The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Security-control methods for statistical databases: a comparative study
Open accessAbstract
This paper considers the problem of providing security to statistical databases against disclosure of confidential information. Security-control methods suggested in the literature are classified into four general approaches: conceptual, query restriction, data perturbation, and output perturbation. Criteria for evaluating the performance of the various security-control methods are identified. Security-control methods that are based on each of the four approaches are discussed, together with their performance with respect to the identified evaluation criteria. A detailed comparative analysis of the most promising methods for protecting dynamic-online statistical databases is also presented. To date no single security-control method prevents both exact and partial disclosures. There are, however, a few perturbation-based methods that prevent exact disclosure and enable the database administrator to exercise "statistical disclosure control." Some of these methods, however introduce bias into query responses or suffer from the 0/1 query-set-size problem (i.e., partial disclosure is possible in case of null query set or a query set of size 1). We recommend directing future research efforts toward developing new methods that prevent exact disclosure and provide statistical-disclosure control, while at the same time do not suffer from the bias problem and the 0/1 query-set-size problem. Furthermore, efforts directed toward developing a bias-correction mechanism and solving the general problem of small query-set-size would help salvage a few of the current perturbation-based methods.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Calibrating Noise to Sensitivity in Private Data Analysis
Dwork, C., McSherry, F., Nissim, K., & Smith, A. (2006) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/11681878_14 · Cited by 7,272
L -diversity: Privacy beyond k -anonymity
Machanavajjhala, A., Kifer, D., Gehrke, J., & Venkitasubramaniam, M. (2007) · ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data · doi:10.1145/1217299.1217302 · Cited by 3,617
Differential Privacy: A Survey of Results
Dwork, C. (2008) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-79228-4_1 · Cited by 3,542
Robust De-anonymization of Large Sparse Datasets
Narayanan, A., & Shmatikov, V. (2008) · 2008 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (sp 2008) · doi:10.1109/sp.2008.33 · Cited by 2,372
Privacy-preserving data mining
Agrawal, R., & Srikant, R. (2000) · Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data · doi:10.1145/342009.335438 · Cited by 1,719
Metadata
- Authors
- Adam, N. R., & Worthmann, J. C.
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 1989-12
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 515-556
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W2113427031
- Cited by
- 969
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Security-control methods for statistical databases: a comparative study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/76894.76895
- The paper
- Adam, N. R., & Worthmann, J. C. (1989). Security-control methods for statistical databases: a comparative study. ACM Computing Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1145/76894.76895
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.