Deletion-Compliance in the Absence of Privacy
Jonathan Godin, Philippe Lamontagne

TL;DR
This paper proposes a new, privacy-independent definition of deletion-compliance, broadening its applicability and ensuring it can be achieved by history-independent data structures, thus separating compliance from privacy concerns.
Contribution
It introduces an alternative, standalone definition of deletion-compliance that is composable, does not require privacy, and applies to history-independent data structures.
Findings
The new definition is implied by the stronger one under natural conditions.
It is equivalent when combined with privacy requirements.
History-independent data structures meet the new compliance criteria.
Abstract
Garg, Goldwasser and Vasudevan (Eurocrypt 2020) invented the notion of deletion-compliance to formally model the "right to be forgotten", a concept that confers individuals more control over their digital data. A requirement of deletion-compliance is strong privacy for the deletion requesters since no outside observer must be able to tell if deleted data was ever present in the first place. Naturally, many real world systems where information can flow across users are automatically ruled out. The main thesis of this paper is that deletion-compliance is a standalone notion, distinct from privacy. We present an alternative definition that meaningfully captures deletion-compliance without any privacy implications. This allows broader class of data collectors to demonstrate compliance to deletion requests and to be paired with various notions of privacy. Our new definition has several…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
