zlacker

>>zoobab+(OP)
I'm a programmer in the GP data analysis world. We use the term 'pseudonymization' for this kind of data. 'Anonymization' is used solely to refer to, say, 'the sum total of diabetes patients this practice has' (that would be anonymous patient data; it would not be anonymous relative to the GP office this refers to): Aggregated data that can no longer be reduced to a single individual at all.

The term raises questions: Okay, so, what does it mean? How 'pseudo' is psuedo? And that's the point: When you pseudonimize data, you must ask those questions and there is no black and white anymore.

My go-to example to explain this is very simple: Let's say we reduce birthdate info to just your birthyear, and geoloc info to just a wide area. And then I have an pseudonimized individual who is marked down as being 105 years old.

Usually there's only one such person.

I invite everybody who works in this field to start using the term 'pseudonimization'.

>>rzwits+e6
It doesn't roll off the tongue, perhaps pseudo-anonymization is enough.

>>cheez+A6
I would suggest "denonymization", implying that the "names" (i.e. identifiable information) were removed. As opposed to anonymous data, which presumably never had any to start with, like the example mentioned by the GP.

>>Berisl+aa
from an etymological perspective, this is kind of gross; you are grafting a latin-derived prefix onto a greek-derived stem. there's no direct Greek equivalent to the Latin "de", but you could consider "apo" or possibly "kata", both of which have similar meanings.