In the last years we have witnessed the appearance of a variety of strategies to design optimal location privacy-preserving mechanisms, in terms of maximizing the adversary's expected error with respect to the users' whereabouts. In this work, we take a closer look at the defenses created by these strategies and show that, even though they are indeed optimal in terms of adversary's correctness, not all of them offer the same protection when looking at other dimensions of privacy. To avoid "bad" choices, we argue that the search for optimal mechanisms must be guided by complementary criteria. We provide two example auxiliary metrics that help in this regard: the conditional entropy, that captures an informationtheoretic aspect of the problem; and the worst-case quality loss, that ensures that the output of the mechanism always provides a minimum utility to the users. We describe a new mechanism that maximizes the conditional entropy and is optimal in terms of average adversary error, and compare its performance with previously proposed optimal mechanisms using two real datasets. Our empirical results confirm that no mechanism fares well on every privacy criteria simultaneously, making apparent the need for considering multiple privacy dimensions to have a good understanding of the privacy protection a mechanism provides.
Subsequently, Oya et al. REF used the same approach to design optimal LPPMs in terms of the conditional entropy.
Back to the Drawing Board: Revisiting the Design of Optimal Location Privacy-preserving Mechanisms
CCS '17
Computer Science