MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400484775 · doi:10.1145/3663529.3663791

A Preliminary Study on the Privacy Concerns of Using IP Addresses in Log Data

2024· article· en· W4400484775 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation privacyInternet privacyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Log data, crucial for system monitoring and debugging, inherently contains information that may conflict with privacy safeguards. This study addresses the delicate interplay between log utility and the protection of sensitive data, with a focus on how IP addresses are recorded. We scrutinize the logging practices against the privacy policies of Linux, OpenSSH, and MacOS, uncovering discrepancies that hint at broader privacy concerns. Our methodology, anchored in privacy benchmarks like GDPR, evaluates both open-source and commercial systems, revealing that the former may lack rigorous privacy controls. The research finds that the actual logging of IP addresses often deviates from policy statements, especially in open-source systems. By systematically contrasting stated policies with practical application, our study identifies privacy risks and advocates for policy reform. We call for improved privacy governance in open-source software and a reformation of privacy policies to ensure they reflect actual practices, enhancing transparency and data protection within log management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.183
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it