DOCSLIB.ORG

Big Data & Privacy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Solutions to many pressing economic and societal challenges lie in better understanding data. New tools for analyzing disparate information sets, called Big Data, have revolutionized our ability to find signals amongst the noise. Big Data techniques hold promise for breakthroughs ranging from better health care, a cleaner environment, safer cities, and more effective marketing. Yet, privacy advocates are concerned that the same advances will upend the power relationships between government, business and individuals, and lead to prosecutorial abuse, racial or other profiling, discrimination, redlining, overcriminalization, and other restricted freedoms. On Tuesday, September 10th, 2013, the Future of Privacy Forum joined with the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School to present a full-day workshop on questions surrounding Big Data and privacy. The event was preceded by a call for papers discussing the legal, technological, social, and policy implications of Big Data. A selection of papers was published in a special issue of the Stanford Law Review Online and others were presented at the workshop. This volume collects these papers and others in a single collection. These essays address the following questions: Does Big Data present new challenges or is it simply the latest incarnation of the data regulation debate? Does Big Data create fundamentally novel opportunities that civil liberties concerns need to accommodate? Can de-identification sufficiently minimize privacy risks? What roles should fundamental data privacy concepts such as consent, context, and data minimization play in a Big Data world? What lessons can be applied from other fields? We hope the following papers will foster more discussion about the benefits and challenges presented by Big Data—and help bring together the value of data and privacy, as well. TABLE OF CONTENTS Privacy & Big Data: Making Ends Meet Jules Polonetsky & Omer Tene .......................................................................................1 S-M-L-XL Data: Big Data as a New Informational Privacy Paradigm Michael Birnhack ...........................................................................................................7 Why Collection Matters: Surveillance as a De Facto Privacy Harm Justin Brookman & G.S. Hans ........................................................................................11 Consumer Subject Review Boards: A Thought Experiment Ryan Calo .....................................................................................................................15 Mo’ Data, Mo’ Problems? Personal Data Mining and the Challenge to the Data Minimization Principle Liane Colonna ...............................................................................................................19 Cloud Computing and Trans-border Law Enforcement Access to Private Sector Data. Challenges to Sovereignty, Privacy and Data Protection Paul de Hert & Gertjan Boulet ........................................................................................23 Taming the Beast: Big Data and the Role of Law Patrick Eggiman & Aurelia Tamò ....................................................................................27 Managing the Muddled Mass of Big Data Susan Freiwald .............................................................................................................31 Regulating the Man Behind the Curtain Christina Gagnier ..........................................................................................................35 Big Data in Small Hands Woodrow Hartzog & Evan Selinger .................................................................................39 The Glass House Effect: Why Big Data Is the New Oil, and What We Can Do About It Dennis Hirsch ...............................................................................................................44 How the Fair Credit Reporting Act Regulates Big Data Chris Jay Hoofnagle ......................................................................................................47 Buying and Selling Privacy: Big Data’s Different Burdens and Benefits Joseph W. Jerome .........................................................................................................51 Prediction, Preemption, Presumption Ian Kerr & Jessica Earle .................................................................................................55 Public v. Non-public Data: The Benefits of Administrative Controls Yianni Lagos & Jules Polonetsky .....................................................................................60 Big Data Analytics: Evolving Business Models and Global Privacy Regulation Peter Leonard ...............................................................................................................65 Big Data and Its Exclusions Jonas Lerman ...............................................................................................................70 Relational Big Data Karen E.C. Levy ............................................................................................................76 Privacy Substitutes Jonathan Mayer & Arvind Narayanan ..............................................................................81 Revisiting the 2000 Stanford Symposium in Light of Big Data William McGeveran ........................................................................................................86 Policy Frameworks to Enable Big Health Data Deven McGraw .............................................................................................................90 It’s Not Privacy & It’s Not Fair Deirdre K. Mulligan & Cynthia Dwork ..............................................................................94 Sensor Privacy as One Realistic & Reasonable Means to Begin Regulating Big Data Scott R. Peppet .............................................................................................................98 Three Paradoxes of Big Data Neil M. Richards & Jonathan H. King ..............................................................................102 Big Data: A Pretty Good Privacy Solution Ira S. Rubinstein ...........................................................................................................106 Big Data and the “New” Privacy Tradeoff Robert H. Sloan & Richard Warner .................................................................................110 Privacy in a Post-Regulatory World: Lessons from the Online Safety Debates Adam Thierer ................................................................................................................113 Has Katz Become Quaint? Use of Big Data to Outflank the 4th Amendment Jeffrey L. Vagle .............................................................................................................117 Big Data Threats Felix Wu .......................................................................................................................120 Jules Polonetsky & Omer Tene PRIVACY AND BIG DATA: MAKING ENDS MEET Jules Polonetsky & Omer Tene* Copyright 2013 The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University 66 STAN. L. REV. ONLINE 25 (2013) * INTRODUCTION efficient use of resources, on the one hand, and individuals’ rights to privacy, fairness, equality, and How should privacy risks be weighed against big freedom of speech, on the other hand. It requires data rewards? The recent controversy over leaked deciding whether efforts to cure fatal disease or documents revealing the massive scope of data eviscerate terrorism are worth subjecting human collection, analysis, and use by the NSA and individuality to omniscient surveillance and possibly other national security organizations has algorithmic decisionmaking.3 hurled to the forefront of public attention the delicate balance between privacy risks and big Unfortunately, the discussion progresses crisis by data opportunities.1 The NSA revelations crisis, often focusing on legalistic formalities while crystalized privacy advocates’ concerns of the bigger policy choices are avoided. Moreover, “sleepwalking into a surveillance society” even as the debate has become increasingly polarized, with decisionmakers remain loath to curb government each cohort fully discounting the concerns of the powers for fear of terrorist or cybersecurity other. For example, in the context of government attacks. surveillance, civil libertarians depict the government as pursuing absolute power, while law Big data creates tremendous opportunity for the enforcement officials blame privacy for child world economy not only in the field of national pornography and airplanes falling out of the sky. It security, but also in areas ranging from marketing seems that for privacy hawks, no benefit no and credit risk analysis to medical research and matter how compelling is large enough to offset urban planning. At the same time, the privacy costs, while for data enthusiasts, privacy extraordinary benefits of big data are tempered by risks are no more than an afterthought in the concerns over privacy and data protection. Privacy pursuit of complete information. advocates are concerned that the advances of the data ecosystem will upend the power relationships This Essay suggests that while the current privacy between government, business, and individuals, debate methodologically explores and lead to racial or other profiling, discrimination, the risks presented by big data, it fails to untangle over-criminalization, and other restricted freedoms. commensurate
Recommended publications
  • Neoformalistická Analýza Televizního Seriálu Community

    Neoformalistická Analýza Televizního Seriálu Community

    Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci Filozofická fakulta Neoformalistická analýza televizního seriálu Community Bakalářská diplomová práce Studijní program: Teorie a dějiny dramatických umění Vedoucí práce: Mgr. Jakub Korda, Ph.D. Autorka práce: Martina Smékalová OLOMOUC 2013 Prohlášení Prohlašuji, že jsem tuto bakalářskou práci vypracovala samostatně pod odborným dohledem vedoucího diplomové práce a uvedla jsem všechny použité podklady a literaturu. V Olomouci dne ………… Podpis ………….. Na tomto místě bych ráda poděkovala Mgr. Jakubu Kordovi, Ph.D., za odborné vedení a konzultování práce. 1. ÚVOD….………………………………………………………………………...…6 1. 1. Struktura práce……………………………………………………………....8 2. TEORETICKÁ ČÁST…………………………………………………………....9 2. 1. Metodologický postup práce………………………………………………..9 2. 2. Použitá literatura a prameny……………………………………………...10 2. 2. 1. Odborná literatura……………………………………………………10 2. 2. 2. Populární literatura…………………………………………………..11 2. 3. Intermedialita a Intertextualita…………………………………...………12 2. 4. Fikční světy podle Mgr. Radomíra Kokeše……………………………....13 2.5. Poznámka k seriálové terminologii a formě seriality…………………….16 3. ANALYTICKÁ ČÁST…………………………………………………………..18 3. 1. Pozadí vzniku seriálu Community………………………………………...18 3. 2. Ocenění a nominace seriálu………………………………………………..20 3. 3. Žánr a forma seriality……………………………………………………..23 3. 4. Analýza postav……………………………………………………………...26 3. 5. Analýza vybraných fikčních světů seriálu Community………………….29 3. 5. 1. Aletický subsvět……………………………………………………...29 3. 5. 2. Alternativní subsvět………………………………………………….32
  • White Paper Swire US EU Surveillance

    White Paper Swire US EU Surveillance

    December 17, 2015 US Surveillance Law, Safe Harbor, and Reforms Since 2013 Peter Swire1 Executive Summary: This White Paper is a submission to the Belgian Privacy Authority for its December 18, 2015 Forum on “The Consequences of the Judgment in the Schrems Case.”2 The Forum discusses the decision by the European Court of Justice in Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner3 that the EU/US Safe Harbor was unlawful under the EU Data Protection Directive, particularly due to concerns about US surveillance law. For the Forum, I have been asked to comment on two issues: 1) Is US surveillance law fundamentally compatible with E.U. data protection law? 2) What actions and reforms has the US taken since the Snowden revelations began in June 2013? The White Paper draws on my background as a scholar of both EU data protection law and US surveillance law. It addresses serious misunderstandings of US national security law, reflected in official statements made in the Schrems case and elsewhere. It has three chapters: (1) The fundamental equivalence of the United States and EU member States as constitutional democracies under the rule of law. In the Schrems decision, the US was criticized for failing to ensure “a level of protection of fundamental rights essentially equivalent to that guaranteed in the EU legal order.” This chapter critiques that finding, instead showing that the United States has strict rule of law, separation of powers, and judicial oversight of law enforcement and national security 1 Peter Swire is the Huang Professor of Law and Ethics at the Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business and a Senior Fellow of the Future of Privacy Forum.
  • 7 October 2019 Dear Mr. Zuckerberg, OPEN LETTER

    7 October 2019 Dear Mr. Zuckerberg, OPEN LETTER

    7 October 2019 Dear Mr. Zuckerberg, OPEN LETTER: FACEBOOK’S END-TO-END SECURITY PLANS The organizations below write today to encourage you, in no uncertain terms, to continue increasing the end-to-end security across Facebook’s messaging services. We have seen requests from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australian governments ​ asking you to suspend these plans “until [Facebook] can guarantee the added privacy does not reduce public safety”. We believe they have this entirely backwards: each day that platforms do not support strong end-to-end security is another day that this data can be breached, mishandled, or otherwise obtained by powerful entities or rogue actors to exploit it. Given the remarkable reach of Facebook’s messaging services, ensuring default end-to-end security will provide a substantial boon to worldwide communications freedom, to public safety, and to democratic values, and we urge you to proceed with your plans to encrypt messaging through Facebook products and services. We encourage you to resist calls to create so-called ​ “backdoors” or “exceptional access” to the content of users’ messages, which will fundamentally weaken encryption and the privacy and security of all users. Sincerely, 1. 7amleh-The Arab Center for Social Media Advancement 2. Access Now 3. ACM US Technology Policy Committee 4. ACT | The App Association 5. AfroLeadership 6. Alternatives 7. American Civil Liberties Union 8. Americans for Prosperity 9. APADOR-CH 10. ARTICLE 19 11. Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet - Internauta Argentina 12. Asociación Colombiana de Usuarios de Internet 13. Asociación por los Derechos Civiles (ADC), Argentina 14.
  • Privacy in Atlantis*

    Privacy in Atlantis*

    Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 18, Number 1 Fall 2004 PRIVACY IN ATLANTIS* Jerry Kang & Benedikt Buchner** TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................230 SCENE I: PRIVACY’S FORM...............................................................231 A. Market-Talk..............................................................................231 B. Dignity-Talk .............................................................................234 SCENE II: PRIVACY’S SUBSTANCE....................................................236 A. The Core Similarities ...............................................................237 1. Dignity’s Consent (or the Market’s Initial Allocation) .........237 2. Data Protection Regulations (or Intangible Property Regulations) ....................................................................240 B. Too Little Control.....................................................................244 1. The Problem: Hard Choices ..................................................244 2. The Response: Fortifying the Individual...............................246 C. Too Much Control....................................................................251 1. The Problem: Societal Overrides ..........................................251 2. The Response: Interest Balancing .........................................252 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................255 APPENDIX .........................................................................................257
  • NOTHING to HIDE: Tools for Talking (And Listening) About Data Privacy for Integrated Data Systems

    NOTHING to HIDE: Tools for Talking (And Listening) About Data Privacy for Integrated Data Systems

    NOTHING TO HIDE: Tools for Talking (and Listening) About Data Privacy for Integrated Data Systems OCTOBER 2018 Acknowledgements: We extend our thanks to the AISP Network and Learning Community, whose members provided their support and input throughout the development of this toolkit. Special thanks to Whitney Leboeuf, Sue Gallagher, and Tiffany Davenport for sharing their experiences and insights about IDS privacy and engagement, and to FPF Policy Analyst Amy Oliver and FPF Policy Intern Robert Martin for their contributions to this report. We would also like to thank our partners at Third Sector Capital Partners and the Annie E. Casey Foundation for their support. This material is based upon work supported by the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS). Opinions or points of view expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of, or a position that is endorsed by, CNCS or the Social Innovation Fund. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Why engage and communicate about privacy? ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Using this toolkit to establish social license to integrate data .....................................................................................................................
  • January 11, 2015 President Barack Obama the White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Access Now 1110 Vermont

    January 11, 2015 President Barack Obama the White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Access Now 1110 Vermont

    January 11, 2015 President Barack Obama The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Access Now 1110 Vermont Avenue NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 Dear President Obama, We urge you to protect the security of your citizens, your economy, and your government by supporting the development and use of secure communications tools and technologies, rejecting policies that would prevent or undermine the use of strong encryption, and urging other leaders to do the same. Encryption tools, technologies, and services are essential to protect against harm and to shield our digital infrastructure and personal communications from unauthorized access. The ability to freely develop and use encryption provides the cornerstone for today’s global economy. Economic growth in the digital age is powered by the ability to trust and authenticate our interactions and communicate and conduct business securely, both within and across borders. Some of the most noted technologists and experts on encryption recently explained that laws or policies that undermine encryption would “force a U-turn from the best practices now being deployed to make the Internet more secure,” “would substantially increase system complexity” and raise associated costs, and “would create concentrated targets that could attract bad actors.”1 The absence of encryption facilitates easy access to sensitive personal data, including financial and identity information, by criminals and other malicious actors. Once obtained, sensitive data can be sold, publicly posted, or used
  • Source Code Patterns of Cross Site Scripting in PHP Open Source Projects

    Source Code Patterns of Cross Site Scripting in PHP Open Source Projects

    Source Code Patterns of Cross Site Scripting in PHP Open Source Projects Felix Schuckert12, Max Hildner1, Basel Katt2 ,∗ and Hanno Langweg12 1 HTWG Konstanz, Department of Computer Science, Konstanz, Baden-W¨urttemberg, Germany [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 2 Department of Information Security and Communication Technology, Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Gjøvik, Norway [email protected] Abstract To get a better understanding of Cross Site Scripting vulnerabilities, we investigated 50 randomly selected CVE reports which are related to open source projects. The vulnerable and patched source code was manually reviewed to find out what kind of source code patterns were used. Source code pattern categories were found for sources, concatenations, sinks, HTML context and fixes. Our resulting categories are compared to categories from CWE. A source code sample which might have led developers to believe that the data was already sanitized is described in detail. For the different HTML context categories, the necessary Cross Site Scripting prevention mechanisms are described. 1 Introduction Cross Site Scripting (XSS) is on the fourth place in Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) top 25 2011 [3] and on the seventh place in Open Wep Application Security Project (OWASP) top 10 2017 [4]. Accordingly, Cross Site Scripting is still a common issue in web security. To discover the reason why the same vulnerabilities are still occurring, we investigated the vulnerable and patched source code from open source projects. Similar methods, functions and operations are grouped together and are called source code patterns.
  • Postgresql Flyer

    Postgresql Flyer

    PostgreSQL - English Usage Examples Further Information Development system PostgreSQL (2nd Edition), Korry Douglas, Sams Publishing, ISBN: 0672327562 A small system just for developing, running on any supported platform (Unix, Linux, Mac OS, Windows). Beginning Databases with PostgreSQL:From Novice to This system does not need much system resources. Professional, Second Edition, Neil Matthew, Apress, The result can be exported and used in the production ISBN: 1590594789 PostgreSQL system. PostgreSQL Developer's Handbook, Ewald Geschwinde, Sams Publishing, ISBN 0672322609 Beginning PHP and PostgreSQL 8, W. Jason Gilmore, Small to mid-level database server Apress, ISBN 1590595475 A small to mid-level database server has just small PHP and PostgreSQL Advanced Web Programming, hardware requirements. PostgreSQL is not running ex- Ewald Geschwinde and Robert Treat, Sams Publishing, clusive on this system but shares the resources with ISBN 0672323826 other services. A webserver (Blog, CMS) with a data- base backend is a good example. PostgreSQL homepage: www.postgresql.org pgAdmin III: http://www.pgadmin.org Large database server PgFoundry: http://pgfoundry.org phpPgAdmin: http://phppgadmin.sourceforge.net A large database server has extensive hardware re- PostGIS: postgis.refractions.net quirements and is usually dedicated to a single appli- cation or project. PostgreSQL can use the full power Slony: slony.info of the hardware without the need to share resources. PostgreSQL 8.3 What is PostgreSQL? PostgreSQL 8.3, released in early 2008, includes a record PostgreSQL is an object-relational database management number of new and improved features which will greatly system (ORDBMS). It is freely available and usable with- enhance PostgreSQL for application designers, database out licensing fee.
  • Disinformation, and Influence Campaigns on Twitter 'Fake News'

    Disinformation, and Influence Campaigns on Twitter 'Fake News'

    Disinformation, ‘Fake News’ and Influence Campaigns on Twitter OCTOBER 2018 Matthew Hindman Vlad Barash George Washington University Graphika Contents Executive Summary . 3 Introduction . 7 A Problem Both Old and New . 9 Defining Fake News Outlets . 13 Bots, Trolls and ‘Cyborgs’ on Twitter . 16 Map Methodology . 19 Election Data and Maps . 22 Election Core Map Election Periphery Map Postelection Map Fake Accounts From Russia’s Most Prominent Troll Farm . 33 Disinformation Campaigns on Twitter: Chronotopes . 34 #NoDAPL #WikiLeaks #SpiritCooking #SyriaHoax #SethRich Conclusion . 43 Bibliography . 45 Notes . 55 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study is one of the largest analyses to date on how fake news spread on Twitter both during and after the 2016 election campaign. Using tools and mapping methods from Graphika, a social media intelligence firm, we study more than 10 million tweets from 700,000 Twitter accounts that linked to more than 600 fake and conspiracy news outlets. Crucially, we study fake and con- spiracy news both before and after the election, allowing us to measure how the fake news ecosystem has evolved since November 2016. Much fake news and disinformation is still being spread on Twitter. Consistent with other research, we find more than 6.6 million tweets linking to fake and conspiracy news publishers in the month before the 2016 election. Yet disinformation continues to be a substantial problem postelection, with 4.0 million tweets linking to fake and conspiracy news publishers found in a 30-day period from mid-March to mid-April 2017. Contrary to claims that fake news is a game of “whack-a-mole,” more than 80 percent of the disinformation accounts in our election maps are still active as this report goes to press.
  • A Framework for Working with Cross-Application Social Tagging Data

    A Framework for Working with Cross-Application Social Tagging Data

    TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHEN FAKULTÜT FÜR INFORMATIK Forschungs- und Lehreinheit XI Angewandte Informatik / Kooperative Systeme A Framework for Working with Cross-Application Social Tagging Data Walter Christian Kammergruber Vollständiger Abdruck der von der Fakultät für Informatik der Technischen Universität München zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat.) genehmigten Dissertation. Vorsitzender: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Helmut Krcmar Prüfer der Dissertation: 1. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Johann Schlichter 2. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Florian Matthes Die Dissertation wurde am 26.06.2014 bei der Technischen Universität München eingere- icht und durch die Fakultät für Informatik am 26.11.2014 angenommen. Zusammenfassung Mit dem zunehmenden Erfolg des Web 2.0 wurde und wird Social-Tagging immer beliebter, und es wurde zu einem wichtigen Puzzle-Stück dieses Phänomens. Im Unterschied zu ausgefeilteren Methoden um Ressourcen zu organisieren, wie beispielsweise Taxonomien und Ontologien, ist Social-Tagging einfach einzusetzen und zu verstehen. Bedingt durch die Einfachheit finden sich keine expliziten und formalen Strukturen vor. Das Fehlen von Struktur führt zu Problemen beim Wiederaufinden von Informationen, da beispielsweise Mehrdeutigkeiten in Suchanfragen nicht aufgelöst werden können. Zum Beispiel kann ein Tag „dog“ (im Englischen) für des Menschen bester Freund stehen, aber auch für das Lieblingsessen mancher Personen, einem Hot Dog. Ein Bild einer Katze kann mit„angora cat“, „cat“, „mammal“, „animal“oder „creature“getagged sein. Die Art der Tags hängt sehr stark vom individuellen Nutzer ab. Weiterhin sind Social-Tagging-Daten auf verschiedene Applikationen verteilt. Ein gemeinsamer Mediator ist nicht vorhanden. Beispielsweise kann ein Nutzer auf vielen verschiedenen Applikationen Entitäten taggen. Für das Internet kann das Flickr, Delicious, Twitter, Facebook and viele mehr sein.
  • Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata

    Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata

    Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata Adam Mathes Computer Mediated Communication - LIS590CMC Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign December 2004 Abstract This paper examines user-generated metadata as implemented and applied in two web services designed to share and organize digital me- dia to better understand grassroots classification. Metadata - data about data - allows systems to collocate related information, and helps users find relevant information. The creation of metadata has generally been approached in two ways: professional creation and author creation. In li- braries and other organizations, creating metadata, primarily in the form of catalog records, has traditionally been the domain of dedicated profes- sionals working with complex, detailed rule sets and vocabularies. The primary problem with this approach is scalability and its impracticality for the vast amounts of content being produced and used, especially on the World Wide Web. The apparatus and tools built around professional cataloging systems are generally too complicated for anyone without spe- cialized training and knowledge. A second approach is for metadata to be created by authors. The movement towards creator described docu- ments was heralded by SGML, the WWW, and the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. There are problems with this approach as well - often due to inadequate or inaccurate description, or outright deception. This paper examines a third approach: user-created metadata, where users of the documents and media create metadata for their own individual use that is also shared throughout a community. 1 The Creation of Metadata: Professionals, Con- tent Creators, Users Metadata is often characterized as “data about data.” Metadata is information, often highly structured, about documents, books, articles, photographs, or other items that is designed to support specific functions.
  • S:\FULLCO~1\HEARIN~1\Committee Print 2018\Henry\Jan. 9 Report

    S:\FULLCO~1\HEARIN~1\Committee Print 2018\Henry\Jan. 9 Report

    Embargoed for Media Publication / Coverage until 6:00AM EST Wednesday, January 10. 1 115TH CONGRESS " ! S. PRT. 2d Session COMMITTEE PRINT 115–21 PUTIN’S ASYMMETRIC ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY IN RUSSIA AND EUROPE: IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY A MINORITY STAFF REPORT PREPARED FOR THE USE OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JANUARY 10, 2018 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations Available via World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 28–110 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:06 Jan 09, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5012 Sfmt 5012 S:\FULL COMMITTEE\HEARING FILES\COMMITTEE PRINT 2018\HENRY\JAN. 9 REPORT FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER seneagle Embargoed for Media Publication / Coverage until 6:00AM EST Wednesday, January 10. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS BOB CORKER, Tennessee, Chairman JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland MARCO RUBIO, Florida ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JEFF FLAKE, Arizona CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware CORY GARDNER, Colorado TOM UDALL, New Mexico TODD YOUNG, Indiana CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming TIM KAINE, Virginia JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts ROB PORTMAN, Ohio JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon RAND PAUL, Kentucky CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey TODD WOMACK, Staff Director JESSICA LEWIS, Democratic Staff Director JOHN DUTTON, Chief Clerk (II) VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:06 Jan 09, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 S:\FULL COMMITTEE\HEARING FILES\COMMITTEE PRINT 2018\HENRY\JAN.