I think that this article[1] (written by the researchers themselves) gives a better overview of the paper and context.<p>The important context is that there's legislation being discussed at the moment that would criminalise re-identification of published government data[2]. This link provides the important context that this legislation would only achieve a silencing of researchers, rather than actual protections.<p>[1] <a href="https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-simple-process-of-re-identifying-patients-in-public-health-records" rel="nofollow">https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-simple-process-o...</a><p>[2] <a href="https://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2016/ThirdQuarter/Amendment-to-the-Privacy-Act-to-further-protect-de-identified-data.aspx" rel="nofollow">https://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2016/...</a>
Research for those interested: <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.05627" rel="nofollow">https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.05627</a>