1996-06-01 - Re: Statistical analysis of anonymous databases

Header Data

From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
To: Alan Horowitz <alanh@infi.net>
Message Hash: b944cff7f1fe52537b375f5540cb2b94698cc1dcde726d232ebdc87061e968e7
Message ID: <v02120d02add5829399c2@[192.0.2.1]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-01 08:10:33 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:10:33 +0800

Raw message

From: shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green)
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 16:10:33 +0800
To: Alan Horowitz <alanh@infi.net>
Subject: Re: Statistical analysis of anonymous databases
Message-ID: <v02120d02add5829399c2@[192.0.2.1]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 0:56 6/1/96, Alan Horowitz wrote:
>> In medical research, third party audit, i.e., the Department of Health and
>> Human Services, is often required. A simple pseudonym picked by the patient
>> won't do.
>
>   It's not clear to me that the second sentence follows from the first.

HSS needs to verify that the researcher didn't just make up the data. The
Department therefore has to be able to audit the results of the study by
contacting a small subset of the participants directly. How can the
Department contact the participants if they are known only under their
nyms? No, pseudonymous remailers are not a valid answer. All this has to be
done without requiring any type of email/Internet access. US Mail only.


Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer.

-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com>
   PGP encrypted mail preferred.







Thread