7 / 28
7
PCPD News
私隱專員公署通訊
•
Issue no. 31
Ms Christina Peters
美國
IBM
公司首席私隱主任
Chief Privacy Officer
IBM Corporation, US
制訂分析計劃時，可依從這套非常簡單的指引：
•
把保障私隱的設計納入分析計劃。
•
認識數據。了解數據從何而來；就數據的儲存及使用，是否有法律及其他限制。
•
考慮去識別化 ／匿名化。這方法讓機構在應用大數據之餘，亦減少對私隱的顧慮。
這已應用於多個範疇，包括醫護。
•
了解你如何使用資料，及可能對他人的影響。知道你追求的目標，及其對個人的預
期和非預期結果。
•
區別對廣大民眾的影響、及針對個人的影響 — 後者尤其需要你的深思熟慮。
•
具透明度。告知他人你在做甚麼、為何這樣做，及解釋有甚麼好處。
•
保障你的系統。適當地保障資料及系統，並在有需要時調整保安程度。
•
加入問責及監督。制訂適當的管治架構和措施。
Let me share with you this set of very simple guidelines when developing analytics
programmes.
• Design privacy into the programme.
• Know data. Understand where it comes from, and whether there are legal and
other restrictions that may apply to its storage and use.
• Consider de-identification / anonymisation. This technique allows organisations to
work with big data sets while mitigating privacy concerns, and has been used in
many fields, including healthcare.
• Understand how you use your data and how it may affect people. Understand the
goal being pursued and its intended and unintended results for individuals
• Differentiate between diffuse effects on broad populations and individually
targeted effects. The latter, in particular, requires thoughtful focus.
• Be transparent. Tell individuals what you are doing, why you are doing it and what
the benefits are.
• Secure and safeguard your systems. Appropriately secure your data and systems,
and adjust that security over time as needed.
• Build in accountability and oversight. Establish appropriate governance structures
and practices.
Ms Kimberly Gray
美國
IMS Health
環球
首席私隱主任
Chief Privacy Officer, Global,
IMS Health, US
透明度是絕對重要的，但有時只有透明度及問責性並不足夠。我們需要第三個元素 —
道德元素，以及自問以下的問題：
•
建議使用及共享數據的目的是甚麼？
•
會否導致可預見傷害的風險？
•
誰是持份者及誰會得益？
•
可否在對個人造成較少風險情況下，達致類似結果？
•
（公眾、立法者、規管者等的）看法是甚麼？
Transparency is absolutely important. But sometimes it is not enough just to be
transparent and accountable. We need a third factor – the ethical factor. And ask
yourself the following questions:
• What are the proposed purposes of our data use and of sharing it?
• Does it have the risk of causing foreseeable harm?
• Who are the stakeholders and who benefits?
• Can comparable outcomes be achieved with fewer risks to individuals?
• What is the perception (by the public, by legislators, by regulators, etc.)?