New pre-print https://www.it.uc3m.es/acrumin/papers/COVID_BigTechs.pdf @rcuevasrumin @joseegc_ Martin Maier. We aim at re-opening the discussion of technical solutions for contact-tracing that so far have failed. We propose a new solution, but our goal is to urge researchers to propose efficient solutions(1/N)

This the reality for most CT mobile-apps https://cadenaser.com/programa/2021/01/18/hoy_por_hoy/1610950945_559710.html (in Spanish). In a pandemic with more than 1M deaths the main design principle should be efficiency and not privacy. Obviously the solution should offer privacy-standards acceptable in an advanced democracy (2/N)

It has been proven that apps that needs to be installed at least by 30% of the population are very unlikely to work. Let us rely on existing data rather than try to generate new one. BigTechs (FB, Google, etc) have already data that may be useful for contacts-tracing purpose(3/N)

Let us really exploit legislation in an honest way. Article 6 Recital 46 of the GDPR says (4/N)

"The processing of personal data should also be regarded to be lawful where it is necessary to protect an interest which is essential for the life…as for instance when processing is necessary for humanitarian purposes, including for monitoring epidemics and their spread“ (5/N)

I can't think of other case where this provision should be considered. More than 2M official deaths due to COVID (probably many more). Therefore, I think Data Protection Authorities should move from a very comfortable position where they put privacy on top of efficiency (6/N)

The law allow processing data without user consent in a pandemic. Consent is a bottleneck to develop an efficient solution (it is similar to require installing brand new apps from scratch). Data Protection Authorities and EDPB should simply confirm what the GDPR says (7/N)

Otherwise lets be serious and remove Recital 46 because it will never be used except in a war. (8/N)

We want to make it clear that privacy is an important requirement in our solution and we aim to avoid misuse of the data and massive surveillance, but efficiency goes first (9/N)

We do not know whether what we are proposing will work in practice, but we strongly believe it is worth trying. Again, if our solutions is proven not useful it is fine as long as the research community starts proposing efficient solutions for contact-tracing. (10/N)

Technology should be better and propose 21st century contact-tracing solutions that work, rather than propose something that ends-up being useless and drives us to a 20th century contact-tracing approach (this means manual). (11/N)