Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28786364›Full record

ArticleBMC medical genomics2017

Aftermath of bustamante attack on genomic beacon service.

Md Momin Al Aziz, Reza Ghasemi, Md Waliullah, Noman Mohammed

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Genome Reconstruction Attacks Against Genomic Data-Sharing Beacons.Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies. Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Real-time Protection of Genomic Data Sharing in Beacon Services.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2018
    Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Md Momin Al AzizDepartment of Computer Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. azizmma@cs.umanitoba.ca.
Reza GhasemiDepartment of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran.
Md WaliullahDepartment of Computer Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Noman MohammedDepartment of Computer Science, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
University of Manitoba · CABu-Ali Sina University · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

AlgorithmsComputer SecurityGenomicsTime FactorsBustamante attackBustamante attack mitigationGA4GH genomic beaconGenomic beacon serviceHuman genomic data privacyRe-identification attack

Identifiers

PMID28786364
PMCPMC5547468
OpenAlexW2739248717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.