The paper emphasizes the need for thinking innovatively in our way of handling data in regards to IoT. As we get more “things” which can collect data, concerns about user privacy have been raised. The authors suggest a new approach in order to satisfy the different user privacy needs and wants; Ethical Design. Instead of defining broad privacy settings, the individual user gets a profile, in which they can adjust their personal privacy settings. This profile is based on the user’s IT skills (and priced hereafter), and the “things” around can adjust automatically to the settings of the profile; and furthermore taking other circumstances, such as context, into account. This solution is based on an existing platform, SecKit, which is not yet integrated into the “things” or has a specific marketplace. The paper illustrates the power of the individual users, whom can provide the system with the degree of complexity it needs in order to satisfy various stakeholders (Baldini et al., 2016).
Three points of critique
1. Change in language
In the first half of the text, the authors use an easy understandable language, but throughout the text ends up using more technical terms, which are introduced, but not explained: “The Policy Decision Point (PDP) receives event notifications from the Policy Enforcement Point (PEP) and evaluates the security policies.” (Baldini et al., 2016: 13). This could be easier understandable if they introduced PDP and PEP in terms of what they are and do, prior to explaining their connection.
2. Transition failed
On page 8 and 9, a Table 1 is introduced and used several times in the later sections. However the transition from the prior passage to the table is done without any introduction of the table. The last paragraph begins with “In summary, the IoT products based on an Ethical design should be based or have (…)” (Baldini et al., 2016: 7), and sums up four points. On the next page the table is then displayed with the headers “Challenge, Description”; thus no apparent connection or introduction. Again it would be useful to introduce it in prior, especially due to its importance in the text; thus stating what the table is about and its use in the text.
3.Lack of Research?
After describing their solution, Ethical Design, they state: “In summary, Ethical Design for developers and entrepreneurs may bring a number of advantages: (…)” (Baldini et al., 2016: 11). The word “may” indicates that these advantages are based on speculations instead of actual research. This should be backed up with some research, interviews with stakeholders, etc. in order to make the statement more convincing.