"The Corona warning app deserves her trust."With these words, Chancellor Angela Merkel for the widespread use of private smartphones was able to better track the infection events. Gernot Rieder (University of Hamburg) asked at the Conference The Philosophy and Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, as she had come to this clear statement and drew the complicated emergence of the app.
The app should use according to the planning of the Ministry of Health at first location data, which a relaxation of data protection was sought. According to public criticism, the Ministry had to bring back the tarp. Now the approach has been pursued to use contact information instead of location data and save it decentralized. The app was developed as an open source project and published for the first time in June 2020.
"Trust due to differences"
This story show that trust and confidence is gradually developed, so rieder. They are the result of a chain of decisions. It is not alone about the technologies, but also their social embedding.
Persons and institutions had played a crucial role, with Rieder, in particular, highlighted one of the open letter signed by six organizations. These organizations have just been trusted because of their differences. Confidence in the Corona warning app owes the controversy.
The risk of expansion to other areas
A little different was the development in Israel, as Niva Koren-Elkin (Tel Aviv University) reported. The Ministry of Health at Marz 2020 initially offered the app Hamagen, whose use was voluntary. Data was stored on the smartphone and the users were asked to report a possible alarm to the health care authorities. After publishing the app in June 2020 Version 2 of the app, the Ministry of Health was supported by support for this in December.
In parallel, the government had driven a central monitoring of all mobile phones (Global Surveillance System). This use of a technology that is actually intended for terrorism, was discussed heavily, then approved in July 2020 for six months, but only finished in Marz 2021 by the highest court. Although the comprehensive monitoring had been admitted only for the tight purpose of the pandemic occlusion, there is always the risk of expansion to other areas, said Koren-Elkin. The dispute over the termination of the maaking underlines this reminder.
"Clear and conceivable system architecture required"
When tracking, it never went to individual actors, but always a whole okosystem of involved, stressed Tilo Bohmann (University of Hamburg). Their relationships with each other are mostly difficult to overlook.
For example, at eBay Germany, more than 16 working days were required to read the business conditions of more than 900 partners with which a user comes into contact with the platform utilization. In order to strong confidence in apps for pandemie bumps, it requires a clear and conceivable system architecture for pursuing it facilitated data streams.
"Privacy requires data flow"
Helen Nissenbaum (Cornell Tech) finally served with the question of what exactly the protection of privacy actually means. Basically, it is good if data dropped, she said. No data flow is synonymous with secrecy. The protection of privacy therefore requires an appropriate data flow that corresponds to the applicable standards. However, from the respective circumstances, the context.
Nissenbaum has therefore called the approach developed by it is contextual integrity. To judge whether a data determination was legitimate, therefore, FUNF parameters had to be observed: topic, transmitter, receivers, type of message, method of transmission. The simple distinction of "private" and "public" reduce the problem on only a parameter and do not work as empirical studies had such nissen tree. As well as the most widely used understanding clarifications on general business conditions or for cookie use, the Internet users are demanded. Such explanations could certainly have their place, says Nissenbaum, but as a central goalwake of privacy are unsuitable.