دانلود مقاله افشای سیاست حریم خصوصی آنلاین
چکیده
مقدمه
مروری بر مطالعات
چارچوب تحقیق
روش تحقيق
تجزیه و تحلیل و نتایج
بحث
نتیجه گیری و تحقیقات آتی
منابع
Abstract
Introduction
Literature review
Research framework
Research method
Analysis and results
Discussion
Conclusion and future research
References
چکیده
در حالی که خط‌مشی‌های حفظ حریم خصوصی شرکت‌ها، مصرف‌کنندگان را در مورد شیوه‌های حفظ حریم خصوصی‌شان آگاه می‌کند، پایبندی آنها به مقررات و شیوه‌های اطلاعات منصفانه (FIP) ممکن است بسیار متفاوت باشد. ما یک چک لیست گسترده را برای بررسی شیوه‌های حفظ حریم خصوصی شرکت‌هایی که خطر حفظ حریم خصوصی و امنیت داده‌ها بالاتری دارند، ایجاد و اعمال می‌کنیم. ما متوجه شدیم که بخش صنعت تأثیر قابل توجهی بر روی حریم خصوصی شرکت ها دارد. به طور خاص، شرکت‌هایی که در بخش خدمات ارتباطی غیرقانونی هستند، بهتر از شرکت‌هایی که در بخش مالی تنظیم‌شده هستند، از FIP پیروی کردند، که نشان می‌دهد رویکرد خودتنظیمی FTC، حداقل برای بخش مورد بررسی کار می‌کند. در حالی که 67 درصد از شرکت‌ها به طور کامل از اصل امنیت پیروی می‌کردند، اما در سیاست‌های حفظ حریم خصوصی خود به اندازه کافی مشخصات اجرایی را انجام ندادند، که نشان می‌دهد تنظیم‌کننده‌ها باید مقررات اجرایی در مقررات را تقویت کنند و مکانیزم‌های اجرایی مختلف را توسعه و به کار بگیرند. به طور کلی، این تحقیق قوانین و عموم مردم را در مورد اثربخشی خود تنظیمی و مقررات دولتی آگاه می کند.
توجه! این متن ترجمه ماشینی بوده و توسط مترجمین ای ترجمه، ترجمه نشده است.
Abstract
While companies’ privacy policies inform consumers about their privacy practices, their adherence to regulations and Fair Information Practices (FIP) may vary widely. We develop and apply an extended checklist to examine the privacy practices of companies with a higher privacy and data security risk. We find that industry sector has a significant effect on companies’ privacy practice. Specifically, companies in the non-regulated communication services sector complied to FIP better than those in the regulated financial sector, indicating that the FTC’ self-regulation approach works, at least for the examined sector. While 67% of companies fully complied to the Security principle, they were not doing enough in full specification of Enforcement in their privacy policies, indicating that regulators need to strengthen enforcement provision in regulations and develop and enlist various enforcement mechanisms. Overall, this research informs legislation and the public on the effectiveness of self-regulation and government regulation.
Introduction
In 2019, more than 56% of the world’s population and about 89% of the U.S. population were Internet users.1 People use the Internet for various activities, such as searching, shopping, banking, communicating, entertaining, or learning. During the course of these activities, various organizations collect and use our personal information (PI) to facilitate the services we consume. Sometimes, we are cognizant of what PI is collected and how it is used. Some other times, our PI is collected, used, or shared without our knowledge or consent.2 Facebook shared personally identifiable information of more than 87 million users to the political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica without users’ consent.3 High-profile incidents like these appear to have heightened consumers’ privacy concerns.
Conclusion and future research
Developing and disclosing privacy policy that adheres to FIP is an important first step to ease consumers’ privacy concerns. A policy that is full-FIP complied shows that the company understands and cares about consumers’ privacy issues and is to be trusted with their personal data. This study helps us understand how the FIP and government regulations have influenced companies’ privacy practices and if self-regulation via marketbased mechanism works. We find that companies in the three studied sectors have different levels of compliance with FIP in their privacy policies, and they also acted differently in providing policy content and design features that go beyond the FIP. The privacy practices of the studied companies in the CS sector showed that the FTC’s approach of enforcing FIP through self-regulation works. We found that driven by market forces, companies in this unregulated sector complied more to FIP in their privacy policies than those in the regulated FIN sector, and their FIP compliance also measured up to those in the regulated HC sector.
H1: Companies in different sectors follow different privacy practices: having different levels of compliance with FIP in their privacy policies and acting differently in providing policy content and design features that go beyond FIP.
H2: In terms of FIP compliance practice, companies in different sectors provide different levels of CCPA- and non-CCPA-related terms in their privacy policies.
H3: The practice of offering CCPA-terms in the privacy policy positively affects a company’s compliance with non-CCPA-terms.
H4: The practice of complying with FIP in the privacy policy positively affects a company’s offering of AF when disclosing its privacy policy.