You are here

IGF 2020 - Day 5 - OF32 Trustworthy internet technologies against COVID-19

The following are the outputs of the real-time captioning taken during the virtual Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), from 2 to 17 November 2020. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the event, but should not be treated as an authoritative record. 




>> GEMMA CAROLILO:  Hi.  Can you hear me?

>> GIOVANNI RIMASSA:  Good morning, everyone.  Welcome to this open session, the Open Forum that will deep with the technology landscape that was set up in various countries in Europe and elsewhere in response to the COVID‑19 crisis.  My name is Giovanni Rimassa.  So we all know how important the COVID pandemic became and how many aspects of the social and technological life have been affected by it.  So this is what we want to discuss today and for this purpose, we want to assess and discuss both the response at international level both from the European Commission actions point of view and also from the citizens and consumer reaction and behavior aspect.  And we will also then discuss in specific cases of how countries in Europe and outside Europe have organized themselves to respond with a combination of policy actions, technological means and trust building and involvement of the social community at ladies and gentlemen.

For this, we have a set of diverse panelists that will allow us to tackle the different angles of this interesting topic and we have Ms. Gemma Carolilo on and then we have Mr. Dirk‑Willem van Gullic who is an expert for the welfare and sport and is taking care of the technological response to the Corona virus pandemic for the Netherlands.  Then we will move on to Jelena.  And then we have two guests from Taiwan.  We have Dr. Yennun Huang for technology and innovation.  Ask then we have Mr. Hye Kyung for the executive in Taiwan.  So without further adieu, since we have very time constraints in this session, I would like to hand over to Ms. Carolilo on to start and then everyone will be involved in the Q&A session.  Handing it over to you.

>> GEMMA CAROLILO:  Thank you for joining this session.  As Giovanni said, I am working on the team of commissions that deals with next generation internet.  We working on the policies dealing with internet governance and we are working on an initiative which funds several programs that are especially directed to build the next components of the Internet.  And this is done around the key principles of at the U values of privacy accessibility and around the citizens needs.  I wanted to stress this because I think this is linked in particular to the topic of our session today, which is around the use of technology in the need to insure trust for the user future technology, which is precisely what you are doing on our team.  Since we have very little time, I will go straight to my intervention once to focus for giving an overview of the role of the EU in this crisis and in particular giving some insights on what we are doing as regards the contact and (inaudible) ups related to the Corona virus.

Needless to say, the answers measures and supports member states and the coming of the pandemics and of course those concerning (inaudible).  But today we're talking about an important area, which is the digital health.  And there beyond the contact tracing apps, I wanted to recall the important work is ongoing in regards to the research and there is a specific COVID‑19 emergency call to deploy solutions and using Artificial Intelligence to increase the response capabilities to Corona virus crisis and also interesting results are coming from the escalate for cove, which is a new co‑founded project that leverages the escalate, which is the world's most performance intelligence super computing platform.  This is already now bringing interesting results with regards to identification of molecules that are effective against the Corona virus.

I wanted to make this point because in the areas any time we touch upon measures in the digital field, the element of trust is really essential.  Of course in the use of Artificial Intelligence and super computing, it's important that we can build the trust framework for the communities and the citizens to believe to what endorse and adopt the results of such research.

With regards to tracing contact apps, this is a tool integrating manual systems that is very important to break the chains of contagious in all counties.  In the EU, we have a big variety of applications in the sense that this is done at the national level and we have at the moment 19 initial contract tracing apps.  The level of uptake differs from countries to countries and also the level of development, but at the moment, we have about 55 million U.S. citizens.  It is important and growing number of citizens that are using the contact tracing.  But what do you plan to do to build a working citizen and a trust framework for the COVID apps?  Already at the outset of the pandemic after the billing consultation of the D health net, we view adopted tool box with a series of guiding principles.  And these guiding principles again aim at building a trust framework.  So the key principles we're talking about is that they should be voluntary installed and voluntary information should be provided voluntary.  They should be effective and it is effective they do not need location and they should not track people's movement.  Also the data should not be stored longer than necessary.  There is retention a period of 14 days which refers to the contagion period that's been so far identified.  And also, of course, there is a full set of guiding principle on how to preserve privacy of the users and there is the key element of interoperability because for a framework inside the European union to work, it's very important that this applications can communicate to each other and the citizens are in a position to travel across the EU.  Of course the virus does not stop at the board are of the EU does not stop at the borders of the U.  But this is an element with further working on.

I wanted to say about the interoperability and I am sure we'll have the opportunity to further touch upon it during the discussion, but just to mention that it's already working, European federation gate way service which is precisely a platform that would allow the exchange of contact (inaudible) keys between national contact tracing apps.  This is based on centralized architecture which is again a topic we will address today and the federation gate way service started working recently, but it is already a number of member states whether to (inaudible) and we have expected more member states would join that.

And last element I wanted to introduce in this introduction is something a project that's been developed specifically in our unit within the community.  There are two (inaudible) from the next generation community of innovators which is the tech review facility.  This links precisely to the optative of building a trust framework and it's an initiative which provides expert advice including we're talking about security and privacy audience to the national teams that are in charge of developing the contract tracing apps.  One important thing is the type of service which is offered is tailored on the development stage of the apps because not all apps are on the same level of development.  From the sign and testing to the solutions that are already completed.  The elements that are assessed within this facility are the key ones for the transframework.  Security, privacy accessibility and there is also assessment with the compliance with the legal requirements.  One element which helps build this framework and it's (inaudible) to the next generation internet community is the optative is also to simulate of use of open source and that we gather feedback from the community.  So while the reviewer completely independent, there is possibility from the community of expert to intervene.  In this case, the element of interoperability, which I mentioned before is enabled by the convergence of using comparative criteria that allow to compare the applications and possibly to converge.

So my last point is we try to build this trust framework which is not easy especially when a technology is new or adopted and used in the new context especially a delicate one while you clarify a prompt what are the guiding principles and these in the European union toolbox and when you have as a final objective, one increasing the quality and the trustworthiness of these applications.  And with this, I would complete my intervention.  I look forward to the discussion.

>> GIOVANNI RIMASSA:  Thank you very much.  Now I am happy to hand it over to Mr. Van Gullic to go over the Dutch experience.  I hand it over to you.

>> DIRK-WILLEM van GULIK:  Yes.  So like from a different perspective from a very national Dutch perspective where basically I was with a team of people which built the Corona up in the Netherlands.  But first, the app is being used by well over 4 million people, nearly 5 million people and we're seeing warnings come through the system.  We're hearing from the surveys we're doing that people get them tested, contact public health authorities.  So we're waiting and seeing the app have additional affect in regards to normal contract tracing.  There's also a bit of a car yacht in there already basically that we have to learn those things not by monitoring or getting stats and not by having Google analytics and actually have to do that by surveys and have to ask people are you using the app and call public health authorities and would you mind share the keys.  Because by and large, the Dutch effort will basically one which was difficult in society.  This was felt and rightly so.  It would turn into a surveillance thing and can be about and an app that can basically go beyond the scope of the Corona (inaudible).

A number of things that brought up on to the right track.  Interestingly, what they normally do is have this upcoming to stitch governance I want to do and for all sorts of reasons, this was a widely televise, vent with lots of people working essentially like a dragons den style by the Private Sector and actually they didn't deliver.  Questions about privacy around inclusiveness were simply not answered or the answers were basically make people by and large cringe.  So by the time that society list of expert had already made as where of what a good Corona should adhere to, all the countries list similar across Europe.  Now look at what the European tech review facilities using a sense of the very same list.  It is something to measure very early on.  What happened is this whole Private Sector came to nothing and the ministry of public health had to do with itself.  And probably getting roped in there.  If you have so much criticism, build it.  That started to happen.  We did that in an open process.  Base scale an open source project where absolutely everyone could see everyone line of code contribute to it, comment on it and look at the August base and look at absolutely everything.  And even to this day basically, there is nothing secret.  In theory, anyone in society can build that app and run it on their phone.  There are limitations, but if you do that with your phone, you can do that.  Can even verify that on GitHub is the same app you saw done from the app store from either of the two parties.

That works really, really eliminate there were some glimpses there.  How the government can select procural things in the future.  Coming from the Private Sector, you could do things right in this setting.  You can do accessibility right.  So inclusion right.  You can really have your first test in that setting by focusing on people with different reading skills, with start issues and all our challenges because this is actual comments that we really, really care about and there wasn't that normal conflict you saw around these things.  So that's what was interesting.  But what was even more interesting, this app which was basically people were rightly very worried about had to be built and we had to dot every I and cross every T.  So that really meant a lot of privacy by design concepts, a lot of Internet engineering things were not going to be available on the common market which are not commonly done.  We could actually basically essentially use them now for the first time in a national skill application.  So that gives you a glimpse of a decentralized and look at the future and how the apps could actually basically foster trust.  So be trust (inaudible) something which (inaudible).  Of course, so this is still a major concern.  The Netherlands is by and large regarding on (inaudible) Google because the majority of phones are by those two vendors.  The first priority here is not yeah basically doing nice technical things, but going off that virus and the contact tracing to work really well.  So that's kind of like we're primarily and dominantly run on.  So we're working also to other platforms to get that going.  So as a final message that I would like to select, this app is working and it's working both from a perspective of public health and that society and the assistants at large why it can twist the app and it doesn't have to trust it blindly.  You have to actively verify it and people do.  So really means that trust becomes vital in how acceptable the app says and basically to make this app a useful trust the tool in essentially feeding our manual contact tracing processes with additional people who are likely have been basically near to someone with Corona for over 15 minutes and then if they show some things, concerns should be (inaudible).  And basically the numbers showing that we saw getting those numbers in as well.

>> GIOVANNI RIMASSA:  Very good.  We have seen the trust and the citizen acceptance and response in engagement is a very important topic that is emerging already.  So very good to now hand over to Ms. Malinina.  Thank you.  Handing it over to you.

>> JELENA MALININA:  I do represent (inaudible) consumer organization.  We represent 45 national ‑‑ 44 national consumer organizations.  European countries and Dirk already presented the case from the netter lands.  Not all countries are doing so L. I must say when it comes to apps and one of the key ingredients which was already mentioned for any kind of technology and especially contact tracing applications to be successful, what we need is people trust because nobody will opt in unless they believe public health strategy and also personal advantages of what they hope to gain from it.  I would like to structure my intervention around four main points.  So the first one is compliance with the GDPR.  It's the general data protection regulation.  It's data protection bible in Europe and all the key principles by you and the countries made by the GDPR and tracing apps.  It is still super important to pay attention to how it is implemented because we have a theory, but unfortunately, at times the enforcement is not there.  It is super important to apps that track our content that they respect data immunization principle and data retention is limited and that the app is use the only for the time when it is necessary and then it is discontinued because one year ago.  None of us could have mentioned that we use this.  The second point is transparency.  It is very, very important to show how the technology is made.  Any citizen, any patient and consumer is supposed to be an IT expert.  But if needed, this information must be in the public.  We have already an example from the Netherlands that some apps are open source.  So anyone can go and check and how do they work.  In general, the European apps are consisting of two main components.  So one is the client app, which is managed by usually by national public health out towards another component chosen by many, many countries and Google exposure model.  This centralized system and while we see that health authority client app component of this contact tracing has received considerable public scrutiny and typically has data protection impact assessment and also in many countries, very good data protection reviews.  There are no such public documents existing for Google and (inaudible).  And the rest written concerns despite the decentralized model, there is certain research being done right now saying there might be loopholes through each data can be processed in a way it should not be processed.  We top know that, but what would really help is have full transparency of the data model.  Who can run the proper check of this because this is used, Gemma mentioned there are many apps in the U.  Don't know the exact number, but I believe 90% are based on the Google and apple modem and we want to know more about it.  The third component is the usefulness of these apps.  This is very difficult when we use the decentralized model to see whether people actually do something after they receive the notification whether they go and test, whether they decide to tie themselves.  Nobody knows what happens and it is very difficult to prove the usefulness of this app.  We would like to see because we believe that the apps will stay with us for a while that it will not be over in one month.  It will be a lot of time for them to be our tools for contact tracing and it's important to establish certain criteria of how we have (inaudible) the effectiveness and usefulness of the apps.  And also communicated to the system because only by knowing how you contribute to public health and how you protect yourself with that tool would help you to sign up for that.

And the last point, but not least, I would like to stress there is no such thing as an average person.  We are a society and there are different citizens and consumers with very different needs, capacity, values, goals when it comes to use of any kind of digital health tools.  And we insist that digital health solutions including COVID‑19 contact tracing apps must correspond to a variety of user preferences.  And also respecting preference not to use this product or service.  And when designing any kind of new technology, it's very important to target specific needs of different groups to relate whether they have access to it or for instance, I can give you an example that in Belgium, it is not possible to download the national app on the iPhone, which is 3 years old.  So how many people would like to use it, but their phone is too old and it is not supporting the technology.  It must be taken into account.  Not everyone Los Angeles ‑‑ not everyone has the latest iPhone models.  Because we are a big society as I mentioned, it is important to think of potential and capacities of different groups.  So the app must be target the also to those people with hearing problems about I said problems and anything else.  Everyone has the right to use it and to use it conveniently.  Of course there is a need to take into account potentially some cultural sensitivities with different habits and beliefs.

So when we have all components together and probably there are more, the four I gained for this time, we have an app that will be trusted or any other technology trusted by citizens.  Thank you.

>> GIOVANNI RAMMASSA:  Anywhere I hand it over to the last, the interesting thing I would like to remind is you can pose your questions or make comments in the chat and my colleague is following this and we will have slots again later for the questions from the public.  Thank you.

And now we finished this initial part with the experience from Taiwan that covers the contact tracing app, but also the self‑quarantine management and other challenges that have been (inaudible) favorably addressed there.  I am pleased to hand it over to Dr. Huang.

>> YENNUN HUANG:  Because of the pandemic, we have set up with a central and command center since January of this year.  And next to me is the chief of the information technology of the central epidemic command center.  Director Chen.  He's also the director general of the department of service (inaudible).  I will hand it over to him and he will talk about the experience we have in dealing with this epidemic.

>> Thank you.  In the next new minutes, I would like to share the quarantine and (inaudible) and our experience.  During the COVID‑19, it is very important to control this and also the trust of the whole society is also very important.  In Taiwan, we get a balance between privacy protection and also the control.  So there is two important principles.  The first one is about transparency and the second one is collaboration.  In Taiwan, we share ‑‑ we open all the information we have every day and we have media announcement every day.  We also collaborate with the private sector.  Thanks.

>> We establish smart transistent in the end of this generally.  We is the up a CC and also we stop using this smart transystem from the border control to the tracking system and then we have (inaudible) system.  And then all information was tracked to the business control.  And we collaborate with the local police and now the local (inaudible).  And then we cooperate with the Private Sector especially the Telecom operator.  We don't use the GPS or apps to do this.  We only collect the radio signal from the station of this Telecom operator so we can know the location of each mobile phone.  So this is very important because some people don't use chart phone.  So in that case, they cannot start any apps.  So that's the reason we have decided to use the radio station.  So it depends on the system to compete other people when they are quarantines.  When they're quarantined, they will stay at home.  And all this information will be removed.  Thanks.  So this is the (inaudible) of the quarantine.  So you can see we collaborate with the police and also the certainty.  If the people and the person went out of the fence and the operator sends out a message, if they have two kinds of the alert message, the person still out of the fence and then the police and the local authority will go to find this person.  So in this case, we can guarantee that people will stay at a place for quarantine.  This is very effective for people to stay at home.  They will stop and expand of the disease.  And this is a screen shot.  This is a screen shot of our system and we have the isolation types and also we have a list of the out of fence people.  And also we have a (inaudible) for each city.  And in a central part is the whole map and we have marked all the persons on this map.  So based on this, we can know the situation of why people are in quarantine and because of the privacy issue.  Only the CC and the police department can see this system.  All the others cannot see this.  And also we have a very strong service security protection of this and the purpose of this is to guarantee that privacy.  We develop a contact tracing app and this one is we have placed on the Google and also on the (inaudible).  And the idea of this is very signal to (inaudible) and Google's API.  But we have developed our own.  We have more dispute here and all the (inaudible) ID will change every 15 minutes and the governor will not collect the information.  The reason is to protect the privacy, but right now, we don't use this app because in our society, people think of the COVID‑19 is not (inaudible).  So our people think current (inaudible) is enough.  So they don't want to use this contact tracing app.  But still.  If there is coming in and going bad in the end of this year, we may ask to use this contact tracing app next.

So this is a balance between human right and combating COVID‑19.  From technology table, we have to use the technology to do the disease control and also get our authorization from the communicable disease and also we have a very strong protection of personal data.  We also have set up other things and to order the government agency who has collected the information and after the quarantine, they must remove that information and no one can use this.  So we think it's a very good example to have a balance of this.  So that is our experience of this and I would like to share with you.  Thank you.

>> Giovanni MIMASSA:  Very good.  Thank you very much.  Now we finish the initial statements and so we can check with you.  We have something from the public that we could submit to our panelists.

>> ESTEVE SANZ:  Yes.  Thank you.  Thank you, Giovanni.  Yes.  I can perhaps start with a comment from Victoryo.  He reports that in Italy, basically the COVID‑19 app seems to be reporting what people perceive as false contacts because these contacts are record the, but people have not had any contact actually.  And I think it's a good question to put to the panelist if they have detected such issue.  I will start with that.

>> GIOVANNI:  Dirk in the Netherlands, do you have contact?

>> DIRK-WILLEM van GULIK:  So one part is basically yes.  Basically false positives.  And the other question really is that the app is not very ‑‑ the observation is not very useful if it takes weeks to get tested.  To do stuff like tackle the left, yes.  The Netherlands app is just a small part of a large public health response.  Traditional contact tracing testing is absolutely crucial.  So basically these things have to be in place.  All the Corona (inaudible) is (inaudible) people into that process and help you find people especially when they have set someone on the person or in the train or in public spaces.  Just like in Italy, we also see cases which are hard to explain or at least at first sight.  We ‑‑ the framework we get basically from the big tech organizations are black boxes essentially.  We have very limit insight and source code for them and they're not perfect and the radio technology is not perfect either.  But overall, if you look at what you're getting there and potential mistakes or false positives, it's still comparing positively to the typical false positive and false negatives you have in the generals of a contact tracing efforts.  But with that said, this app cannot be used blindly.  Cannot be trusted blindly.  It needs a public health authority in the loop.  When you get a warning, the health authority are not cold and there is (inaudible) health authority.  It is in our choice to call them and phone them and you have a conversation with them and you figure out what they have happened if it's a false positive or false negative and what the next step step should be.

>> GIOVANNI:  Mrs. Malinina, have you report?  Have you received reports on this from the various involved nations from the consumer organizations?

>> JELENA MALININA:  I would say it is quite typical.  There are many false positives.  The technology is not perfect, but in some country its is more perfect than others.  Also depends on the client component and also I talked with Dirk that it is super important to engage public hill at some point because it's super unclear for a person what to do if you receive this notification and what your steps should be.  At times it is not communicated at all.  At times you are receiving ‑‑ for instance, I know that in certain countries, it's the generalized ‑‑ I think what I'm saying now is not corresponding to any country in particular, but at times, you can receive a notification if you passed someone I don't know a public transfer which was quite far from you or there is somebody in your house and (inaudible) does not see the wall and they have Corona.  People have received that kind of thing.  So (inaudible) exposure and also you receive it to the ‑‑ receive it not for the technology hour, but in the shopping street or somewhere because there are so many people so how can you assess the content.  That person too.  So what does it mean?  And it's really necessary to involve the human, but it sals very, very difficult because what is the capacity?  Who is doing that?  How is it organised?  Are there many questions?  It is very difficult the false positives incorrect statistics by phone do not (inaudible) statistics, yes.

>> GIOVANNI:  It is important to get potential positives and then put them into a process to check back there.  Okay.  Thank you very much.

>> GEMMA CAROLILO:  Giovanni, can I get in on this one just very quickly to say this also replies to one of the comments regarding the usefulness of the apps.  It is clear that the list has been the case in the U, but I believe worldwide, there's been raised to developing the apps.  Of course, nobody could see this coming and our member states I think they developed the apps in very short time and with the best of the knowledge available.  At the same time, it's clear that no technology is perfect and also as Jelena said, we are going to use this technology for quite some time still.  So an important thing is that we are working with the European center for disease control to develop some metrics.  This can be used to monitor the effectiveness of the contract.  And then beyond the issue of technology, which is I say the part of our project is to review the technical aspects of the ops that have been developed and this is why we set up specificity.  It is important to consider the factors and the success of the apps include many, many things.  The uptake, the trust from the public, but also the link with the public health system because indeed, somebody was mentioning.  It depends also the behavior of the people notified by the apps and whether the public health system which is under great pressure with comply to the situations.  It is very, very difficult to do widespread testing especially in some countries where the pressure is super high, you can get a notification, but then perhaps the follow up procedure is not necessary and so straight forward.  But just to say we ever working in both directions.  So reviewing the technology to make sure that it gets better and better and at the same time, make sure there is a match between the technology and the type of support that the public health system can already provide.

>> GIOVANNI:  Maybe we can close the loop.  Please, Dr. Huang, because I think we have other questions in the pipeline.  I will give you the answer to the next.  Go on, please.

>> YENNUN:  People don't ice contact tracing.  We use a lot of the lock from the Telecom operators and those people need to be quarantined.  We have very few cases, almost no confirmed cases inside of Taiwan.  We deal with people coming in, flying in and then they're in quarantine for two weeks.  Those people need to stay inside a hole or house.  And those people because of this system, they are limited in their movement and that is how we limited the spread of the COVID‑19.  So people in Taiwan don't really use contact tracing a lot.  It has not been used.

>> Giovanni:  Good.  Other questions or we can elaborate further.

>> ESTEVE SANZ:  Giovanni, there is a very interesting question from Herman Ramos.  Basically it refers to the complexity of the event for the system that both regulation and the technology might imply for 'tiz own knowledge and whether this is ‑‑ there are ways that governments can really cope with that complexity.  In particular, he refers to potential changing environment in the regulation meaning that in the case of state of alarms or loss related to pandemics, some data protection regulation are lost and might be suspended at the national level.  I think it is really interesting respective really around the knowledge of the citizen of all these elements.

>> GIOVANNI:  Maybe I can bounce them back directly to our panelist in Taiwan.  First going in reverse order.  So was there any change from other framework in Taiwan during this year of the pandemic measures?  Are there areas of concern about this possible changes?

>> YENNUN:  In Taiwan, we had face the SARS several years ago.  So according to that experience of SARS, we changed the law and communicable act.  So that is at that time.  So in this time, the COVID‑19 because we have this law and this act and this also writes a government to (inaudible) so we can do the agencies they have complication and exchange.  So we can ‑‑ and also we can use and let you know health insurance and database.  So we can ‑‑ so we can Connect all this together.  So that is the reason we can do this.  So we don't change the fair walk this time, but we do change after the SARS.  I think it is very correct.  Yeah.

>> Geo Johnny:  Okay.  Thank you.  And Ms. Carolilo.  So how is the pressure on the normal framework perceived?

>> GEMMA CAROLILO:  Thank you.  Thank you, Giovanni.  I am not going to go in also because I like the knowledge and the measures of all states but there have been in Italian following that country.  There have been measures in all member states or most of them to counter the pandemics; however, in regards in particular the topic we're talking about which is the contact tracing apps and in general the technologies to counter the pandemics.  This is done in the framework of the European regulation and the national regulation and in particular as Jelena mentioned plays a key role.  Of course there might need to be adjustments.  For example, for setting up European federation gate way which is a safe facility and interoperable between the apps, we are referring from 2011, but it was a necessity to revise one of its implementing decisions in order to set out the modalities for processing the data using the interability gate way.  This is a sort of adjustment.  But the framework of the data protection and deprivacy apply, I wanted to very briefly to touch upon the other point on the questions from Herman Ramos.  How can we insure citizens do not lead to use the information for a purpose and how can we insure that they are aware?  So I think it's very important to have that right regulator and as I say, we believe we have legislation with the GDPR.  We have also in terms of security and application of the directive and national measures.  But in order to insure that the process is working, one key element is the transparency.  This is what Dirk mentioned in the beginning and I say it is the BASIS of our facility.  So if the system cannot trust the government or in the sense that they cannot supervise what the government is doing, it's important they can trust the process.  So it's important that the way these apps have developed is tranparent and there is possibility also to access information as I said review of these apps in a way that can be aware of what is really happening, but of course you need the strong back bone of the regulation because the transparency needs to be proof of compliance with a legal framework where you feel protected.

>> GIOVANNI:  Pretty much.  Ms. Malinina, what is your feedback on this question?

>> JELENA MALININA:  I think the question is very, very good because the fear is real.  We can see it from our member organizations on the service which were done not only about COVID‑19, but in general about digital technology that privacy is one of the concerns.  And despite the fact we do have the GDPR and other data protection related (inaudible), when it comes to pandemics, every member states ‑‑ every member states can introduce certain lows based on the critical situation.  We saw cases like this in the U.S.  Since March at the national level, something strange was happening and it was overruling certain laws which already exist.  It is dangerous.  It can lead to surveillance if it's not done correctly either by a tech or the government or you name it.  What is important to do is not to create (inaudible) or speak about something in general, but we need to start thinking about our regulatory systems in the content of our new lives because our lives became highly digital, but our legal systems are still corresponding to the life without technology.  So we must speak about our digital rights and must be embedded in every low we have.  It must be probably in the constitution of the countries as well because it will have human rights.  Why don't we make the correspondence to digital rights as well.  The reality is thanking and that's the only way.  It also leads to the discussion of what is ethical, how far should we go.  It's not on there about Corona virus which hopefully will end at some point, but it's the world we will face after that as well.

>> DIRK-WILLEM van GULIK:  In our country basically, this was a vigorous debated in parliament and ultimately left to basically specific law being implemented.  It was very specific time limits and all sorts of other constraints on the authorities.  Basically MacDonald be done with that data, which was very, very constrained in time and space and even could not be used for other purposes let's say for catching criminals and things like that.  But yeah, it does require a lot of debate in parliament and that's where there is certainly stuff like now basically laws don't get extended and things of legal dark and disappear after 14 days.

>> GIOVANNI:  So let me know if we have other questions from the public.  In the mean time, I can follow up trying to sum up the main theme.  I would say the overarching point here is that everyone has to balance, trust with effectiveness in this tracing apps and systems behind them.  We have heard this from everyone more or less.  I would like to ask specifically to each of you what do you think are the key factors to gain trust and active participation behavioral change from the citizens while keeping the good effectiveness of the tracing applications and ground systems.  Anyone knows to start?  We can ‑‑ good.  Maybe Ms. Malinina, if you wish to go first.

>> JELENA MALININA:  My answer will be very short.  The key word is transparency.  So transparency from the technological point of view and transparency in the communication to our citizens.  If we have both, it will fly.

>> GIOVANNI:  Good.  Ms. Carolina, what do you think the main key words can pass?

>> We have mentioned this already all of us and Jelena just said it is absolutely important.  Now we are moving more and more of our offline activities to the online activities.  This is also something that Jelena mentioned.  Basically our life online is the facto enabling most economic and social activities in the times of confinement.  So the challenge is that when you are addressing the issues of importance liking hill versus private, but to have an active participation from the citizen, beyond the key issue of being transparent, there needs to be ownership.  Ownership in the sense of ‑‑ ownership from the citizens to feel.  In this case, there's a problem.  But it can be a different situation when we're talking about the positive scenario and also ownership in the sense of being part of the solution.  And you get transparency and to the pocket to implement and practice the principle of data.  We talk a lot about digital sovereignty of countries at the broader ‑‑ in the broader scope.  It's important that citizens can feel they own their data in this case.  And how do they know they own them?  Data is when there are tools available to excerpt their price online.  We need to make sure that the regulations that we have and apply to the offline work can be actually used in your line work by having the right tools to accept the control of citizens data.

>> Giovanni:  Thank you.  We still have five minutes.  So I would say Mr. Van Gullic first on the main factor you see and then I will move on.

>> DIRK-WILLEM van GULIK:  I will echo some of the things they said around the stressing distance and transparency and but I'm slightly saw less optimistic this is an easy path.  Yes.  We need to have security.  We need to have privacy and have them both.  We cannot compromise against each other.  We have very limit technologies and ways of actually doing this.  And even if we try to do that, in the fan wreck of society and the way we deal with data and the way we deal with processes, very often the data about someone isn't owned by that person who it is about, but by whoever collect its and all sorts of things conspire there.  And the technology side, we're building on this model infinite framework serves worldwide web, but it wasn't built with these things in mind.  It was a lot of the patterns in that system.  So the technology built, the investments made there were not from the perspective of citizens.  So I think we need to basically learn a lot about how we apply those technologies because these things show privacy by design is perfect bee possible.  But also find ways of words for this and explaining this.  So like getting vocabulary ready where we can ‑‑ everyone can actually understand why one thing is different from the other and why citizens would prefer one over the other or vice‑versa and these things were not ready.  So yes.  That tryst and transparency is really, really important.  I don't think we have quite yet the words for it or the environment in which those words can be used.  So I think there's a long way to go of conversations of explanations, of ‑‑ yeah.  Understanding.

>> GIOVANNI:  And so I understand you have not deployed yet.  What you expect the factors to be if we need to have adoption there?

>> YENNUN:  All the way, way to open source to the society.  So that people can review the technology we use and also we will announce what kind of data we use.  So we are very open to our citizens and I think transparency and trust our citizens and also it's very important because of the transparency (inaudible).  So we listen to our citizens.  The citizens told us what they want and what kind of app they want to use and what apps they don't expect the governments to use.  So I think transparency is very important and it is a face of a trust and also it's a face of a cooperation.  Yeah.  Thank you.

>> GIOVANNI:  Thank you.  We are notice approaching the end of the session and I think the last round with the key word are transparency and I would say trust in very close second shows how important this focus are above and beyond the technology at the end of the day.  It is just a way that we have as indigenous creatures to resolve problems we have to face.  This also ties into the initial statements from Mrs. Carolilo.  It is exactly to ‑‑ it is not afraid to reexamine and rethink very basic and entrenched mechanisms and we are learning by using maybe not always for all the purposes that you might want.  I would like to thank a lot all the panelists and for your contribution of the thanks, everyone, for participating into this session and I wish you a good continuation with the event after the closure of this.  Right on time.  So thanks again, everyone.

>> Everyone:  Thank you.

>> GEMMA CAROLILO:  Thank you, Giovanni.  Thank you to all the participants.


Contact Information

United Nations
Secretariat of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF)

Villa Le Bocage
Palais des Nations,
CH-1211 Geneva 10

igf [at] un [dot] org
+41 (0) 229 173 411