrey, 1961) being one of the mechanisms that has attracted more interest from the computer science researchers. This is a sealed bid where the bidder who submits the highest bid gets the item, but he/she pays the
Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
...
- tailieumienphi.vn
nguon tai.lieu . vn