In widely used sociological descriptions of how accountability is structured through institutions, an “actor” (e.g., the developer) is accountable to a “forum” (e.g., regulatory agencies) empowered to pass judgements on and demand changes from the actor or enforce sanctions. However, questions about structuring accountability persist: why and how is a forum compelled to keep making demands of the actor when such demands are called for? To whom is a forum accountable in the performance of its responsibilities, and how can its practices and decisions be contested? In the context of algorithmic accountability, we contend that a robust accountability regime requires a triadic relationship, wherein the forum is also accountable to another entity: the public(s). Typically, as is the case with environmental impact assessments, public(s) make demands upon the forum's judgements and procedures through the courts, thereby establishing a minimum standard of due diligence. However, core challenges relating to: (1) lack of documentation, (2) difficulties in claiming standing, and (3) struggles around admissibility of expert evidence on and achieving consensus over the workings of algorithmic systems in adversarial proceedings prevent the public from approaching the courts when faced with algorithmic harms. In this paper, we demonstrate that the courts are the primary route—and the primary roadblock—in the pursuit of redress for algorithmic harms. Courts often find algorithmic harms non-cognizable and rarely require developers to address material claims of harm. To address the core challenges of taking algorithms to court, we develop a relational approach to algorithmic accountability that emphasizes not what the actors do nor the results of their actions, but rather how interlocking relationships of accountability are constituted in a triadic relationship between actors, forums, and public(s). As is the case in other regulatory domains, we believe that impact assessments (and similar accountability documentation) can provide the grounds for contestation between these parties, but only when that triad is structured such that the public(s) are able to cohere around shared experiences and interests, contest the outcomes of algorithmic systems that affect their lives, and make demands upon the other parties. Where courts now find algorithmic harms non-cognizable, an impact assessment regime can potentially create procedural rights to protect substantive rights of the public(s). This would require algorithmic accountability policies currently under consideration to provide the public(s) with adequate standing in courts, and opportunities to access and contest the actor's documentation and the forum's judgments.
more »
« less
SAMPL: Scalable Auditability of Monitoring Processes using Public Ledgers
Organized surveillance, especially by governments poses a major
challenge to individual privacy, due to the resources governments
have at their disposal, and the possibility of overreach. Given the
impact of invasive monitoring, in most democratic countries, government
surveillance is, in theory, monitored and subject to public
oversight to guard against violations. In practice, there is a difficult
fine balance between safeguarding individual’s privacy rights
and not diluting the efficacy of national security investigations, as
exemplified by reports on government surveillance programs that
have caused public controversy, and have been challenged by civil
and privacy rights organizations.
Surveillance is generally conducted through a mechanism where
federal agencies obtain a warrant from a federal or state judge
(e.g., the US FISA court, Supreme Court in Canada) to subpoena
a company or service-provider (e.g., Google, Microsoft) for their
customers’ data. The courts provide annual statistics on the requests
(accepted, rejected), while the companies provide annual
transparency reports for public auditing. However, in practice, the
statistical information provided by the courts and companies is at a
very high level, generic, is released after-the-fact, and is inadequate
for auditing the operations. Often this is attributed to the lack of
scalable mechanisms for reporting and transparent auditing.
In this paper, we present SAMPL, a novel auditing framework
which leverages cryptographic mechanisms, such as zero knowledge
proofs, Pedersen commitments, Merkle trees, and public ledgers
to create a scalable mechanism for auditing electronic surveillance
processes involving multiple actors. SAMPL is the first framework
that can identify the actors (e.g., agencies and companies) that
violate the purview of the court orders. We experimentally demonstrate
the scalability for SAMPL for handling concurrent monitoring
processes without undermining their secrecy and auditability.
more »
« less
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10130859
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Session 9E: Web Censorship and Auditing
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 2249 to 2266
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract Our increasing reliance on digital technology for personal, economic, and government affairs has made it essential to secure the communications and devices of private citizens, businesses, and governments. This has led to pervasive use of cryptography across society. Despite its evident advantages, law enforcement and national security agencies have argued that the spread of cryptography has hindered access to evidence and intelligence. Some in industry and government now advocate a new technology to access targeted data: client-side scanning (CSS). Instead of weakening encryption or providing law enforcement with backdoor keys to decrypt communications, CSS would enable on-device analysis of data in the clear. If targeted information were detected, its existence and, potentially, its source would be revealed to the agencies; otherwise, little or no information would leave the client device. Its proponents claim that CSS is a solution to the encryption versus public safety debate: it offers privacy—in the sense of unimpeded end-to-end encryption—and the ability to successfully investigate serious crime. In this paper, we argue that CSS neither guarantees efficacious crime prevention nor prevents surveillance. Indeed, the effect is the opposite. CSS by its nature creates serious security and privacy risks for all society, while the assistance it can provide for law enforcement is at best problematic. There are multiple ways in which CSS can fail, can be evaded, and can be abused.
-
more » « less
Abstract A primary challenge in advancing sustainability in rangelands and drylands is the lack of governance systems that are linked to information about highly variable ecosystem conditions. Here, we describe the national‐scale implementation of a resilience‐based management system in the rangelands of Mongolia. The system comprises several interacting elements. Land type‐specific information about rangeland conditions was captured in vegetation state‐and‐transition models (STMs) that allow interpretation of monitoring data and locally tailored restoration recommendations. Rangeland monitoring systems based on standardized protocols were developed and have been adopted by national government agencies, which provide annual, high‐quality data on rangeland conditions on which to base and adjust management decisions. Rangeland use agreements between local governments and herders' collective organizations, called Pasture Users' Groups, define their respective rights and responsibilities and introduce economic and policy incentives for management changes. Pasture Users' Groups also provide a platform for information sharing and collective action. Rangeland condition data and other indicators are linked to the Responsible Nomads product traceability system that provides consumers and industry a means to associate products with sustainable rangeland management practices. The collaboration between national agencies, international donors, scientists, and herders has been essential to initial success, but longer term support and monitoring will be needed to assess whether the adoption of resilience‐based management leads to positive social and ecological outcomes. We draw generalizations and lessons learned from this effort, which can lead to the successful implementation of new management systems across global rangelands.
-
null (Ed.)Executive Summary ● As the Biden-Harris administration recommits the US to the Paris Agreement, a robust national net zero emissions strategy, integrated with local and corporate decarbonization targets, will ensure the nation achieves its climate goals. A new nationwide survey of current net zero climate commitments reveals the following: ● The US has a broad foundation of local net zero ambition on which to build a robust national decarbonization pathway. At least 53% of Americans live in a jurisdiction with a subnational net zero target. Furthermore, US companies accounting for at least $5.2 trillion in yearly sales have committed to net zero. ● Discrepancies in the quality of these targets highlight the need for strong federal leadership to raise the bar for existing subnational and corporate targets and spur further ambition to meet the goals laid out in the Paris Agreement.1 ● Existing state, local and private sector targets require improved alignment in governance mechanisms, consideration of equity and use of offsets. ● To achieve net zero emissions in the US by 2050 in an equitable, just, and leastcost manner, the White House Climate Task Force and Congress should enact policies to strategically strengthen and grow subnational and corporate ambition. In conjunction, subnational and corporate actors must continue to set and improve upon existing targets. ● Our empirical findings indicate a strong basis of support for federal policymakers to implement a robust national net zero strategy. Four key policies will enable government leaders to connect ambition to action: ○ Pledge: Include a robust net zero pledge in the US’ Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) submission that exceeds the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Race to Zero minimum criteria and adopts key leadership practices. These practices include creating a pledge that is codified in law, covers all greenhouse gases across operations and supply chains and includes an interim target of 50% emissions reductions by 2030. ○ Plan: Publish a national net zero roadmap that includes considerations of equity and justice and places constraints on the role of offsets. ○ Proceed: Align economic recovery spending with the aims of the net zero target, develop sector-specific net zero benchmarks and template strategies and mandate net zero alignment as a condition for federal bailouts. ○ Publish: Publish an annual national progress report that includes the progress of subnational commitments.more » « less
-
Jacobson v. Massachusetts has long stood for the proposition that courts should generally uphold the government’s public health policies even when they incidentally infringe constitutional rights protections. But the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted this traditional understanding, as many federal courts struck down or enjoined state and local pandemic-response policies, downplaying the applicability of Jacobson. Meanwhile, prominent legal scholars argued that judicial deference premised on Jacobson should be completely abandoned. This article argues that Jacobson must be reconsidered in light of COVID-19, but its posture of deference should not be abandoned. Instead, this article proposes a new theory of “Public Health Deference,” which is the deference that courts should afford to the government’s pandemic-response policies. This article argues that Public Health Deference should be premised on the quality of the processes by which the government creates and implements public health policies, even during an emergency. Courts should not blindly defer to the government’s pandemic response; instead, they should evaluate the government’s decision-making processes to ensure that they meet standards of transparency, accountability, public justification, and community engagement.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3319535.3354219
