Suchergebnisse

Ziel dieser Studie war es, die Einstellung gegenüber Datenaustausch- und Datenerhebungsorganisationen vor und nach der Einführung der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung (DSGVO) der EU von Personen in Deutschland zu messen. Die Daten stammen aus einer dreistufigen Split-Panel-Webbefragung unter Personen ab 18 Jahren in Deutschland, die aus einem deutschen, Nicht-Wahrscheinlichkeits-Online-Panel rekrutiert wurden. Im April 2018 (vor dem Inkrafttreten der DSGVO) füllten 2.095 Teilnehmer den Welle 1-Fragebogen über Gerätebesitz, Social Media-Nutzung, Vertrauen in verschiedene Datenerfassungsorganisationen, Bereitschaft zum Datenaustausch, allgemeines Vertrauen, Bewusstsein und Wissen über die DSGVO sowie Datenschutzbelange aus. Im Juli und Oktober 2018 (nach Inkrafttreten der DSGVO) wurden die Befragten aus den früheren Wellen zu einer zweiten und dritten Webumfrage eingeladen, die die meisten Fragen der ersten Welle wiederholte. Zusätzlich zu den Teilnehmern aus den früheren Wellen wurden auch neue Teilnehmer zu den Wellen 2 und 3 eingeladen. Insgesamt 2.046 (Welle 2) und 2.117 (Welle 3) Teilnehmer füllten den Fragebogen der folgenden Wellen aus. 1.269 Teilnehmer nahmen an allen drei Wellen teil.

Themen:

Welle 1

Besitz von Smartphone, Handy, PC, Tablet und/oder E-Book-Reader; Social-Media-Nutzung: Account mit Benutzernahme und Passwort bei ausgewählten Anbietern (Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Xing); Vertrauen in Institutionen (Google, Facebook, Bundesamt für Statistik, Universitätsforscher) im Hinblick auf den Schutz persönlicher Daten und Begründung diese Einschätzung; Wahrscheinlichkeitsskala im Hinblick auf den Schutz persönlicher Daten bei den zuvor genannten Institutionen und Gründe für diese Einschätzung; Einverständnis mit dem Zuspielen persönlicher Daten der Sozialversicherungsträger zu den Umfragedaten; allgemeines Personenvertrauen; Bekanntheit der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung (DSGVO) der EU; Wissenstest: Ziele der DSGVO (offen); Gefühl verletzter Privatsphäre durch folgende Institutionen: Google, Facebook, Staatliche Behörden, Universitätsforscher; allgemeine Datenschutzbedenken.

Welle 2:

Besitz von Smartphone, Handy, PC, Tablet und/oder E-Book-Reader; Social-Media-Nutzung: Account mit Benutzernahme und Passwort bei ausgewählten Anbietern (Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Xing); Vertrauen in Institutionen (Google, Facebook, Bundesamt für Statistik, Universitätsforscher) im Hinblick auf den Schutz persönlicher Daten; allgemeines Personenvertrauen; Bekanntheit der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung (DSGVO) der EU; Wissenstest: Ziele der DSGVO (offen); Einverständnis mit dem Speichern verschiedener persönlicher Daten durch Facebook bzw. Google (Name, E-Mail Adresse, Wohnadresse, Geburtsdatum, Telefonnummer, Einkommen, Familienstand, Anzahl der Kinder, aktueller Standort, Internetbrowserverlauf, Accountnamen von anderen sozialen Medien und von Dritten erhaltene Daten); Gefühl der Verletzung der Privatsphäre durch folgende Institutionen: Google, Facebook, Staatliche Behörden, Universitätsforscher; allgemeine Datenschutzbedenken.

Welle 3:

Besitz von Smartphone, Handy, PC, Tablet und/oder E-Book-Reader; Social-Media-Nutzung: Account mit Benutzernahme und Passwort bei ausgewählten Anbietern (Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Xing); Vertrauen in Institutionen (Google, Facebook, Bundesamt für Statistik, Universitätsforscher) im Hinblick auf den Schutz persönlicher Daten; allgemeines Personenvertrauen; Bekanntheit der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung (DSGVO) der EU; Wissenstest: Ziele der DSGVO (offen); Besorgnis über Privatsphäre im Allgemeinen; Verständlichkeit von auszugweise wiedergegebenen Inhalten der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung (DSGVO) der EU (bzw. zu Fluggastrechten bei Nichtbeförderung und Flugverspätungen); geschätzte Popularität von Smartphones (Anteil der Smartphonebesitzer je 100 erwachsene Deutsche); Wiederholung der Frage nach dem Vertrauen in Datenerfassungsunternehmen (Google, Facebook) im Hinblick auf den Schutz personenbezogener Daten sowie zum allgemeinen Personenvertrauen; Bereitschaft zum Datenaustausch durch Google (bzw. Facebook oder das Statistische Bundesamt) für Forschungszwecke (bzw. für kommerzielle Zwecke).

Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Geburtsjahr); Bundesland; Schulbildung; berufliche Qualifikation.

Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: laufende Nummer; Befragten ID; Experimentalgruppen DSGVO Info; Dauer (Reaktionszeit in Sekunden); Gerätetyp, mit dem der Fragebogen ausgefüllt wurde.

Der Fragebogen beinhaltete auch zwei Experimente, eines über die Auswirkungen von DSGVO-bezogenen Informationen auf das Vertrauen in Datenerfassungsunternehmen und eines über den Komfort des Datenaustauschs mit verschiedenen Unternehmen aus verschiedenen Gründen.

The first few years of the 21st century were characterised by a progressive loss of privacy. Two phenomena converged to give rise to the data economy: the realisation that data trails from users interacting with technology could be used to develop personalised advertising, and a concern for security that led authorities to use such personal data for the purposes of intelligence and policing. In contrast to the early days of the data economy and internet surveillance, the last few years have witnessed a rising concern for privacy. As bad data practices have come to light, citizens are starting to understand the real cost of using online digital technologies. Two events stamped 2018 as a landmark year for privacy: the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and the implementation of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The former showed the extent to which personal data has been shared without data subjects' knowledge and consent and many times for unacceptable purposes, such as swaying elections. The latter inaugurated the beginning of robust data protection regulation in the digital age. Getting privacy right is one of the biggest challenges of this new decade of the 21st century. The past year has shown that there is still much work to be done on privacy to tame the darkest aspects of the data economy. As data scandals continue to emerge, questions abound as to how to interpret and enforce regulation, how to design new and better laws, how to complement regulation with better ethics, and how to find technical solutions to data problems. The aim of the research project Data, Privacy, and the Individual is to contribute to a better understanding of the ethics of privacy and of differential privacy. The outcomes of the project are seven research papers on privacy, a survey, and this final report, which summarises each research paper, and goes on to offer a set of reflections and recommendations to implement best practices regarding privacy.

"This book brings together papers that offer conceptual analyses, highlight issues, propose solutions, and discuss practices regarding privacy, data protection and Artificial Intelligence. It is one of the results of the thirteenth annual International Conference on Computers, Privacy and Data Protection (CPDP) held in Brussels in January 2020. The development and deployment of Artificial Intelligence promises significant break-throughs in how humans use data and information to understand and interact with the world. The technology, however, also raises significant concerns. In particular, concerns are raised as to how Artificial Intelligence will impact fundamental rights. This interdisciplinary book has been written at a time when the scale and impact of data processing on society - on individuals as well as on social systems - is becoming ever starker. It discusses open issues as well as daring and prospective approaches and is an insightful resource for readers with an interest in computers, privacy and data protection"--

This book offers a comparative perspective on data protection and cybersecurity in Europe. In light of the digital revolution and the implementation of social media applications and big data innovations, it analyzes threat perceptions regarding privacy and cyber security, and examines socio-political differences in the fundamental conceptions and narratives of privacy, and in data protection regimes, across various European countries. The first part of the book raises fundamental legal and ethical questions concerning data protection; the second analyses discourses on cybersecurity and data protection in various European countries; and the third part discusses EU regulations and norms intended to create harmonized data protection regimes.

This book offers a comparative perspective on data protection and cybersecurity in Europe. In light of the digital revolution and the implementation of social media applications and big data innovations, it analyzes threat perceptions regarding privacy and cyber security, and examines socio-political differences in the fundamental conceptions and narratives of privacy, and in data protection regimes, across various European countries. The first part of the book raises fundamental legal and ethical questions concerning data protection; the second analyses discourses on cybersecurity and data protection in various European countries; and the third part discusses EU regulations and norms intended to create harmonized data protection regimes. Max-Otto Baumannis a political scientist. He studied political science, philosophy and physics at Heidelberg University where he also took his doctorate in the field of International Relations. He then worked for three years at the John Stuart Mill Institute in Heidelberg where his research focused on issues around privacy, democracy, and digital revolution. In 2015 he left the Mill Institute and is now a senior researcher with the German Development Institute in Bonn. Wolf Schünemannis a political scientist at Heidelberg University. He does research and teaching in the fields of International Relations, European Integration, and Internet Governance. After having studied political science, philosophy, German literature, and media, he worked as research fellow and lecturer at the University of Koblenz-Landau. He is the founder and speaker of the Netzpolitik AG (Internet Governance Working Group) at Heidelberg University. He serves as a spokesperson of the subgroup Politics and the Internet, established under the umbrella of the German Political Science Association (DVPW) in 2015.

Cover -- Title Page -- Preface -- Contents -- List of Contributors -- 1. Don't Accept Candy From Strangers: An Analysis of Third-Party Mobile SDKs -- 2. AI and the Right to Explanation: Three Legal Bases under the GDPR -- 3. A Comparison of Data Protection Regulations for Automotive Systems -- 4. Misaligned Union Laws? A Comparative Analysis of Certification in the Cybersecurity Act and the General Data Protection Regulation -- 5. Aggregation, Synthesisation and Anonymisation: A Call for a Risk-based Assessment of Anonymisation Approaches -- 6. The Role of the EU Fundamental Right to Data Protection in an Algorithmic and Big Data World -- 7. Implementing AI in Healthcare: An Ethical and Legal Analysis Based on Case Studies -- 8. Technological Experimentation Without Adequate Safeguards? Interoperable EU Databases and Access to the Multiple Identity Detector by SIRENE Bureaux -- Closing Remarks -- Index -- Copyright Page.

Technological developments in the era of globalization bring humans into the digital age. All things will directly contact with an electronic system. And so with the data, some of the data among this world is privacy. That's why encryption is needed to be applied. Initially, encryption was used as a privacy data protector, but in its development encryption gave birth to problems in the legal field. Where criminals use encryption as a shield for their crimes. Therefore, legal issues arise, whether for reasons of government or state security can have access to one's privacy data. How does international or national law regulate the issue of using decryption of encryption technology? The method used in this paper is a juridical-normative comparative legal research method.The result shows that international law does not regulate the use of encryption in protecting privacy data in the digital world comprehensively because some of the countries claim that the use of encryption is a part of human right, on the other hands some country has another vision on national security.

The purpose of this survey was to gather individual's attitudes and feelings towards privacy and the selling of data. A total (N) of 1,107 people responded to the survey. We conducted an online survey through a distribution platform (Amazon's Mechanical Turk) which has been developed through Qualtrics software. The survey covers: (1) Experiences of online data and privacy breaches (2) Concerns regarding privacy (3) The use of personal data by companies (4) The use of personal data by institutions (5) Trust in companies and institutions (6) Acceptability of monetising privacy (7) Bulk data collection by governments

Preface -- Contents -- Table of Cases -- European Court of Human Rights -- European Court of Justice -- USA -- UK -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- 1.1 Background and Subject Matter -- 1.2 Aims of the Research -- 1.3 Approach of the Research -- 1.4 Overview of the Structure -- Part I: General Part -- Chapter 2: Protection of Privacy and Data Protection in Aviation Security -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 What Is Privacy and Data Protection -- 2.2.1 The Concept of Privacy -- 2.2.2 The Concept of Data Protection -- 2.2.2.1 The Concept of Personal Data -- 2.2.2.2 The Concept of Processing -- 2.2.2.3 Information Security in Aviation -- 2.2.3 Relation Between Privacy and Data Protection -- 2.3 Privacy and Data Protection Regulation -- 2.3.1 International -- 2.3.2 EU -- 2.3.3 National -- 2.3.3.1 UK -- 2.3.3.2 Norway -- 2.3.3.3 USA -- 2.3.3.4 Russia -- 2.4 Concluding Remarks -- Chapter 3: Other Human Rights in Aviation Security -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 The Concept of Human Rights -- 3.2.1 Protection of Human Rights -- 3.2.2 Limitations of Rights -- 3.3 Right to Life -- 3.4 Right to Health -- 3.5 Right to Freedom of Movement -- 3.6 Right to Equal Treatment and Non-discrimination -- 3.7 Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion -- 3.8 Rights of the Child -- 3.9 Concluding Remarks -- Chapter 4: Civil Aviation Security -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Security and Its Relation to Safety -- 4.3 Civil Aviation and Civil Aviation Security by Numbers -- 4.4 Snapshots from History -- 4.4.1 The Earliest Days of Aviation - 1968 -- 4.4.2 1968-9/11 -- 4.4.3 Aftermath of 9/11 -- 4.4.4 Recent Developments -- 4.5 Aviation Security Concept -- 4.5.1 Introduction -- 4.5.2 Risk Assessment -- 4.5.3 Assets -- 4.5.4 Threats -- 4.5.4.1 Civil Aviation as a Target for Terrorists -- 4.5.4.2 Modern Terrorism