ON THE IDENTITY TRAIL
MAY 12/13 2006
Forty-six researchers, students and guests met for two days and focused on forging further inter-disciplinarity and collaboration among team members. Planning also began for a number of events that will occur over the next two years including, a judicial training program (on reasonable expectation of privacy), an international workshop, the project’s final conference and the project’s final publication.
Jacquelyn Burkell and David Matheson
The first day was devoted to discussing the barriers to inter-disciplinary work and the methods that might be used to bridge the discipline divide. The discussion was structured around three case studies in which a member from each of the project’s three tracks (humanities, law & technology) gave a short presentation on their work. Following the presentations there was a response from two people with different disciplinary perspectives, as well as a broader discussion among all team members.
The first case study engaged the work of the humanities. Steven Davis, a philosopher, gave a presentation that centered around a draft paper on identity that had been pre-circulated to the group. Ian Kerr (law) and Latanya Sweeney (technology) were the respondents to Steven’s presentation. The topic drew wide-ranging debate that drew out numerous perspectives and underscored the need for careful distinctions in concepts such as identity, identification and identifiable and the need for further work connected to the inter-relation of these concepts.
Natalie Bellefeuille and Natalie Senst
The second case study engaged the work of the technologists. Steve Mann
, a computer scientist, gave a presentation on his work on sousveillance
, which included the use of technology to stream his personal experience captured by a camera phone to a website. Dave Matheson
(humanities) and Val Steeves
(law) were the respondents to Steve’s presentation. The ensuing discussion was lively and animated and brought out the underlying tensions and values conflicts that are engaged by Steve’s work and approach.
The third case study engaged the work of the law from a feminist perspective. Jane Bailey
, a law professor and feminist, gave a presentation on the relationship between and the conflicts inherent in the concepts of equality and privacy. Charles Raab
(humanities) and Stefan Brands
(technology) were the respondents to Jane’s presentation. This final topic also drew wide-ranging debate that engaged the complexities of the meaning(s) of privacy and the need, as in the case of issues around identity, for further conceptual clarification.
At the end of the first day, team members had supper together at Frescocielo
and were treated to a presentation by Latanya Sweeny
. Latanya’s presentation gave team members a snap-shot of the type and variety of work she is engaged with.
James Fung, Marty Finestone, Natalie Bellefeuille and Jeffrey Vicq at the team dinner.
The theme of the morning of the second day was privacy enhancing technologies. The morning’s session focused on the work of the technologists, in recognition of the challenges the team has faced in fully integrating their work. The objectives of the session were to provide team members with a clearer understanding of the work being undertaken by the technologists and to promote pathways to inter-disciplinary and collaborative work. Each researcher or student gave a short presentation, which was followed by a general discussion period. The presentations were as follows: Stefan Brands
– User-Centric Identity Management James Muir
- Internet Geolocation and Evasion Yogesh Kalyani
- Privacy Negotiation using a Mobile Agent Mansour Alsaleh
- Enhancing Consumer Privacy in Identity Federation Architectures Jeremy Clark
- Anonymity Enhancement: An Introduction to MIX Networks Architectures Carlisle Adams
– Privacy-Preserving Delegation of Digital Credentials
Each presenter did a first-class job in making highly complex technical matters understandable to non-technical team members. This greatly assisted the ensuing discussions and undoubtedly assisted in opening up potential avenues for collaboration.
The afternoon session began with a presentation from Charles Raab
, a political scientist and Professor of Government at the University of Edinburgh and an invited guest to the meeting. Charles spoke about his work on identity and linked this back to the sessions of the previous day. The presentation was followed with a lively discussion.
Professor Charles Raab
The remainder of the second day was spent on team business and planning for the future. Team members were given an update on forthcoming activities, which include:
• Panel participation in the Information the Rights and Organizational Accountabilities Workshop on June 16-17 2006 at University of Toronto. The workshop has been developed by the Canadian Research Alliance for Community Innovation and Networking (CRACIN), which is led by Andrew Clement and is also a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Initiatives in the New Economy (SSHRC INE) recipient. The workshop will bring together a number of SSHRC INE recipients and the ID Trail project will participate in two panels: one on lawful access led by Pippa Lawson and the other on Copyright reform, DRM, free culture led by Ian Kerr and Alex Cameron.
• The development of a privacy module for the National Judicial Institute, which will focus on a conceptual framework on the reasonable expectation of privacy and which will be delivered to approximately 250 county court judges at their meeting in New Brunswick in September. The module will also be delivered in November to Queen’s Bench judges in Alberta.
• An international workshop in Bologna, Italy at the end of May 2007. The international workshop will see ID Trail members come together with members of the European PRIME initiative and a group of researchers at the University of Bologna, all of whom are working on similar topics and themes. The workshop will be preceded with an internal meeting that will provide an opportunity for team members to workshop papers in development and receive multi-disciplinary input from other team members.
• The development and delivery of a day’s workshop on a reasonable expectation of privacy for the 2007 Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference, which will be held in Montreal, P.Q.
• The ID Trail’s final conference in October 2007.
• The ID Trail’s final publication in spring 2008.
Cynthia Aoki and Carole Lucock
In order to foster inter-disciplinary work, team members were encouraged to ensure that the summary of their work-in-progress is continually updated as it is a vital source of information for other team members. A copy of the researcher work in progress report can be found here
. The student work in progress report is available here
Researchers and Students then broke into separate meetings. The researchers brainstormed ideas for the final conference and publication and will submit further ideas for consideration over the next couple of months. Students gave each other updates on their work in progress and then spent some time discussing ideas for the inclusion of students in the final conference. Ideas for inclusion included an integrated approach that might include a day for students to present work (selection based on a peer review process) and opportunities to present at during the two-day conference. Students also discussed how the blog might be invigorated and suggested that barriers to posting, such as the requirement to categorize, be eliminated.
Jason Millar and Chris Young
Discussion ensued over coffee (photograph by Cynthia Aoki).