William Sexton

Brian Finley, Anthony M Caruso, Justin C Doty et al.

We develop formal privacy mechanisms for releasing statistics from data with many outlying values, such as income data. These mechanisms ensure that a per-record differential privacy guarantee degrades slowly in the protected records' influence on the statistics being released. Formal privacy mechanisms generally add randomness, or "noise," to published statistics. If a noisy statistic's distribution changes little with the addition or deletion of a single record in the underlying dataset, an attacker looking at this statistic will find it plausible that any particular record was present or absent, preserving the records' privacy. More influential records -- those whose addition or deletion would change the statistics' distribution more -- typically suffer greater privacy loss. The per-record differential privacy framework quantifies these record-specific privacy guarantees, but existing mechanisms let these guarantees degrade rapidly (linearly or quadratically) with influence. While this may be acceptable in cases with some moderately influential records, it results in unacceptably high privacy losses when records' influence varies widely, as is common in economic data. We develop mechanisms with privacy guarantees that instead degrade as slowly as logarithmically with influence. These mechanisms allow for the accurate, unbiased release of statistics, while providing meaningful protection for highly influential records. As an example, we consider the private release of sums of unbounded establishment data such as payroll, where our mechanisms extend meaningful privacy protection even to very large establishments. We evaluate these mechanisms empirically and demonstrate their utility.

John Abowd, Robert Ashmead, Ryan Cumings-Menon et al.

Privacy-protected microdata are often the desired output of a differentially private algorithm since microdata is familiar and convenient for downstream users. However, there is a statistical price for this kind of convenience. We show that an uncertainty principle governs the trade-off between accuracy for a population of interest ("sum query") vs. accuracy for its component sub-populations ("point queries"). Compared to differentially private query answering systems that are not required to produce microdata, accuracy can degrade by a logarithmic factor. For example, in the case of pure differential privacy, without the microdata requirement, one can provide noisy answers to the sum query and all point queries while guaranteeing that each answer has squared error $O(1/ε^2)$. With the microdata requirement, one must choose between allowing an additional $\log^2(d)$ factor ($d$ is the number of point queries) for some point queries or allowing an extra $O(d^2)$ factor for the sum query. We present lower bounds for pure, approximate, and concentrated differential privacy. We propose mitigation strategies and create a collection of benchmark datasets that can be used for public study of this problem.

Sam Haney, William Sexton, Ashwin Machanavajjhala et al.

This article describes a proposed differentially private (DP) algorithms that the US Census Bureau is considering to release the Detailed Demographic and Housing Characteristics (DHC) Race & Ethnicity tabulations as part of the 2020 Census. The tabulations contain statistics (counts) of demographic and housing characteristics of the entire population of the US crossed with detailed races and tribes at varying levels of geography. We describe two differentially private algorithmic strategies, one based on adding noise drawn from a two-sided Geometric distribution that satisfies "pure"-DP, and another based on adding noise from a Discrete Gaussian distribution that satisfied a well studied variant of differential privacy, called Zero Concentrated Differential Privacy (zCDP). We analytically estimate the privacy loss parameters ensured by the two algorithms for comparable levels of error introduced in the statistics.

John M. Abowd, Ian M. Schmutte, William Sexton et al.

With vast databases at their disposal, private tech companies can compete with public statistical agencies to provide population statistics. However, private companies face different incentives to provide high-quality statistics and to protect the privacy of the people whose data are used. When both privacy protection and statistical accuracy are public goods, private providers tend to produce at least one suboptimally, but it is not clear which. We model a firm that publishes statistics under a guarantee of differential privacy. We prove that provision by the private firm results in inefficiently low data quality in this framework.