ArticleBMC medical genomics2017
Aftermath of bustamante attack on genomic beacon service.
Article in BMC medical genomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward owner governance in genomic data privacy with Governome.Cell reports methods · 2025Article
- Future-proofing genomic data and consent management: a comprehensive review of technology innovations.GigaScience · 2024Review
- The evolving privacy and security concerns for genomic data analysis and sharing as observed from the iDASH competition.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Privacy-Preserving Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Biomedicine.Methods of information in medicine · 2022Article
- Haplotype-based membership inference from summary genomic data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Genome Reconstruction Attacks Against Genomic Data-Sharing Beacons.Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies. Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium · 2021Article
- The effect of kinship in re-identification attacks against genomic data sharing beacons.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Privacy-preserving techniques of genomic data-a survey.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2019Review
- Real-time Protection of Genomic Data Sharing in Beacon Services.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2018Article
- A community effort to protect genomic data sharing, collaboration and outsourcing.NPJ genomic medicine · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the enormous need for federated eco-system for holding global genomic and clinical data, Global Alliance for Genomic and Health (GA4GH) has created an international website called beacon service which allows a researcher to find out whether a specific dataset can be utilized to his or her research beforehand. This simple webservice is quite useful as it allows queries like whether a certain position of a target chromosome has a specific nucleotide. However, the increased integration of individuals genomic data into clinical practice and research raised serious privacy concern. Though the answer of such queries are yes or no in Bacon network, it results in serious privacy implication as demonstrated in a recent work from Shringarpure and Bustamante. In their attack model, the authors demonstrated that with a limited number of queries, presence of an individual in any dataset can be determined.
methodsWe propose two lightweight algorithms (based on randomized response) which captures the efficacy while preserving the privacy of the participants in a genomic beacon service. We also elaborate the strength and weakness of the attack by explaining some of their statistical and mathematical models using real world genomic database. We extend their experimental simulations for different adversarial assumptions and parameters.
resultsWe experimentally evaluated the solutions on the original attack model with different parameters for better understanding of the privacy and utility tradeoffs provided by these two methods. Also, the statistical analysis further elaborates the different aspects of the prior attack which leads to a better risk management for the participants in a beacon service.
conclusionsThe differentially private and lightweight solutions discussed here will make the attack much difficult to succeed while maintaining the fundamental motivation of beacon database network.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.