Silencing the Risk, Not the Whistle: A Semi-automated Text Sanitization Tool for Mitigating the Risk of Whistleblower Re-Identification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Whistleblowing is essential for ensuring transparency and accountability in both public and private sectors. However, (potential) whistleblowers often fear or face retaliation, even when reporting anonymously. The specific content of their disclosures and their distinct writing style may re-identify them as the source. Legal measures, such as the EU WBD, are limited in their scope and effectiveness. Therefore, computational methods to prevent re-identification are important complementary tools for encouraging whistleblowers to come forward. However, current text sanitization tools follow a one-size-fits-all approach and take an overly limited view of anonymity. They aim to mitigate identification risk by replacing typical high-risk words (such as person names and other NE labels) and combinations thereof with placeholders. Such an approach, however, is inadequate for the whistleblowing scenario since it neglects further re-identification potential in textual features, including writing style. Therefore, we propose, implement, and evaluate a novel classification and mitigation strategy for rewriting texts that involves the whistleblower in the assessment of the risk and utility. Our prototypical tool semi-automatically evaluates risk at the word/term level and applies risk-adapted anonymization techniques to produce a grammatically disjointed yet appropriately sanitized text. We then use a LLM that we fine-tuned for paraphrasing to render this text coherent and style-neutral. We evaluate our tool's effectiveness using court cases from the ECHR and excerpts from a real-world whistleblower testimony and measure the protection against authorship attribution (AA) attacks and utility loss statistically using the popular IMDb62 movie reviews dataset. Our method can significantly reduce AA accuracy from 98.81% to 31.22%, while preserving up to 73.1% of the original content's semantics.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 May 2024.
Builds on
14 of 78 references.
References · 14
- 2022The Text Anonymization Benchmark (TAB): A Dedicated Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Text Anonymizationcited by 94
- 2016De-identification of Patient Notes with Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 88
- 2021Differential Privacy for Text Analytics via Natural Text Sanitizationcited by 74
- 2022The Limits of Word Level Differential Privacycited by 63
- 2018Generalised Differential Privacy for Text Document Processingcited by 52
- 2017A4NT: Author Attribute Anonymity by Adversarial Training of Neural Machine Translationcited by 41
- 2014C-sanitized: a privacy model for document redaction and sanitizationcited by 27
- 2022On the State of the Art in Authorship Attribution and Authorship Verificationcited by 27
- 2018SynTF: Synthetic and Differentially Private Term Frequency Vectors for Privacy-Preserving Text Miningcited by 20
- 2021The Topic Confusion Task: A Novel Scenario for Authorship Attributioncited by 17
- 2022Textwash -- automated open-source text anonymisationcited by 10
- 2022Which anonymization technique is best for which NLP task? -- It depends. A Systematic Study on Clinical Text Processingcited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.