惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

N
Netflix TechBlog - Medium
IT之家
IT之家
博客园_首页
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
美团技术团队
小众软件
小众软件
博客园 - 叶小钗
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
罗磊的独立博客
博客园 - Franky
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
博客园 - 【当耐特】
月光博客
月光博客
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理

cs.CR updates on arXiv.org

Agentic Vulnerability Reasoning on Windows COM Binaries From Beats to Breaches:How Offensive AI Infers Sensitive User Information from Playlists Undetectable Backdoors in Model Parameters: Hiding Sparse Secrets in High Dimensions When Embedding-Based Defenses Fail: Rethinking Safety in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems Token-Efficient Change Detection in LLM APIs Selfie-Capture Dynamics as an Auxiliary Signal Against Deepfakes and Injection Attacks for Mobile Identity Verification Trident: Improving Malware Detection with LLMs and Behavioral Features When Alignment Isn't Enough: Response-Path Attacks on LLM Agents RefusalGuard: Geometry-Preserving Fine-Tuning for Safety in LLMs Checkerboard: A Simple, Effective, Efficient and Learning-free Clean Label Backdoor Attack with Low Poisoning Budget Block-wise Codeword Embedding for Reliable Multi-bit Text Watermarking Secret Stealing Attacks on Local LLM Fine-Tuning through Supply-Chain Model Code Backdoors Enhancing Linux Privilege Escalation Attack Capabilities of Local LLM Agents Defusing the Trigger: Plug-and-Play Defense for Backdoored LLMs via Tail-Risk Intrinsic Geometric Smoothing Evaluating Jailbreaking Vulnerabilities in LLMs Deployed as Assistants for Smart Grid Operations: A Benchmark Against NERC Standards Behavioral Canaries: Auditing Private Retrieved Context Usage in RL Fine-Tuning FlexServe: A Fast and Secure LLM Serving System for Mobile Devices with Flexible Resource Isolation Breaking MCP with Function Hijacking Attacks: Novel Threats for Function Calling and Agentic Models Text Steganography with Dynamic Codebook and Multimodal Large Language Model An AI Agent Execution Environment to Safeguard User Data TwoHamsters: Benchmarking Multi-Concept Compositional Unsafety in Text-to-Image Models Fundamental Limitations of Favorable Privacy-Utility Guarantees for DP-SGD Symbolic Guardrails for Domain-Specific Agents: Stronger Safety and Security Guarantees Without Sacrificing Utility Hardening x402: PII-Safe Agentic Payments via Pre-Execution Metadata Filtering QShield: Securing Neural Networks Against Adversarial Attacks using Quantum Circuits Hijacking Text Heritage: Hiding the Human Signature through Homoglyphic Substitution Like a Hammer, It Can Build, It Can Break: Large Language Model Uses, Perceptions, and Adoption in Cybersecurity Operations on Reddit Private Seeds, Public LLMs: Realistic and Privacy-Preserving Synthetic Data Generation One Word at a Time: Incremental Completion Decomposition Breaks LLM Safety Measuring and Exploiting Contextual Bias in LLM-Assisted Security Code Review
Privacy Impact Assessments in the Wild: A Scoping Review
Leonardo Horn Iwaya, Ala Sarah Alaqra, Marit Hansen, Simone Fisc · 2024-02-17 · via cs.CR updates on arXiv.org

Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs) offer a systematic process for assessing the privacy impacts of a project or system. As a privacy engineering strategy, PIAs are heralded as one of the main approaches to privacy by design, supporting the early identification of threats and controls. However, there is still a shortage of empirical evidence on their uptake and proven effectiveness in practice. To better understand the current state of literature and research, this paper provides a comprehensive Scoping Review (ScR) on the topic of PIAs "in the wild", following the well-established Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. As a result, this ScR includes 45 studies, providing an extensive synthesis of the existing body of knowledge, classifying types of research and publications, appraising the methodological quality of primary research, and summarising the positive and negative aspects of PIAs in practice, as reported by studies. This ScR also identifies significant research gaps (e.g., evidence gaps from contradictory results and methodological gaps from research design deficiencies), future research pathways, and implications for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers developing and evaluating PIA frameworks. As we conclude, there is still a significant need for more primary research on the topic, both qualitative and quantitative. A critical appraisal of qualitative studies (n=28) revealed deficiencies in the methodological quality, and only four quantitative studies were identified, suggesting that current primary research remains incipient. Nonetheless, PIAs can be regarded as a prominent sub-area in the broader field of Empirical Privacy Engineering, warranting further research toward more evidence-based practices.