Ethics and privacy issues of critical infrastructure protection – risks and possible solutions through standardization [original]

Simone Wurster*

Ethics and Privacy Issues of Critical Infrastructure

Protection –Risks and Possible Solutions Through

Standardization

Abstract: Recent studies propose a paradigm shift in stan-

dardization strategies and research and the use of ethical

aspects as an additional factor to explain standardization

success. This article goes one step further. It focuses on

specific ethical and privacy standards and introduces priv-

acy as a new dimension of the interplay between standards

and innovation in the fields of civil security and the protec-

tion of critical infrastructures. Based on a survey, it repre-

sents mainly German and European perspectives. The arti-

cle finishes by giving recommendations for new privacy

standards which may help to raise acceptance for several

new security solutions.

Keywords: privacy, standards, security technologies, pub-

lic security, critical infrastructures

DOI 10.1515/pik-2014-0018

1 Introduction

Life in modern democratic societies requires security mea-

sures and there is a need for protecting critical infrastruc-

tures (CIs) in particular (see CRN, 2011; EC, 2004; Wurster,

2013

). Several recent studies also highlight the need for

security-related standards, e.g. ECORYS (2009), ESRIF

(2009), EC (2008, 2011) and Sáez et al. (2009).

CIs comprise all physical and information technology

facilities, networks, services and assets which, if disrupted

or destroyed, would have a serious impact for the relevant

country (see EC, 2004, p. 2). They include for example

energy systems, communications and information technol-

ogy, water supply systems as well as transportation sys-

tems including airports, ports, the railway system and

mass transit networks (see EC, 2004, p. 2). The focus of this

article is on transportation infrastructure.

The EC’s perception of security relates to public secur-

ity and includes among others, protection against threats

by terrorism and severe and organized crime (see EC, 2011,

p. 1). Three kinds of civil security-specific settings can be

distinguished: private places (e.g. privately owned houses

or company buildings), public places (e.g. public parks,

schools etc.) and semi-public places like airports, train

stations; ports etc. (see Wuerttemberger, 2012).

Many semi-public areas represent CIs and are used by

millions of people every day worldwide. Therefore their

protection has great importance but security technologies

bear ethical and privacy-specific risks (see Article 29

DPWP, 2007) which can impede the acceptance of new

security solutions (see e.g. Hempel & Toepfer, 2004, and

Wuerttemberger, 2012).

A definition of privacy is given in Wilkins & Christians’

(2008) book: ‘(Privacy is) the condition of being protected

from unwanted access by others –either physical access,

personal information, or attention’(Wilkins & Christians,

2008, p. 277).

Principle privacy-related rights are defined by the Uni-

versal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 12 and

in Europe, for example, by the EU Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

(ECHR), Article 8.

According to Craig & Ludloff (2011) and Wilkins &

Christians (2008), privacy has two dimensions: physical

freedom and having control over personal information.

Privacy goals and security-related goals may contradict

each other. Regarding CIs, security has specific importance

and fulfilling both goals bears challenges. Specific stan-

dards may offer solutions and raise the acceptance of

innovations in the security field but privacy-related stan-

dards for CI protection are missing (see e.g. ESRIF, 2009,

and EC, 2011). Therefore, this article has four objectives:

1.) showing which security technology solutions bear spe-

cial ethical or privacy-specific risks, 2.) identifying specific

ethical and privacy risks, 3.) showing needs for standards

and 4.) deriving implications for further research.

* Corresponding author: Simone Wurster:

E-Mail: simone.wurster@tu-berlin.de

1This article builds on Wurster (2013). ‘Security technologies for the

protection of critical infrastructures –ethical risks and solution of-

fered by standardization’, presented at the 5th ITU Kaleidoscope Con-

ference, Kyoto Japan, 22–24 April 2013.

PIK 2014; 37(3): 205–210

Bereitgestellt von | Technische Universität Berlin

Angemeldet

Heruntergeladen am | 27.10.17 15:41

2 European & International

Standards

A standard is ‘a publication that provides rules, guidelines

or characteristics for activities or their results, for common

and repeated use’(CEN, 2014a). Our focus is on formal

standards that have been adopted by one of the three

European Standardization Organisations (ESOs) CEN,

CENELEC and ETSI or by one of the three international

organisations ISO, IEC and ITU. Their most popular deli-

verables are European Norms (ENs) and international stan-

dards (ISs), respectively.

In addition, these organizations have developed dif-

ferent other types of deliverables to foster the diffusion of

innovation via standardization. A suitable instrument on

both a European and an international level is the ‘Work-

shop Agreement’which is offered by CEN and ISO. The

specific documents are called CEN Workshop Agreement

(CWA) and International Workshop Agreement (IWA) (see

Hatto, 2013; CEN, 2014b and ISO, 2014 for a description).

Developed in 10 to 12 months, they are quickly available to

address specific market requirements. There are two addi-

tional possible deliverables in ISO and one in CEN which

offer interesting conditions for researchers (see Hatto,

2013). They are most suitable for topics which have not

reached a sufficient state of maturity for more formal stan-

dardization. These are international Technical Specifica-

tions (TS), CEN TS as well as international Publicly Avail-

able Specifications (PAS) (see ISO, 2014 and CEN, 2014c).

3 Literature Review and

Research Gap

Investigating privacy and security-related standards re-

quires in-depth insight into standard-related and security

issues. This chapter analyses four aspects: a) advantages

of standards and public security standards, b) ethical and

privacy aspects of public security solutions, c) ethical and

privacy aspects in standards as well as d) ethical and

privacy aspects in standards for public security and the

protection of CIs.

a) advantages of standards and public security stan-

dards: Blind (2004, 2009), STAIR (2011) and Swann (2000)

give overviews of the many benefits of standardization.

General advantages include, e.g., its contribution to global

market access for innovative solutions, economies of

scale, cost savings as well as the facilitation of compatibil-

ity and interoperability. Standardization also ‘raises the

acceptance of innovations among customers and public

procurers’and therefore ‘helps to accelerate the diffusion

of innovations’(Blind, 2009, p. 16). Blind (2008) provides

innovation economic findings regarding the importance of

(public) security standards but there is no work that covers

privacy standards in the context of public security.

b) ethical and privacy aspects of public security solu-

tions: Ethical and privacy issues of security technologies

are investigated, for example, by Article 29 DPWP (2007),

Hempel & Toepfer (2004), PRISE (2008), Wuerttemberger

(2012) and Wright & de Hert (2011). All authors show that

privacy problems can impede the acceptance of new secur-

ity solutions.

c) ethical and privacy aspects in standards: Fens

(2013), Wurster (2013) and van de Kaa (2013) are three of

the first to investigate privacy issues in standardization.

Fens (2013) and van de Kaa (2013) proposed a paradigm

shift in standardization strategies and research to include

privacy aspects as a new factor to explain standardization

success. Van de Kaa (2013) even calls for a new research

discipline that includes philosophy, ethics and standardi-

zation management. Besides the more practice-oriented

paper by Wurster (2013), research on privacy and ethical

aspects related to formal standards is rare. This article

addresses this gap.

d) ethical and privacy aspects in standards for public

security and the protection of CIs: Part b) showed the

importance of privacy aspects in the public security field.

Measures addressing concerns about CI and the physical

safety of the population in particular usually have a sub-

stantial impact on privacy (see ICO, 2010). Specific privacy

standards may help to overcome such problems, but there

has been no scientific work which investigates standardi-

zation related to privacy issues of security technologies for

CIs so far. One reason is the novelty of the field. In 2011 the

EC described a need for public security standards (see EC,

2011). The report only includes a general note that privacy

issues need consideration. This article helps to overcome

the related research gap.

The investigation of these issues needs to consider all

groups of security technology and security solutions, for

example closed-circuit television (CCTV) and radio-fre-

quency identification (RFID) technologies separately: ‘It is

crucial to clearly distinguish different types of detection

technologies (i.e. CCTV, RFID tags, biometrics, etc.) in

order to match appropriate data protection solutions to

each of them separately’(Article 29 DPWP, 2007, p. 4).

206 Simone Wurster

Bereitgestellt von | Technische Universität Berlin

Angemeldet

Heruntergeladen am | 27.10.17 15:41

4 Survey in the German Security

Research Program

In order to gain insight into ethical and privacy-related

problems of security technologies and to identify possible

solutions, a study in the German framework program ‘Re-

search for civil security’was done in summer 2012. It was a

follow-up study to a survey on security research and stan-

dardization among the participants of the research pro-

gram and included 23 participants

. Six out of ten ques-

tions were related to ethical and privacy-specific risks of

security technologies. The survey took place in June and

July 2012. The results are presented in chapter 5. Survey

data was coded and clustered with the software Atlas.TI.

5 Ethical and Privacy Risks

of Security Solutions

In response to question 1 four areas presenting ethical and

privacy-specific problems were identified: detection tech-

nologies, processing of data, security services and addi-

tional topics (which only received two mentionings).

Ethical and privacy-specific risks of detection technol-

ogies are regarded as most important. Figure 1 describes

their nature in more detail.

According to the figure, two specific areas of detection

technologies were identified: detection from a distance

and obtrusive detection. Technologies which allow detec-

tion from a distance comprise all kinds of video surveil-

lance (CCTV) solutions including intelligent CCTV as well

as identification technologies, for example remotely iden-

tifying license plate numbers. The second cluster, ‘obtru-

sive detection’includes body scanners, biometric devices

as well as solutions for access control which allow the

identification of people. In question 2, the participants

were asked to rank a selection of the products and technol-

ogies they had listed in the previous question according to

their ethical and privacy-specific risk potentials. Similar to

the results from question 1, detection from a distance is

regarded as bearing the most ethical and privacy-specific

risks. Question 3 and 4 addressed specific ethical and

privacy risks. Three groups of problems became apparent:

restrictions to freedom, abuse and discrimination.

Figure 1: Ethical risks of detection technologies.

Questions 5 and 6 focused on the need for standards to

better address ethical and privacy specific aspects in the

development and use of security solutions and services.

Based on the answers, six fields with specific needs for

standards to reduce ethical risks were identified: bio-

metrics, security-specific sensor solutions, video surveil-

lance (CCTV), data storage, access control and security

services. Furthermore, a need for a regulative document

was unveiled in the specific area of intelligent CCTV.

In our further investigations we will examine aspects

of access control within the analyses in the biometrics

field. Suggestions regarding security services gathered by

our survey mainly focused on the work of security service

firms. These issues will be excluded from further ana-

lyses because they do not represent specific technology

topics. The remaining fields will be investigated in the

next two chapters. In addition, some responses unveiled

in particular a need for certifications for ethic-friendly

security products. We will refer to this issue in the next

chapters, too.

26 experts from supplier companies of security-related products and

services, 5 from research organizations, 8 from universities, 1 expert

from an industry association and 3 experts representing the end user.

Ethics and Privacy Issues of Critical Infrastructure Protection –Risks and Solutions Through Standardization 207

Bereitgestellt von | Technische Universität Berlin

Angemeldet

Heruntergeladen am | 27.10.17 15:41

6 Reducing Ethical and Privacy

Risks in CI Protection by

Standardization

Database and document analyses were done to compare

the need for privacy standards in the field of public secur-

ity expressed in the survey with existing standards and

other relevant documents. An important European docu-

ment related to privacy in general is the Directive 95/46/

EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the

processing of personal data and on the free movement of

such data. Concerning public security, the directive in-

cludes specific passages on safeguarding e.g. national and

public security. But permanent CI protection is not specifi-

cally covered by the directive.

Current activities in Europe focus in particular on the

creation of a new General Data Protection Regulation

which will supersede Directive 95/46/EC. The draft was

released in January 2012 (EC, 2012). The European Parlia-

ment adopted a modified Directive in March 2014, while its

implementation is expected to be finished in 2016.

The regulation does not include specific technology-

related passages. More technology-specific documents

regarding privacy are, for example, provided in Europe by

CEN, though most documents are Workshop Agreements

(CWA)

like CWA 16113, 15262 and 15499, part I and II. The

documents are shown in table 1. An important player in the

international arena is the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Commit-

tee (JTC) 1/Sub Committee 27/Work Group 5, ‘Identity Man-

agement and Privacy Technologies’. Its focus in the privacy

field includes topics such as ‘A Privacy Framework’,‘A

Privacy Reference Architecture’,‘Privacy infrastructures’,

‘Anonymity and credentials’,‘Specific Privacy Enhancing

Technologies (PETs)’and ‘Privacy Engineering’. Privacy

standards developed by the work group include, in particu-

lar, ISO/IEC 29100, ISO/IEC 29101 as well as ISO/IEC 29115.

Problems of ISO/IEC 29100 concerning public security

and the protection of CIs are in particular its principles

‘consent and choice’,‘participation and access’and ‘trans-

parency and notice’because they can hinder investiga-

tions of irregular behavior which might endanger the po-

pulation in a relevant area.

CWA 16113 and ISO/IEC 15944-8 pay specific attention

to privacy in the context of public security but specifics of

the permanent protection of (semi-public) CIs (e.g. ports

and airports) are not covered and managers of these infra-

structures are expressing a need for action.

Further analyses were dedicated to specific technol-

ogy areas. According to table 1, there are six documents

which have specific importance in the biometric field. But

there are limitations. ISO/IEC TR 24714-1 offers, for exam-

ple, no applications for the protection of CIs, public and

semi-public areas and the specific use of data in contexts

of CI protection. Specific privacy issues in the field of

sensors are for example related to sensor tunnels, wireless

sensor networks and sensor data fusion

. Our analysis

Table 1: Suggestions for new working items for new standards.

Area Suggestion by participants

in the survey

Investigation of current standards

(general and regarding CIs)

Remaining standardization needs

for the protection of CI

biometrics matching of biometric records,

conditions and limitations of

the procedure

ISO/IEC 15944-8, CWAs 16113, 15499,

Part I + II, 15262, 15263, 15292

ISO/IEC 19784-2, 19785-1,

19792, 24745, 24761 and

ISO/IEC TR 24714-1

protection of (semi-public) CI, particularly

airports and ports

use of biometric data in the

context of public security

security-specific

sensor solutions

ethic and privacy standard

in general

no appropriate standard

available

ethic and privacy standards for

security sensors and security-

specific sensor solutions

video surveillance specification of the storage

period, specifications for

intelligent CCTV

ISO 22311, IEC 62676 series,

particularly IEC 62676-1-1,

EN 62676 series,

div. European + national laws

general requirements for the

processing of video data as

suggested by ISO 22311

data storage neutral supervision, a

specification of the storage

period and the type of data

EN 15713, ISO/TR 15801, ISO/

TS 21547, div. European and

national laws

definition of the kind of data

stored for security reasons,

rules for the matching of data

for security reasons

3The adoption of CWAs is voluntary in the European member states.

4See e.g. the German survey InfraNorm (2013). Sicherheitsethik,

Privacy und Normung, available via the author.

208 Simone Wurster

Bereitgestellt von | Technische Universität Berlin

Angemeldet

Heruntergeladen am | 27.10.17 15:41

showed that ethical aspects in these areas are not repre-

sented appropriately yet. Suitable standards are not avail-

able. Specific aspects of video surveillance (CCTV) are

covered by ISO 22311. It calls for monitoring access to the

data, a mandatory storage time and an appropriate dele-

tion of data after a relevant period, minimal masking tech-

niques as well as training of staff in dealing with sensitive

data. In addition, it includes a comment recommending

implementing privacy specifications as fast as possible.

The participants of our survey mentioned specific risks

regarding intelligent CCTV. While conventional systems

record all events during a monitoring period, intelligent

CCTV systems only document detected events that deviate

from the ‘ordinary’. Resulting problems are in particular

risks of abuse, discrimination risks and possible intimida-

tion effects (see Wuerttemberger, 2012). Specific aspects

related to these technologies are not included in the cur-

rent version of ISO 22311. Documents on data storage

include, for example, the European Standard EN 15713 as

well as the ISO report ISO/TR 15801. Recommendations for

data storage which specify a specific period are not avail-

able but this field is also covered by many national laws

and in Europe also by European regulation. Regarding

video data the need for action is stressed by the ISO stan-

dard 22311. It calls for a mandatory storage time for such

data but does not specify the storage period.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, several partici-

pants in the survey described a need for appropriate certi-

fication schemes to show the fulfillment of specific priv-

acy-related requirements. Privacy Impact Assessments

(PIAs) were invented to handle privacy issues in different

fields (see Wright & de Hert, 2011, for an overview). Cur-

rently, PIAs for systems used for the protection of public

and semi-public areas also suffer from a research gap.

Important additional solutions to address ethical ques-

tions are offered by Privacy Enhancing Technologies

(PETs) but most areas investigated in this article, for exam-

ple sensors, are not covered by existing standards in this

field (see ETSI, 2011).

Furthermore, no standard for PETs exists which parti-

cularly addresses specific security solutions for public and

semi-public areas. In summary, the needs expressed by

the participants of the survey are not appropriately met by

current standards.

7 Suggestions for new Standards

In section 5, needs for various privacy standards in the

security context were expressed. In section 6 they were

analysed in detail. Table 1 summarized the results. First of

all, our analyses showed the shortage of privacy rules in

the context of public and semi-public security and the

need for privacy standards that meet the specific require-

ments of CI protection and the security of public transpor-

tation infrastructure. In addition, figure 1 showed that the

risk potential of detection from a distance including CCTV

was top-ranked in our survey and ISO 22311 describes the

need to implement as fast as possible privacy specifica-

tions published by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27. Based on all

results, six new working items for new standards were

suggested: 1) a privacy standard for the protection of

(semi-public) CI, particularly airports and ports, 2) a gen-

eral standard defining the kind of data stored for security

reasons, 3) rules for matching data for security reasons,

4) the use of biometric data in the context of public secur-

ity, 5) privacy-related standards for security sensors and

sensor solutions and 6) general requirements for the pro-

cessing of video data as suggested by ISO 22311.

Besides the identified topics to be considered in new

standards, the need for a regulative document covering

privacy-related issues of intelligent CCTV which may be

followed by specific standards was described. In addition,

section 5 showed that the current need for action regarding

privacy in the civil security field has merely caused the

development of CWAs, specifications or technical reports

in many areas in Europe. Several current CWAs relate to

Directive 95/46 EC. The General Data Protection Regula-

tion may require the development of new related stan-

dards. Furthermore, the development of formal standards

based on selected CWAs and technical specifications and

reports from the three ESOs is recommended. In the inter-

national arena comparable privacy-related standards and

even workshop agreements are missing in many fields.

Therefore these European documents may offer a stable

foundation for future standardization activities in this

broader context, too.

Earlier, we identified privacy as a new area in which

standards can raise the acceptance of innovations. Recom-

mendations to overcome privacy problems through stan-

dardization were formulated but standardization alone

does not guarantee the realization of specific privacy-re-

lated requirements. As mentioned by several participants

in our survey, appropriate certification schemes and proce-

dures are necessary to ensure the implementation of the

desired levels of privacy. The new European project CRISP

(Evaluation and certification schemes for security pro-

ducts –Capability Project, 2014–2017) is addressing this

gap.

Ethics and Privacy Issues of Critical Infrastructure Protection –Risks and Solutions Through Standardization 209

Bereitgestellt von | Technische Universität Berlin

Angemeldet

Heruntergeladen am | 27.10.17 15:41

8 Summary and Further Directions

Blind (2009) and STAIR (2011) showed the importance of

standards for raising the acceptance of innovative solu-

tions. Fens (2013) and van de Kaa (2013) illustrated the

novelty of investigating ethical and privacy aspects in

standardization research. Based on a survey, we identified

topics for new ethical and privacy standards which may

support the acceptance of new security solutions. A re-

maining question is in which way and to what extent

privacy and ethical standards raise the acceptance of se-

curity solutions. We recommend further in-depth studies

focusing the different security fields and privacy dimen-

sions. In addition, more research in general is needed to

measure the importance of ethical and privacy aspects as

an explaining factor for standardization success.

References

Article 29 DPWP [Article 29 Data Protection Working Party](2007).

Opinion 1/2007 on the Green Paperon Detection Technologies in

the Work of Law. Enforcement, Customs and otherSecurity Autho-

ritieswww.dataprotection.ro/servlet/ViewDocument?id=227.

Blind, K. (2004). The Economics of Standards: Theory, Evidence,

Policy. Cheltenham 2004.

Blind, K. (2008). Standardization and Standards in Security

Research and Emerging Security Markets. 3rd Security Research

Conference Karlsruhe, 2008, 63–72.

Blind, K. (2009). Standardisation: a catalyst for innovation. Inaugural

Address Series. Research in Management. Erasmus Universiteit.

http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/17558/EIA-2009-039-LIS.pdf.

CEN (2014a). European Standards. www.cen.eu/cen/products/en/

pages/default.aspx.

CEN (2014b). CEN Workshop Agreements. www.cen.eu/cen/

Products/CWA/Pages/default.aspx.

CEN (2014c). Technical Specifications (TS). www.cen.eu/cen/

Products/TS/Pages/default.aspx.

Craig, T., Ludloff, M. (2011). Privacy and Big Data. Bejing, Cambridge,

Farnham etc. 2011.

CRN (2011). CRN Report. Focal Report 6. Risk Analysis. Resilience –

Trends in Policy and Research. www.bevoelkerungsschutz.ad

min.ch/internet/bs/de/home/dokumente/Unterlagen_Risiken.

parsys.19839.downloadList.95833.DownloadFile.tmp/crnfocal

report6resilience.pdf.

EC (2004). Critical Infrastructure Protection in the fight against

terrorism (COM/2004/0702). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/

LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2004:0702:FIN:EN:PDF.

EC (2008). Towards an increased contribution from standardisation

to innovation in Europe. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/

LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0133:FIN:en:PDF.

EC (2011). Programming Mandate Addressed to CEN, CENELEC and

ETSI to Establish Security Standards. ftp://ftp.cencenelec.eu/

CENELEC/EuropeanMandates/M_487.pdf.

EC (2012). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and

of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the

processing of personal data and on the free movement of such

data. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/

review2012/com_2012_11_en.pdf.

ECORYS (2011). Security Regulation, Conformity Assessment & Certifi-

cation. Final Report. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/

security/files/doc/secerca_final_report_volume__1_main_

report_en.pdf.

ESRIF (2009). ESRIF Final Report. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/

policies/security/files/esrif_final_report_en.pdf.

ETSI (2011). Technical Report Radio Frequency Identification (RFID);

Coordinated ESO response to Phase 1 of EU Mandate M436.

www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/187000_187099/187020/

01.01.01_60/tr_187020v010101p.pdf.

Fens, T. (2013). Smart metering in the realm of smart grids. Presented

at the 5

ITU Kaleidoscope Conference, Kyoto Japan, 22–24 April

2013.

Hatto, P. (2013). Standards and Standardisation. A practical guide for

researchers. European Union 2013.

Hempel, L., Toepfer, E. (2004). CCTV in Europe. Final Report. Urbaneye

Working Paper No. 13 (August 2004).

ICO (2010). Privacy Impact Assessment Handbook 2.0. www.ico.gov.

uk/upload/documents/pia_hand-book_html_v2.

ISO (2014). ISO deliverables. www.iso.org/iso/home/standards_

development/deliverables-all.htm?type=pas.

PRISE (2008). Legal Evaluation Report. http://prise.oeaw.ac.at/docs/

PRISE_D3.2_Legal_Evaluation_Report.pdf.

Sáez, A. C., Urech, A., Pereira, J. (2009). Current status of Security in

Mass Transport. DEMASST Deliverable 3.1, November 2009.

STAIR [CEN/CENELEC WG STAIR] (2011). An Integrated Approach for

Standardization, Innovation and Research. www.cencenelec.eu/

news/publications/Publications/STAIR.pdf.

Swann, P. (2000). The Economics of standardisation. Final Report for

Standards and Technical Regulations Directorate Department of

Trade and Industry. Manchester 2000.

van de Kaa, G. (2013). Responsible innovation and value sensitive

design and its application to ICT standardization. Presented at

the 5

ITU Kaleidoscope Conference, Kyoto, Japan, April 2013.

Wilkins, L., Christians, C. G. (2008). The handbook of mass media

ethics. New York, 2009.

Wright, D., de Hert, P. [eds.] (2011). Privacy Impact Assessment. Law,

Governance and Technology Series, Vol. 6. Dordrecht 2011.

Wuerttemberger, T. (2012). Rechtswissenschaftliche Begleit-

forschung zur intelligenten Videoueberwachung. BMBF-Innova-

tionsforum ‘Zivile Sicherheit’. www.bmbf.de/pubRD/B1-I_Wuert

temberger_Redemanuskript.pdf.

Wurster, S. (2013). Security technologies for the protection of critical

infrastructures –ethical risks and solution offered by standardi-

zation. Presented at the 5th ITU Kaleidoscope Conference, Kyoto,

Japan, April 2013.

Simone Wurster: TU Berlin –

Innovationsökonomie,

Müller-Breslau-Str. 15,

10623 Berlin, Germany

210 Simone Wurster

Bereitgestellt von | Technische Universität Berlin

Angemeldet

Heruntergeladen am | 27.10.17 15:41