National Privacy Research Strategy, WPF participant

WPF is participating in the National Privacy Research Strategy workshop, which will be held in Washington DC this February. This workshop is part of a broader effort from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). Last October, OSTP asked federal agencies to prepare a draft National Privacy Research Strategy, with the objective to guide and prioritize federal R&D investments in privacy-enhancing technologies and solutions. At this time, the National Science Foundation issued a Request for Information to the public to ask for guidance.

WPF responded to the National Science Foundation’s RFI. In our comments, we requested a focus on what we call “statistical parity,” which means ensuring fairness throughout the statistical process, from signals to data use. (not just focusing on algorithms.) We also requested the NSF hold a workshop to air stakeholder perspectives and work on solutions. We are pleased that the workshop will be held. The Federal Cybersecurity R&D Senior Steering Group is guiding the workshop.

Dates: Feb. 18-20

Location: Washington, DC metro area

For more information:

This event is by invitation only. However, comments submitted to the NSF have been made public.

WPF’s Comments to the NSF on National Privacy Research Strategy

National Privacy Research Strategy home page with links to all comments

Original Request for Information (Federal Register)

Posted February 3, 2015 in

New Report: Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools

We are pleased to announce the publication of a new WPF report, “Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools.” This report sets out a definition of AI governance tools, documents why and how these tools are critically important for trustworthy AI, and where these tools are around the world. The report also documents problems in some AI governance tools themselves, and suggests pathways to improve AI governance tools and create an evaluative environment to measure their effectiveness. AI systems should not be deployed without simultaneously evaluating the potential adverse impacts of such systems and mitigating their risks, and most of the world agrees about the need to take precautions against the threats posed. The specific tools and techniques that exist to evaluate and measure AI systems for their inclusiveness, fairness, explainability, privacy, safety and other trustworthiness issues — called in the report collectively AI governance tools – can improve such issues. While some AI governance tools provide reassurance to the public and to regulators, the tools too often lack meaningful oversight and quality assessments. Incomplete or ineffective AI governance tools can create a false sense of confidence, cause unintended problems, and generally undermine the promise of AI systems. The report contains rich background details, use cases, potential solutions to the problems discussed in the report, and a global index of AI Governance Tools.
National IDs Around the World — Interactive map

About this Data Visualization: This interactive map displays the presence...
Report: From the Filing Cabinet to the Cloud: Updating the Privacy Act of 1974

This comprehensive report and proposed bill text is focused on the Privacy Act of 1974, an important and early Federal privacy law that applies to the government sector and some contractors. The Privacy Act was written for the 1970s information era -- an era that was characterized by the use of mainframe computers and filing cabinets. Today's digital information era looks much different than the '70s: smart phones are smarter than the old mainframes, and documents are now routinely digitized and stored and perhaps even analyzed in the cloud, among many other changes. The report focuses on why the Privacy Act needs an update that will bring it into this century, and how that could look and work. This work was written by Robert Gellman, and informed by a two-year multi-stakeholder process.