Sunlight: Fine-grained Targeting Detection at Scale with Statistical Confidence

ABSTRACT

We present Sunlight, a system that detects the causes of targeting phenomena on the web -- such as personalized advertisements, recommendations, or content -- at large scale and with solid statistical confidence. Today's web is growing increasingly complex and impenetrable as myriad of services collect, analyze, use, and exchange users' personal information. No one can tell who has what data, for what purposes they are using it, and how those uses affect the users. The few studies that exist reveal problematic effects -- such as discriminatory pricing and advertising -- but they are either too small-scale to generalize or lack formal assessments of confidence in the results, making them difficult to trust or interpret. Sunlight brings a principled and scalable methodology to personal data measurements by adapting well-established methods from statistics for the specific problem of targeting detection. Our methodology formally separates different operations into four key phases: scalable hypothesis generation, interpretable hypothesis formation, statistical significance testing, and multiple testing correction. Each phase bears instantiations from multiple mechanisms from statistics, each making different assumptions and tradeoffs. Sunlight offers a modular design that allows exploration of this vast design space. We explore a portion of this space, thoroughly evaluating the tradeoffs both analytically and experimentally. Our exploration reveals subtle tensions between scalability and confidence. Sunlight's default functioning strikes a balance to provide the first system that can diagnose targeting at fine granularity, at scale, and with solid statistical justification of its results.

We showcase our system by running two measurement studies of targeting on the web, both the largest of their kind. Our studies -- about ad targeting in Gmail and on the web -- reveal statistically justifiable evidence that contradicts two Google statements regarding the lack of targeting on sensitive and prohibited topics.

References

1. AdBlockPlus.small https://adblockplus.org/, 2015.
2. Barford, P., Canadi, I., Krushevskaja, D., Ma, Q., and Muthukrishnan, S. Adscape: Harvesting and Analyzing Online Display Ads. WWW (Apr. 2014).
3. Benjamini, Y., and Yekutieli, D. The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Annals of statistics (2001), 1165--1188.
4. Bickel, P. J., Ritov, Y., and Tsybakov, A. B. Simultaneous analysis of lasso and dantzig selector. Ann. Statist. 37, 4 (08 2009), 1705--1732.
5. Bodik, P., Goldszmidt, M., Fox, A., Woodard, D. B., and Andersen, H. Fingerprinting the datacenter: Automated classification of performance crises. In European Conference on Computer Systems (2010).
6. Book, T., and Wallach, D. S. An Empirical Study of Mobile Ad Targeting. arXiv.org (2015).
7. Brandeis, L. What Publicity Can Do. Harper's Weekly (Dec. 1913).
8. Datta, A., Tschantz, M. C., and Datta, A. Automated Experiments on Ad Privacy Settings. In Proceedings of Privacy Enhancing Technologies (2015).
9. Donoho, D. L. Compressed sensing. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 52, 4 (2006), 1289--1306.
10. Dudoit, S., and van der Laan, M. Multiple testing procedures with applications to genomics. Springer, 2008.
11. Feldman, V. Optimal hardness results for maximizing agreement with monomials. SIAM Journal on Computing 39, 2 (2009), 606--645.
12. Google. AdSense policy.small https://support.google.com/adsense/answer/3016459?hl=en, 2015.
13. Google. AdWords policy.small https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6008942?hl=en, 2015.
14. Gretton, A., Bousquet, O., Smola, A., , and Schölkopf, B. Measuring statistical dependence with Hilbert-Schmidt norms. In Algorithmic Learning Theory (2005).
15. Hannak, A., Sapiezynski, P., Kakhki, A. M., Krishnamurthy, B., Lazer, D., Mislove, A., and Wilson, C. Measuring personalization of web search. In WWW (May 2013).
16. Hannak, A., Soeller, G., Lazer, D., Mislove, A., and Wilson, C. Measuring Price Discrimination and Steering on E-commerce Web Sites. In IMC (Nov. 2014).
17. Holm, S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 6, 2 (1979), 65--70.
18. Lécuyer, M., Ducoffe, G., Lan, F., Papancea, A., Petsios, T., Spahn, R., Chaintreau, A., and Geambasu, R. XRay: Enhancing the Web's Transparency with Differential Correlation. 23rd USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 14) (2014).
19. Liu, B., Sheth, A., Weinsberg, U., Chandrashekar, J., and Govindan, R. AdReveal: improving transparency into online targeted advertising. In HotNets-XII (Nov. 2013).
20. Mikians, J., Gyarmati, L., Erramilli, V., and Laoutaris, N. Detecting price and search discrimination on the internet. In HotNets-XI: Proceedings of the 11th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (Oct. 2012), ACM Request Permissions.
21. Mikians, J., Gyarmati, L., Erramilli, V., and Laoutaris, N. Crowd-assisted Search for Price Discrimination in E-Commerce: First results. arXiv.org (July 2013).
22. Nath, S. MAdScope: Characterizing Mobile In-App Targeted Ads. Proceedings of ACM Mobisys (2015).
23. Ng, A. Y. Feature selection, l1 vs. l2 regularization, and rotational invariance. In Proceedings of the Twenty-first International Conference on Machine Learning (2004).
24. Rubin, D. B. Estimating the causal effects of treatments in randomized and non-randomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 66 (1974), 688--701.
25. Selenium.small http://www.seleniumhq.org/, 2015.
26. Tibshirani, R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 58 (1994), 267--288.
27. Vissers, T., Nikiforakis, N., Bielova, N., and Joosen, W. Crying Wolf? On the Price Discrimination of Online Airline Tickets. Hot Topics in Privacy Enhancing Technologies (June 2014), 1--12.
28. Wu, T. T., Chen, Y. F., Hastie, T., Sobel, E., and Lange, K. Genome-wide association analysis by lasso penalized logistic regression. Bioinformatics 25, 6 (2009), 714--721.
29. Xing, X., Meng, W., Doozan, D., Feamster, N., Lee, W., and Snoeren, A. C. Exposing Inconsistent Web Search Results with Bobble. In PAM '14: Proceedings of the Passive and Active Measurements Conference (2014).

Index Terms

• Security and privacy

  • Human and societal aspects of security and privacy

• Social and professional topics

  • Computing / technology policy

    • Censorship

    • Privacy policies

    • Surveillance

  • Professional topics

    • Computing profession

      • Codes of ethics