Researchers expose new vulnerabilities in the security of personal genetic information

by Matt Fearer

Using only a computer, an Internet connection, and publicly accessible online resources, a team of Whitehead Institute researchers has been able to identify nearly 50 individuals who had submitted personal genetic material as participants in genomic studies.

Intent on conducting an exercise in "vulnerability research"—a common practice in the field of information security—the team took a multi-step approach to prove that under certain circumstances, the full names and identities of genomic research participants can be determined, even when their is held in databases in de-identified form.

"This is an important result that points out the potential for breaches of privacy in genomics studies," says Whitehead Fellow Yaniv Erlich, who led the research team. A description of the group's work is published in this week's Science magazine.

Erlich and colleagues began by analyzing unique known as short tandem repeats on the Y chromosomes (Y-STRs) of men whose genetic material was collected by the Center for the Study of Human Polymorphisms (CEPH) and whose genomes were sequenced and made publicly available as part of the 1000 Genomes Project. Because the Y chromosome is transmitted from father to son, as are family surnames, there is a strong correlation between surnames and the DNA on the .

Recognizing this correlation, genealogists and genetic genealogy companies have established publicly accessible databases that house Y-STR data by surname. In a process known as "surname inference," the Erlich team was able to discover the family names of the men by submitting their Y-STRs to these databases. With surnames in hand, the team queried other information sources, including Internet record search engines, obituaries, genealogical websites, and public demographic data from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Human Genetic Cell Repository at New Jersey's Coriell Institute, to identify nearly 50 men and women in the United States who were CEPH participants.

Previous studies have contemplated the possibility of genetic identification by matching the DNA of a single person, assuming the person's DNA were cataloged in two separate databases. This work, however, exploits data between distant paternally-related individuals. As a result, the team notes that the posting of genetic data from a single individual can reveal deep genealogical ties and lead to the identification of a distantly-related person who may have no acquaintance with the person who released that genetic data.

"We show that if, for example, your Uncle Dave submitted his DNA to a genetic genealogy database, you could be identified," says Melissa Gymrek, a member of the Erlich lab and first author of the Science paper. "In fact, even your fourth cousin Patrick, whom you've never met, could identify you if his DNA is in the database, as long as he is paternally related to you."

Aware of the sensitivity of his work, Erlich emphasizes that he has no intention of revealing the names of those identified, nor does he wish to see public sharing of genetic information curtailed.

"Our aim is to better illuminate the current status of identifiability of genetic data," he says. "More knowledge empowers participants to weigh the risks and benefits and make more informed decisions when considering whether to share their own data. We also hope that this study will eventually result in better security algorithms, better policy guidelines, and better legislation to help mitigate some of the risks described."

To that end, Erlich shared his findings with officials at the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) and NIGMS prior to publication. In response, NIGMS and NHGRI moved certain demographic information from the publicly-accessible portion the NIGMS cell repository to help reduce the risk of future breaches. In the same issue of Science in which the Erlich study appears, Judith H. Greenberg and Eric D. Green, the Directors of NIGMS and NHGRI, and colleagues author a perspective on this latest research in which they advocate for an examination of approaches to balance research participants' privacy rights with the societal benefits to be realized from the sharing of biomedical research data.

"Yaniv's work is a timely reminder that in this era in which massive amounts of genomic data are being generated rapidly and shared in the interest of scientific advancement, there is an increasing likelihood of privacy breaches," says Whitehead Institute Director David Page. "I'm delighted that, thanks to Yaniv's overture to NIH, we at Whitehead Institute have the opportunity to join policymakers at NHGRI and elsewhere in what will be a critical, ongoing dialog about the importance of safeguarding data, of sharing data, and the implications of failure in either endeavor."

More information: "Identifying Personal Genomes by Surname Inference" Melissa Gymrek et al. (Science, January 18, 2012.

Related Stories

lobSTR algorithm rolls DNA fingerprinting into 21st century

Apr 27, 2012

As any crime show buff can tell you, DNA evidence identifies a victim's remains, fingers the guilty, and sets the innocent free. But in reality, the processing of forensic DNA evidence takes much longer than a 60-minute primetime ...

Y chromosome and surname study challenges infidelity 'myth'

Feb 11, 2009

Our surnames and genetic information are often strongly connected, according to a study funded by the Wellcome Trust. The research, published this week in the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution, may help genealogists create ...

Recommended for you

Mutation disables innate immune system

11 hours ago

A Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich team has shown that defects in the JAGN1 gene inhibit the function of a specific type of white blood cells, and account for a rare congenital immune deficiency that ...

Study identifies genetic change in autism-related gene

Aug 28, 2014

A new study from Bradley Hospital has identified a genetic change in a recently identified autism-associated gene, which may provide further insight into the causes of autism. The study, now published online in the Journal of ...

NIH issues finalized policy on genomic data sharing

Aug 27, 2014

The National Institutes of Health has issued a final NIH Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) policy to promote data sharing as a way to speed the translation of data into knowledge, products and procedures that improve health while ...

The genes behind the guardians of the airways

Aug 27, 2014

Dysfunctions in cilia, tiny hair-like structures that protrude from the surface of cells, are responsible for a number of human diseases. However the genes involved in making cilia have remained largely elusive. ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

nanotech_republika_pl
5 / 5 (1) Jan 17, 2013
I agree that it is not full proof system of safeguarding data, but from what I've read from 23andme discussions over the last 2 years, people who said that they also participate in the 1000 genome project were typically posting their data to other places/boards/programs or were being very open about their identity. I think there is a big chance that these people were discussing the potential loss of the privacy with their family members.

This might be different, in the future, for a more typical person that is much more afraid of losing their privacy.
DavidW
1 / 5 (1) Jan 18, 2013
Excellent Nano!

We are all important. We are all equal. We all have unknown vulnerabilities that can be exposed with the loss of privacy.
*Any thought to remove privacy from people, with or without their consent, which is not specifically for a "real and serious need" for life itself, is not operating in the truth of the very importance of life itself.*

Only a mind that has become ill/warped (completely out of touch with reality) dismisses the obvious threat to life itself that privacy losses expose us to. There are many of us that have yet to connected the dots that it stays this way because the truth says that life is important. Instead, many of us persist in believing there is something to gain in exposing and harvesting the personal information of others.

The ill mind run's down the rabbit hole…. Unable to contend with that their actions and choices are opposite of that with is dictated by the truth and the creator of the truth.