Social media involve many shared items, such as photos, which may concern more than one user. The challenge is that users’ individual privacy preferences for the same item may conflict, so an approach that simply merges in some way the users’ privacy preferences may provide unsatisfactory results. Previous proposals to deal with the problem were either time-consuming or did not consider compromises to solve these conflicts (e.g., by considering unilaterally imposed approaches only). We propose a negotiation mechanism for users to agree on a compromise for these conflicts. The second challenge we address in this article relates to the exponential complexity of such a negotiation mechanism. To address this, we propose heuristics that reduce the complexity of the negotiation mechanism and show how substantial benefits can be derived from the use of these heuristics through extensive experimental evaluation that compares the performance of the negotiation mechanism with and without these heuristics. Moreover, we show that one such heuristic makes the negotiation mechanism produce results fast enough to be used in actual social media infrastructures with near-optimal results.
Few works have actually been proposed to deal with the problem of collaboratively defining privacy policies for shared items between two or more users of a social media site. We shall discuss them and how they relate to our work in the following paragraphs. @cite_8 propose a method to define privacy policies collaboratively. Their approach is based on a collaborative definition of privacy policies in which all of the parties involved can define strong and weak preferences. They define a privacy language to specify users' preferences in the form of strong and weak conditions, and they detect privacy conflicts based on them. However, this approach does not involve any automated method to resolve conflicts, only some suggestions that users may want to consider consider when they try to resolve such conflicts manually.
@cite_8
2125470616 1699452924 2020250474 1597888167
We have seen tremendous growth in online social networks (OSNs) in recent years. These OSNs not only offer attractive means for virtual social interactions and information sharing, but also raise a number of security and privacy issues. Although OSNs allow a single user to govern access to her his data, they currently do not provide any mechanism to enforce privacy concerns over data associated with multiple users, remaining privacy violations largely unresolved and leading to the potential disclosure of information that at least one user intended to keep private. In this paper, we propose an approach to enable collaborative privacy management of shared data in OSNs. In particular, we provide a systematic mechanism to identify and resolve privacy conflicts for collaborative data sharing. Our conflict resolution indicates a tradeoff between privacy protection and data sharing by quantifying privacy risk and sharing loss. We also discuss a proof-of-concept prototype implementation of our approach as part of an application in Facebook and provide system evaluation and usability study of our methodology. Social media involve many shared items, such as photos, which may concern more than one user. The challenge is that users’ individual privacy preferences for the same item may conflict, so an approach that simply merges in some way the users’ privacy preferences may provide unsatisfactory results. Previous proposals to deal with the problem were either time-consuming or did not consider compromises to solve these conflicts (e.g., by considering unilaterally imposed approaches only). We propose a negotiation mechanism for users to agree on a compromise for these conflicts. The second challenge we address in this article relates to the exponential complexity of such a negotiation mechanism. To address this, we propose heuristics that reduce the complexity of the negotiation mechanism and show how substantial benefits can be derived from the use of these heuristics through extensive experimental evaluation that compares the performance of the negotiation mechanism with and without these heuristics. Moreover, we show that one such heuristic makes the negotiation mechanism produce results fast enough to be used in actual social media infrastructures with near-optimal results. The workload needed for managing privacy and publicness in current social network services (SNSs) is placed on individuals, yet people have few means to control what others disclose about them. This paper considers SNS-users' concerns in relation to online disclosure and the ways in which they cope with these both individually and collaboratively. While previous work has focused mainly on individual coping strategies, our findings from a qualitative study with 27 participants suggest that collaborative strategies in boundary regulation are of additional importance. We present a framework of strategies for boundary regulation that informs both theoretical work and design practice related to management of disclosure in SNSs. The framework considers disclosure as an interpersonal process of boundary regulation, in which people are dependent on what others choose to disclose about them. The paper concludes by proposing design solutions supportive of collaborative and preventive strategies in boundary regulation that facilitate the management of disclosure online. Social networking sites have sprung up and become a hot issue of current society. In spite of the fact that these sites provide users with a variety of attractive features, much to users' dismay, however, they are prone to expose users' private information. In this paper, we propose an approach which addresses the problem of collaboratively deciding privacy policies for, but not limited to, shared photos. Our approach utilizes trust relations in social networks and combines them with Condorcet's preferential voting scheme. We study properties of our trust-augmented voting scheme and develop two approximations to improve its efficiency. Our algorithms are compared and justified by experimental results, which support the usability of our trust-augmented voting scheme.