An Overview of Data Privacy in Multi-Agent Learning Systems

Kato Mivule, Darsana Josyula, and Claude Turner

Computer Science Department

Bowie State University

Bowie, Maryland, USA

COGNITIVE 2013

1

OUTLINE

• Introduction • Literature Review • Privacy Issues in Multi-agents • Proposed Abstract Privacy Architectures • Work in Progress • Conclusion

2

COGNITIVE 2013

3

COGNITIVE 2013

This an overview of

data privacy in multi-agent

systems, challenges and future areas of

work.

Need to engineer multi-agent systems that

comply with data privacy laws.

Entities have to comply to data privacy laws.

There are data privacy challenges that multi-agents must encounter.

INTRODUCTION

4

COGNITIVE 2013

MOTIVATION

• Design and develop multi-agent learning systems that take into account data privacy considerations.

LITERATURE REVIEW

5

COGNITIVE 2013

Research Interest

• Privacy in multi-agent systems has been of research interest for some time.

Forner (1996):

• Privacy in multi-agents was still problematic due to privacy design challenges.

Wong et al. (2000)

• Security and trust in multi-agent systems was problematic; proposed a security and trust architecture, agents self-authenticate.

Yu et al. (2003)

• Privacy may have various meanings and importance for different agents; there should be room for a diversity of perceptions on privacy.

Ramchurn et al. (2004):

Three problematic areas of trust in multi-

agent systems.

(i) Multi-agent interactions.

(ii) Multi-agent interrelation.

(iii) Multi-agent cooperation.

6

COGNITIVE 2013

LITERATURE REVIEW

LITERATURE REVIEW – MULTI-AGENTS

7

COGNITIVE 2013

Jung et al. (2012):

• Critical to autonomous computing; Security and Trust issues need to be addressed.

Martins et al. (2012):

• Need to conform to the three canons of privacy and security, namely, Confidentiality, Accessibility, and Integrity.

Nagaraj (2012):

• Privacy and security Requirements for multi-agents, is often neglected during the Requirements design phase.

THE PROBLEM: DEFINING PRIVACY

Friedewald et al. (2010):

Privacy is an evolving and shifting complex

multi-layered concept, described differently by

different people.

Katos et al. (2011):

Privacy is a human and socially driven

distinctive made up of human mannerisms,

perceptions, and opinions.

Spiekermann (2012):

Privacy is a fuzzy concept often confused

with security, and, as such, difficult to

implement.

A concise definition of privacy is problematic.

8

COGNITIVE 2013

Data utility: How useful a privatized dataset is to the user of that particular privatized dataset. Faces same definition challenges as data

privacy.

BACKGROUND – DEFINING PRIVACY IN MULTI-AGENTS

Agents: Wooldridge (2003):

Computer systems that are located in a

particular environment with the

capability of independent and

autonomous action so as to achieve

intended specific goals.

Multi-Agents: Wooldridge (2003):

A group of autonomous agents combined into one

system, independently solving simpler problems while

communicating with each other to

accomplish bigger and complex objectives.

Multi-agent systems (MAS): Da Silva

(2005):

Multi-agent systems are formed to deal

with complex applications in a

distributed systems environment.

Privacy and Security Issues: Da Silva

(2005):

Observed that examining data in

distributed environments is a difficult problem since agents face

several restrictions that include privacy issues with sensitive

data.

9

COGNITIVE 2013

Data privacy and security: Pfleeger et al. (2006):

Privacy:

A controlled disclosure in which an entity decides when

and to whom to disclose its data.

Security:

Has to do with access control, as in who is allowed legitimate access to data and

systems.

10

COGNITIVE 2013

BACKGROUND – UNDERLYING PRIVACY NOTIONS

11

COGNITIVE 2013

BACKGROUND - UNDERLYING PRIVACY NOTIONS

The three aspects of information security Pfleeger et al. (2006):

Confidentiality:

Ensuring the concealment and privacy

of data and systems,

Availability:

Ensuring the availability of data and systems at

all times, and lastly,

Integrity:

Ensuring that data and systems are altered by only the authorized.

Such et al. (2012):

Multi-agents are vulnerable to three information-related

activities:

Information collection:

agents collect and store data about an

individual.

Information processing:

whereby agents modify data that has

been collected.

Information dissemination:

whereby agents publish data.

12

COGNITIVE 2013

PRIVACY ISSUES IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS

Klusch et al. (2003):

• Autonomy and privacy of agents in a distributed environment.

Albashiri (2010):

• Multi heterogeneous agent systems, have to specify suitable communication and interfacing protocols.

13

COGNITIVE 2013

PRIVACY ISSUES IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS

Rashvand et al., (2010): Multi-agent security

requirements :

Service-agent protection:

agents are protected from external threats.

System vulnerability:

agents are protected from insecure internal

processes.

Protective security services:

main goal of an agent is to provide security.

14

COGNITIVE 2013

PRIVACY ISSUES IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS

Nagaraj (2012):

• Agent misbehavior (e.g., denial of service attacks).

Martins et al., (2012):

• Key security concerns of Authentication, Confidentiality, and Integrity must be taken into considered.

Krupa et al. (2012):

• ‘Privacy Enforcing Norms’ in which agents learn a set of acceptable privacy social behavior(rules).

• Penalties given to agents that misbehave.

15

COGNITIVE 2013

PRIVACY ISSUES IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS

Krupa (2012):

Implementing privacy for agents is

still problematic:

Agents have to learn how to sense privacy violations.

Managing multi-agents without centralization to

deter privacy abuses.

Flexible solutions to the

inapplicability of most existing

privacy algorithms.

16

COGNITIVE 2013

AN ABSTRACT ARCHITECTURE FOR PRIVACY PRESERVING MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM

17

COGNITIVE 2013

AN ABSTRACT ARCHITECTURE FOR PRIVACY PRESERVING MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM

18

COGNITIVE 2013

AN ABSTRACT ARCHITECTURE FOR PRIVACY PRESERVING MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM

19

COGNITIVE 2013

AN ABSTRACT ARCHITECTURE FOR PRIVACY PRESERVING MULTI-AGENT SYSTEM

20

COGNITIVE 2013

THE UNDERLYING CHALLENGES OF DATA PRIVACY AND UTILITY STILL IMPACT PRIVACY DESIGN IN MULTI-AGENTS

21

COGNITIVE 2013

• Trade-offs between privacy and utility are sought. • The problem of data privacy in multi-agents still remains a challenge.

REFERENCES

M. Wooldridge, “An Introduction to Multi-Agent Systems.” Chichester, England: John Wiley and Sons, 2003, ISBN-10: 0470519460. J.C. Da Silva, C. Giannella, R. Bhargava, H. Kargupta, and M. Klusch, “Distributed data mining and agents”, Eng Appl Artif Intell, pages 791–807, 2005. K.A. Albashiri, “An investigation into the issues of Multi-Agent Data Mining”, Dissertation, University of Liverpool, 2010 A.L. Samuel, “Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers”. IBM Journal. Res. Dev. 3, 3, pages 210-229, 1959. DOI=10.1147/rd.33.0210 T. Mitchell, “ Machine Learning”, McGraw Hill. ISBN 0-07-042807-7, page 2, 1997. IBM, “Big Data”, Online, [Retrieved: March, 2013] http://www-01.ibm.com/software/data/bigdata/ W. Davies, “Agent-Based Data-Mining”, First Year Report, University, 15 August 1994, Online, [Retrieved: March 2013] http://www.agent.ai/doc/upload/200403/davi94_1.pdf C.P. Pfleeger and S.L. Pfleeger, “Security in Computing” (4th Edition). Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, pages 10, 606, 2006. US Department of Homeland Security, “Handbook for Safeguarding Sensitive Personally Identifiable Information at The Department of Homeland Security”, October 2008. Online, [Retrieved February, 2013] http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_guide_spii_handbook.pdf E. Mccallister, and K. Scarfone, “Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information ( PII ) Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology”, NIST Special Publication 800-122, 2010. V. Rastogi, S. Hong, and D. Suciu, “The boundary between privacy and utility in data publishing”, VLDB, September pp. 531-542, 2007. M. Sramka, R. Safavi-Naini, J. Denzinger, and M. Askari, “A Practice-oriented Framework for Measuring Privacy and Utility in Data Sanitization Systems”, ACM, (EDBT’ 10) Article 27, 10 pages, 2010. DOI=10.1145/1754239.1754270 S.R. Sankar, “Utility and Privacy of Data Sources: Can Shannon Help Conceal and Reveal Information”, Information Theory and Applications Workshop (ITA), pages 1-7, 2010 . R.C. Wong, et al, “Minimality attack in privacy preserving data publishing.” VLDB, pages 543-554, 2007. W. Davies, and P. Edwards, “Distributed learning: An agent-based approach to data-mining”. In working notes of ICML'95, Workshop on Agents that Learn from Other Agents, 1995. D. Caragea, A. Silvescu, and V. Honavar, “Agents that learn from distributed and dynamic data sources.” In Proceedings of the Workshop on Learning Agents, pages 53-61, 2000. S. Ontañón, and E. Plaza, “Recycling data for multi-agent learning”. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Machine learning (ICML '05). ACM, pages 633-640, 2005. R. Cissée, “An architecture for agent-based privacy-preserving information filtering." In Proceedings of 6th International Workshop on Trust, Privacy, Deception and Fraud in Agent Systems, 2003. L. Crepin, Y. Demazeau, O. Boissier, and F. Jacquenet, "Sensitive data transaction in Hippocratic multi-agent systems." Engineering Societies in the Agents World IX, pages 85-101, 2009.

22

COGNITIVE 2013

REFERENCES

T. Léauté, and B. Faltings, “Privacy-Preserving Multi-agent Constraint Satisfaction”, International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering, Vol. 3, pages 17-25, 2009. JM. Such, A. Espinosa, A. GarcíA-Fornes, and C. Sierra, "Self-disclosure decision making based on intimacy and privacy." Journal of Information Sciences Vol 211, 2012, pages 93-111. JM. Such, A. Espinosa, A. GarcíA-Fornes, and C. Sierra, “A Survey of Privacy in Multi-agent Systems”, Knowledge Engineering Review, in press, 2012. M. Klusch, S. Lodi, and G. Moro, “Issues of agent-based distributed data mining.”, In Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, ACM, pages 1034-1035, 2003, DOI=10.1145/860575.860782 H.F. Rashvand, K. Salah, J.M.A Calero, L. Harn: “Distributed security for multi-agent systems - review and applications”. IET Inf. Secur. 4(4), pages 188–201, 2012. S. V. Nagaraj, "Securing Multi-agent Systems: A Survey." Advances in Computing and Information Technology, pages 23-30, 2012. R.A. Martins, M.E. Correia, and A.B. Augusto, "A literature review of security mechanisms employed by mobile agents," Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 7th Iberian Conference, pages 1-4, 2012. Y. Krupa and L. Vercouter "Handling privacy as contextual integrity in decentralized virtual communities: The PrivaCIAS framework." Web Intelligence and Agent Systems, pages 105-116, 2012. Y. Krupa, "PrivaCIAS: Privacy as Contextual Integrity in Decentralized Multi-Agent Systems." PhD dissertation, Université de Caen, 2012. S. Chakraborty, Z. Charbiwala, H. Choi, KR. Raghavan, and MB. Srivastava, "Balancing behavioral privacy and information utility in sensory data flows." Pervasive and Mobile Computing, Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages 331–345 2012. C. Dwork, “Differential Privacy”, Automata, Languages and Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Vol. 4052, pages 1-12, 2006. V. Ciriani, S.D. Di Vimercati, S. Foresti, and P. Samarati, “Theory of privacy and anonymity”. In Algorithms and theory of computation handbook (2 ed.), pages 18-18, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2010, ISBN:978-1-58488-820-8. P. Samarati and L. Sweeney, “Protecting privacy when disclosing information: k-anonymity and its enforcement through generalization and suppression”, IEEE Symp on Research in Security and Privacy, pp. 384–393, 1998. US Federal Election Comission, Campaign Finance Disclosure Portal, Online, [Retrieved: March 2013] http://www.fec.gov/pindex.shtml L.N. Foner, "A security architecture for multi-agent matchmaking." In Proceeding of Second International Conference on Multi-Agent System, Mario Tokoro. Pages 80-86, 1996. C.H. Wong, and K. Sycara. "Adding security and trust to multiagent systems." Applied Artificial Intelligence Vol. 14, no. 9, pages 927-941, 2002. E. Yu, and L. Cysneiros. "Designing for Privacy in a Multi-agent World." Trust, Reputation, and Security: Theories and Practice, pages: 259-269, 2003. S.D. Ramchurn, D. Huynh, and N.R. Jennings. "Trust in multi-agent systems." The Knowledge Engineering Review Vol. 19, no. 1, pages 1-25, 2004. Y. Jung, M. Kim, A. Masoumzadeh, and J.BD. Joshi. "A survey of security issue in multi-agent systems." Artificial Intelligence Review, Vol. 37, no. 3, pages 239-260, 2012. R.A. Martins, M.E. Correia, and A.B. Augusto, "A literature review of security mechanisms employed by mobile agents," 7th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), pages1-4, 2012. V. Katos, F. Stowell, and P. Bednar, “Surveillance, Privacy and the Law of Requisite Variety”, Data Privacy Management and Autonomous Spontaneous Security, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 6514, pages 123–139, 2011. S. Spiekermann, “The challenges of privacy by design,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 55, no. 7, page 38, 2012. M. Friedewald, D. Wright, S. Gutwirth, and E. Mordini, “Privacy, data protection and emerging sciences and technologies: towards a common framework,” Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 61–67, Mar. 2010.

23

COGNITIVE 2013

THANK YOU. Contact: kmivule at gmail dot com

24

COGNITIVE 2013