*MetaPhone: The Sensitivity of Telephone Metadata <http://webpolicy.org/2014/03/12/metaphone-the-sensitivity-of-telephone-metadata/>* /Co-authored by Patrick Mutchler./ Is telephone metadata sensitive? The debate has taken on new urgency since last summer's NSA revelations; all three branches of the federal government are now considering curbs on access. Consumer privacy concerns are also salient, as the FCC assesses <http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/proceeding/view?name=13-306> telecom data sharing practices. President Obama has emphasized <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/07/statement-president> that the NSA is "not looking at content." "[T]his is just metadata," Senator Feinstein told reporters <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/06/transcript-d...>. In dismissing <https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/order_granting_governments_motion_to_dismi...> the ACLU's legal challenge, Judge Pauley shrugged off possible sensitive inferences as a "parade of horribles." On the other side, a number <http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/06/phew-it-was-just-metadata-not-think-aga...> of <http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/06/verizon-nsa-metadata-...> computer <http://www.cs.princeton.edu/%7Efelten/testimony-2013-10-02.pdf> scientists <https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/09/metadata_equals.html> have expressed concern over the privacy risks posed by metadata. Ed Felten gave a particularly detailed explanation in a declaration <https://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/natsec/clapper/2013.08.26%20ACLU%20PI%20Brie...> for the ACLU: "Telephony metadata can be extremely revealing," he wrote, "both at the level of individual calls and, especially, in the aggregate." Holding the NSA's program likely unconstitutional <https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2013cv0851-48>, Judge Leon credited this view and noted that "metadata from each person's phone 'reflects a wealth of detail about her familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.'" This is, at base, a factual dispute. Is it easy to draw sensitive inferences from phone metadata? How often do people conduct sensitive matters by phone, in a manner reflected by metadata? We used crowdsourced data to arrive at empirical answers. Since November, we have been conducting a study <https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/11/what%27s-in-your-metadata> of phone metadata privacy. Participants run the MetaPhone app <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=edu.stanford.seclab.metadata> on their Android smartphone; it submits device logs and social network information for analysis. In previous posts, we have used the MetaPhone dataset to spot relationships <http://webpolicy.org/2013/11/27/metaphone-seeing-someone/>, understand call graph interconnectivity <http://webpolicy.org/2013/12/09/metaphone-the-nsa-three-hop/>, and estimate the identifiability of phone numbers <http://webpolicy.org/2013/12/23/metaphone-the-nsas-got-your-number/>. At the outset of this study, we shared the same hypothesis as our computer science colleagues---we thought phone metadata could be very sensitive. We did not anticipate finding much evidence one way or the other, however, since the MetaPhone participant population is small and participants only provide a few months of phone activity on average. We were wrong. We found that phone metadata is unambiguously sensitive, even in a small population and over a short time window. We were able to infer medical conditions, firearm ownership, and more, using solely phone metadata. [...] Continua qui: http://webpolicy.org/2014/03/12/metaphone-the-sensitivity-of-telephone-metad...