Cited by 2,028Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataUser Authentication and Security Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Information revelation and privacy in online social networks

Gross, Ralph, Acquisti, Alessandro·2005·Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society

Abstract

Participation in social networking sites has dramatically increased in recent years. Services such as Friendster, Tribe, or the Facebook allow millions of individuals to create online profiles and share personal information with vast networks of friends - and, often, unknown numbers of strangers. In this paper we study patterns of information revelation in online social networks and their privacy implications. We analyze the online behavior of more than 4,000 Carnegie Mellon University students who have joined a popular social networking site catered to colleges. We evaluate the amount of information they disclose and study their usage of the site's privacy settings. We highlight potential attacks on various aspects of their privacy, and we show that only a minimal percentage of users changes the highly permeable privacy preferences.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1102199.1102214

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 27 references

1 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. S. Arrison . Is Friendster the new TIA ? TechCentralStation , January 7, 2004 . S. Arrison. Is Friendster the new TIA? TechCentralStation, January 7, 2004.
  2. J. Black . The perils and promise of online schmoozing . BusinessWeek Online , February 20, 2004 . J. Black. The perils and promise of online schmoozing. BusinessWeek Online, February 20, 2004.
  3. J. Brown . Six degrees to nowhere. Salon.com , September 21 , 1998 . J. Brown. Six degrees to nowhere. Salon.com, September 21, 1998.
  4. D. Cave . 16 to 25? Pentagon has your number, and more . The New York Times , June 24, 2005 . D. Cave. 16 to 25? Pentagon has your number, and more. The New York Times, June 24, 2005.
  5. R. Gross . Re-identifying facial images. Technical report , Carnegie Mellon University , Institute for Software Research International, 2005 . In preparation. R. Gross. Re-identifying facial images. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, Institute for Software Research International, 2005. In preparation.
  6. R. Gross , J. Shi , and J. Cohn . Quo vadis face recognition ? In Third Workshop on Empirical Evaluation Methods in Computer Vision , 2001 . R. Gross, J. Shi, and J. Cohn. Quo vadis face recognition? In Third Workshop on Empirical Evaluation Methods in Computer Vision, 2001.
  7. K. Jump . A new kind of fame . The Columbian Missourian , September 1, 2005 . K. Jump. A new kind of fame. The Columbian Missourian, September 1, 2005.
  8. A. Leonard . You are who you know. Salon.com , June 15 , 2004 . A. Leonard. You are who you know. Salon.com, June 15, 2004.
  9. H. Liu and P. Maes . Interestmap: Harvesting social network profiles for recommendations . In Beyond Personalization - IUI 2005 , January 9, San Diego, California, USA , 2005. H. Liu and P. Maes. Interestmap: Harvesting social network profiles for recommendations. In Beyond Personalization - IUI 2005, January 9, San Diego, California, USA, 2005.
  10. A. Newitz . Defenses lacking at social network sites . SecurityFocus , December 31, 2003 . A. Newitz. Defenses lacking at social network sites. SecurityFocus, December 31, 2003.
  11. L. Sweeney . Uniqueness of simple demographics in the U.S. population. Technical report , Carnegie Mellon University , Laboratory for International Data Privacy, 2004 . L. Sweeney. Uniqueness of simple demographics in the U.S. population. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University, Laboratory for International Data Privacy, 2004.
  12. University Planning. Carnegie Mellon Factbook 2005 . Carnegie Mellon University , February 2005. University Planning. Carnegie Mellon Factbook 2005. Carnegie Mellon University, February 2005.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 1,003

Metadata

Authors
Gross, R., & Acquisti, A.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society
Publisher
ACM
Published
2005-11-07
Pages
71-80
OpenAlex
W2016563917
Cited by
2,028
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 79 · 2018: 130 · 2017: 127 · 2016: 125 · 2015: 167 · 2014: 176 · 2013: 200 · 2012: 202
FWCI
57.31
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (WPES) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
Keywords
social networking sites, privacy, information disclosure, privacy settings, privacy attacks, user behavior, university students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review