Privacy White Lists - Don't be Fooled (2009)

[« previous] [title page] [full contents]

3. Summary of findings

Overall the study found that privacy white lists contained a surprising and alarmingly high proportion of inaccurate and out-of-date information. Depending on the trustmark scheme administering the white-list, between 22% and 73% of information is inaccurate or out of date. If a consumer relied on the white lists they would face the risk that they would receive no privacy protection from the trustmark scheme as the organisation’s membership had expired. Similarly the enormous number of missing or broken seals means that consumers are unable to verify membership for a large number of organisations.

This finding raises concerns about the use of white lists as a privacy protection mechanism and adds to more general concerns regarding privacy trustmarks and self regulation.

It is also alarming that all of the white lists examined in this article received Government approval. The two US white lists were both accredited by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the other lists receive Government funding and high-level endorsement. There are risks for consumers in having Governments lend this type of credibility to trustmark schemes and white lists without adequate quality control and regulation in place.

[« previous] [title page] [full contents]

[full document] [download PDF version]

[up to research]