Tag Archives: data compliant

Data Compliant GDPR panic

GDPR – panic … or not?

myth or fact

GDPR – don’t get bogged down by fear-mongering and myth

GDPR is beset with myth, rumour, and so-called experts. The amount of confusion and misinformation provided is incredibly detrimental. And this is largely because many organisations and individuals who are trying to promote their services are using fear tactics to do so.

But they’re missing the point.

We have a Data Protection Act currently in place, and Privacy and Electronic Communication Regulations to support it.  Any organisation which is ignoring the current data protection legislation has every reason to panic about GDPR. Ignorance is no excuse.  And they won’t be able to get away with ignoring GDPR willfully just because they consider data protection an inconvenient restriction preventing them taking unethical actions to make more money.

On the other hand, organisations who conform to the current legislation have a head-start when addressing how to comply with the new regulation.

GDPR – a simple summary

At its simplest, GDPR is a long-overdue evolution which is primarily about all organisations (whether data controllers or data processors):

  1. putting the individual first
  2. being held accountable for protecting that individual’s data

At the same time, GDPR addresses the vast changes to the data landscape since the original data protection legislation of the 1990s:

  • it takes account of technological advances – bear in mind, there was barely an internet in the early ’90s!
  • it seeks to protect EU citizens from  misuse of their personal data wherever that data is processed
  • it addresses (at least in part) the disparity in data protection legislation throughout the EU and its members

GDPR increases both compliance obligations on the part of organisations, and enforcement powers on the part of the regulator.

Compliance Obligations:  The principle of Accountability puts a heavy administrative burden on data controllers and data processors.  Robust record-keeping in relation to all data processing is essential; evidenced decisions around data processing will be critical.

Enforcement Powers:  Yes, there are massive fines for non-compliance.  And yes, they will go up to £20,000,000 or 4% of global turnover.  But is that really the key headline?

GDPR’s Key Message:  Put the Individual First

Rights human rights

As GDPR comes closer, individuals are going to become increasingly aware of their rights – new and old

All organisations who process personal data need to understand that individuals must be treated fairly, and have, under GDPR, greater rights than before.  This means that organisations need to be transparent about their data processing activity, and take full responsibility for protecting the personal or personally identifiable data they process.

What does that mean in practice?

  • Tell the individuals what you intend to do with their data – and make it absolutely plain what you mean
  • Explain that there’s a value exchange – by all means help them understand the benefits to providing the data and allowing the processing – but don’t tell lies, and don’t mislead them
  • If you don’t want to tell them what you’re doing … you probably shouldn’t be doing it
  • If you need their consent, make sure you obtain it fairly, with simple messaging and utter clarity around precisely what it is to which they are consenting
  • Tell them all their rights (including the right to withdraw consent; to object to processing where relevant; to be provided with all the information you hold about them, to be forgotten, etc)
  • Always balance your rights as an organisation against their rights as an individual

Look out for your Reputation

shame

Never underestimate the reputational damage caused by a data breach

The Information Commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, states clearly that, while the ICO has heavy-weight power to levy massive fines, “we intend to use those powers proportionately and judiciously”.  So the ICO may issue warnings, reprimands, corrective orders and fines, but that could be the least of your worries.

Something that tends to be overlooked when talking about penalties of non-compliance is reputational damage.  All the ICO’s sanctions (from warnings to fines) are published on the ICO website.  And the press loves nothing more than a nice, juicy data breach.

So even if no fine is levied, reputations will suffer.  At worst, customers will be lost.  Shareholders will lose confidence.  Revenues will decline.  Board members will lose their jobs.  And, to quote Denham again, “You can’t insure against that.”

Victoria Tuffill     18th August 2017

Data Compliant advises on GDPR compliance – if you’d like more information, please call 01787 277742 or email dc@datacompliant.co.uk

 

Data Protection Weekly Round-up: New Data Protection Bill; the impact of Brexit; £150k fines for failure to apply TPS

This week there’s been much in the media about the UK’s upcoming new Data Protection Bill.  Unfortunately some of the reporting has been unclear, providing very woolly information on some of the new rights of individuals, and the circumstances they do – or do not – apply.  Nonetheless, the main story is that the Data Protection Act will be replaced and that it will include the requirements of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

In other news, the ICO has taken further action against companies who fail to follow the current Data Protection Act and PECR regulations.  This week the spotlight falls on companies who fail to screen their call lists against TPS.  This illegal behaviour has resulted in fines of £150,000 for the week.

Data Protection Bill set to be read out in Parliament in September

Queen

As promised in the Queen’s Speech, GDPR will become part of the UK’s new data protection law. The process begins next month  in Parliament.

The government has said that it plans to give the Data Protection Bill, announced in the Queen’s speech in June, an airing in Parliament at some point next month. This has been confirmed by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (which continues to be officially abbreviated as DCMS, despite the recent addition of ‘Digital’).

The new Bill will replace the existing Data Protection Act 1998 and one of its chief aims is to implement the EU-wide General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).  The UK must adhere to GDPR during its time as a member state and almost certainly beyond – albeit under different legal provisions. The manner in which this EU initiative could apply in the UK after a finalised Brexit is discussed in the next story.

This first reading of the Bill next month is largely a formality. It gives lawmakers, consultants and interested parties a chance to inform themselves and gather the information they need before a second reading takes place, during which a parliamentary debate is properly staged.

Last month, Germany became the first EU member state to approve its data protection legislation meeting the requirements of GDPR – the German Federal Data Protection Act (‘Bundesdatenschutzgesetz‘).

House of Lords publishes a report on the EU data protection package

Responding to the government’s plans outlined in a White Paper on The United Kingdom’s exit from and new partnership with the European Union, the House of Lords has reviewed various options regarding the data protection policy aspect of this new relationship in a report published on 18th July.

Since the government has stated that it wants to “maintain unhindered and uninterrupted data flows with the EU post-Brexit,” the House of Lords has assessed this commitment with a view to providing a more detailed set of practical objectives.

EU

For the UK to continue trading with EU citizens post-Brexit, GDPR or its equivalent will  need to apply.

The report summarises that the UK has two feasible options if it wants to continue uninterrupted data flow with the EU, which is now a lynchpin in our service-driven economy. There will be a transitional period of adopting the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Police and Criminal Justice Directive (PCJ) while the UK remains an EU Member State, regulations which the government plans to implement with the aforementioned new Data Protection Bill. But the report states that after Brexit, the UK will either have to pursue an ‘adequacy decision’ from the European Commission, “certifying that [the UK] provides a standard of protection which is ‘essentially equivalent’ to EU data protection standards,” or else individual data controllers will have to implement their own data protection safeguards, which would “include tools such as Standard Contractual Clauses, and Binding Corporate Rules.”

The report favours the former, that is, adequacy decisions conferred to the UK as a third state in its relation to the EU, provided under Articles 45 and 36 of the GDPR and PCJ respectively. The report states that the Lords were “persuaded by the Information Commissioner’s view that the UK is so heavily integrated with the EU – three quarters of the UK’s cross-border data flows are with EU countries – that it would be difficult for the UK to get by without an adequacy arrangement.”

The report concludes that there is no prospect of a clean break, since the UK will have to continue to update its domestic data protection policies to remain aligned to the standards of EU data protection in the event of changing regulations – that is, if the UK wants the seamless transfer of data with EU countries that is regarded as crucial to the digital economy and the UK’s competitive position in the modern globalised market.

Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) levies £150,000 of fines for nuisance calls

The ICO has issued official warnings, “reminding companies making direct marketing calls that people registered with the Telephone Preference Service are ‘off-limits,’” after two Bradford-based firms were fined a total of £150,000 for flouting this preference.

fined 150000
Calling consumers without consent is illegal unless you run the files against TPS.

HPAS Ltd (t/a Safestyle UK) and Laura Anderson Ltd (t/a Virgo Home Improvements) have been fined £70,000 and £80,000 respectively for making illegal nuisance calls to people on the TPS register. Both firms have been issued enforcement notices and will face court action if the practice continues.

The ICO received 264 complaints about Virgo over 20 months (despite repeated warnings and formal monitoring), and 440 complaints about the latter in 19 months.  Virgo Home Improvements had already been fined £33,000 just over a year ago, bringing their total fines for making nuisance calls up to £113,000.

One complaint about Safestyle quoted by the ICO read, “this harassment has been going on for over five years now. I want it to stop.” Members of the public are becoming increasingly aware of data protection policy, and the prospect of new legislation that will crack down on aggravating breaches such as these will be welcomed by many.

Written by Harry Smithson, 8th August 2017

http://www.datacompliant.co.uk

Data Protection Weekly Round-up: PECR breaches, ransomware research and Facebook on security

Two large corporations fined for PECR breaches; Google study reveals ransomware profits, and Facebook urges people-led changes to security methodology

In the blog below, you’ll note how the Information Commissioner’s Office is taking a hard-line approach to PECR.  If an organisation uses electronic channels to re-permission its database in time for GDPR enforcement in May 2018, it must comply with PECR. Moneysupermarket.com is the latest in a series of big names to fall foul of email regulations.

You’ll also see an analysis of ransomware profitability, which helps explain its continued growth;   the final story summarises Facebook’s views on data security.

The ICO issues fines amounting to £160,000 for Provident Personal Credit and Moneysupermarket.com

The Information Commissioner’s Office has issued civil monetary penalties of £80,000 each for Provident Personal Credit, a Bradford-based sub-prime lender, and Moneysupermarket.com, a leading brand comparison site, on the 17th and 20th of July respectively. In both cases the fine was  for breaching the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulation (PECR).

Text confused person

Unsolicited texts annoy prospects and customers 

Quick-loan credit firm Provident Personal Credit, a brand operated by Provident Financial, was fined £80,000 for sending out nearly 1 million nuisance text messages in the space of 6 months.

The company employed a third party affiliate to send the unsolicited marketing for loans provided by a sister brand, Satsuma Loans.

Text messages may not be sent if the recipients have not consented to receiving marketing texts, so this activity was in breach of PECR.

emails out of laptop

Beware of sending “service” emails which are actually “marketing” emails

A few days later, the price and brand comparison website Moneysupermarket.com was fined for sending 7.1 million emails over 10 days updating customers with its Terms and Conditions, despite these customers having explicitly opted-out of receiving this type of email. This offence is almost identical to the breaches for which Morrison’s, Honda and Flybe were fined last month.

One of the key problems was the section “Preference Centre Update” which said: “We hold an e-mail address for you which means we could be sending you personalised news, products and promotions. You’ve told us in the past you prefer not to receive these. If you’d like to reconsider, simply click the following link to start receiving our e-mails.”

In a previous blog, we explained the ambiguity between ‘service’ emails and ‘marketing’ emails when implicitly emailing or communicating marketing content to individuals who have opted out. This is in breach of regulations (which will only get stricter after the General Data Protection Legislation comes into force in May 2018).

Google research leads to fears of proliferating ransomware

ransomware 2

Ransomware encrypts and scrambles victims’ computerised files. The files will not be decrypted until after a ransom is paid

Research carried out by Elie Bursztein, Kylie McRoberts and Luca Invernizzi from Google has found that cyber-thieves have made $25m (£19m) in the last two years through the use of ransomware. The research suggests that this type of malware regularly makes more than $1m (£761,500) for its creators.

The two strains of ransomware that have seen the most success are ‘Locky’ and ‘Cerber,’ which have collected $7.8m (£5.9m) and $6.9m (£5.2) respectively. But fears have arisen that due to the profitability of ransomware, new and more expansive variants will emerge amid the increasingly competitive, aggressive and “fast-moving” market for cybercrime weaponry. Mr Burszstein warns that ‘SamSam’ and ‘Spora’ are variants that seem to be gaining traction.

The research collected reports from victims of ransomware but also from an experiment wherein thousands of ‘synthetic’ virtual victims were created online. Mr Bursztein and his colleagues then monitored the network traffic generated by these fake victims to study the movement of money. More than 95% of Bitcoin payments (the preferred currency for ransom payments) were cashed out via Russia’s BTC-e exchange.

The lucrative nature of ransomware has led the Google researchers to conclude that it is “here to stay” and may well proliferate among the many syndicates and crime networks around the world. At a talk at the Black Hat conference, one of the world’s largest information security events, Mr Bursztein warned, “it’s no longer a game reserved for tech-savvy criminals, it’s for almost anyone.”

Facebook’s security boss argues that the industry should change its approach

facebook

Hitting the data security balance: user issues vs. tech solutions 

At a talk at this year’s Black Hat, Facebook’s Chief Information Security Officer, Alex Stamos, has criticised the information security industry’s over-prioritisation of technology over people.

Advocating a ‘people-centric’ approach to information security, Mr Stamos stated his belief that most security professionals were too focused on complex ‘stunt’ hacks involving large corporations and state organisations, and tended to ignore problems that the majority of technology users face.

He told the attendees, “we have perfected the art of finding problems without fixing real-world issues. We focus too much on complexity, not harm.”

He explained that most Facebook users are not being targeted by spies or nation states, and that their loss of control over their information are from simple causes with simple solutions in which, he claims, the security industry takes no interest. He criticised the industry in general for lacking ‘empathy’ with less tech-savvy people, citing the often-expressed thought by security professionals that there would be fewer breaches and data losses if people were perfect.

He used the example of the widespread criticism from cyber experts that the security team for Facebook subsidiary Whatsapp faced after their decision to use ‘end-to-end’ encryption for the popular messaging app, which was heralded by some as sacrificing security for the sake of usability. Such a sacrifice did not manifest, but Mr Stamos was keen to emphasise the fact that it simply did not occur to security experts that usability was worth pursuing.

Mr Stamos advocated the diversification of the industry by working with less technically minded people who could empathise with the imperfections of tech-users, thus helping to develop more straightforward tools and services that would benefit a larger amount of people.

Facebook has also committed half a million dollars to fund a new project to secure election campaigns from cyber attack.  The initiative will be run by the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, a think-tank affiliated to Harvard University.  This is timely, given the scandals around the cyber- attack on French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent election campaign, and the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee during the US elections last year.

If you have any data privacy compliance, governance or security concerns which you’d like to discuss with Data Compliant, please email dc@datacompliant.co.uk.

Harry Smithson   20th July 2017

GDPR is here – Data Protection is Changing

shutterstock_128215814The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will become law on 25th May 2018.  This is the biggest data protection shake-up for twenty years and impacts every organisation in the world that processes the personal data of UK and European citizens.

GDPR is designed to strengthen individuals’ rights and give them greater control over their data.  Data breaches and data theft … and the catastrophic publicity that goes with them … are now everyday events.  Just ask Morrisons, Talk Talk, eBay, Altzheimers Society and VTech. Under GDPR, these, and all other organisations will face fines of up to 4% of worldwide turnover or 20 million euros (whichever is higher).

The onus is on Boards, individual directors and management to understand and comply with the Regulation, and to make the critical changes required to the way in which organisations handle personal data.  And the clock is already ticking – there are only 24 months available to make the vital procedural, technical and resource changes required for compliance.

shutterstock_14154718The first issue is to understand exactly what personal data you hold.  This is not always simple. Data’s a bit like a river, and sometimes the flow can just be too fast to control. It may flow down the main stream, pause in a deep pool, join another river at a junction,  then wander off down tributaries, streams and burns, and disappear – only to bubble up unexpectedly in the middle of an isolated moor.  Like a river, data can be full of good and exciting things, or stagnant and disgusting.

 

It is essential to know what personal data you hold, where it is held, where it came from, how it was collected, what evidence you have that it has been collected and processed legally, with whom it has been shared (internally and externally), on what terms it has been bought or licensed, whether and where it has been archived or deleted, and who is responsible for its safekeeping.

Until all that information is in place, there is no chance that you can keep it clean, up-to-date and protect it from external or internal threats.  And there’s absolutely no chance you can comply with the Data Protection Act as it stands now – let alone GDPR.

Data Compliant has developed a quick GDPR Compliance Checker – if you’d like to know more about where you are compared to where you need to be for GDPR compliance, just click here, answer the questions, and we’ll send you a free report, including:

–  your topline level of compliance by category
–  a benchline summary of how you compare with other UK organisations
–  a summary of the key steps you need to take to become compliant
Remember, enforcement begins on May 25th, 2018 – now’s the time to start to get ready.

ISO 27001 Certification – who needs it?

It’s becoming an increasingly essential part of due diligence that a data controller, when appointing a data processor, will ask one simple question:  “Do you have ISO 27001 Certification?”  Given that data controllers are the liable parties for any data breaches or lack of compliance, they need to be certain their data is to be processed safely.  So if the answer is “no”, the processor is unlikely to win the contract unless they have some other extraordinary and unique competitive advantage.

I was going to write a blog about why ISO 27001 certification is so important.  Then I thought it would be simpler just to show you.  It’s all about protecting your business from potential breaches.

2014 global breaches infographicFrom the stats above, taken from  the 2014 Year of Mega Breaches and Identity Theft, it’s clear to see:

  • the US is clearly the largest target, but UK has second largest number of breaches
  • retail organisations suffered the greatest volume of data loss in 2014
  • only 4% of data breaches involved encrypted data – an astonishing statistic which tells us:
    • encrypted data is harder to breach
    • given the critical nature of encryption in data protection, the sheer volume of unencrypted data is staggering – too many organisations are simply not taking the most basic of steps to help keep their data secure

ISO 27001 is an international standard for data security management, providing a risk-based approach to data security that involves a data governance standard that is embedded throughout the business covering processes, technology, employees and training.

In the past, obtaining ISO 27001 certification has been a time-consuming, arduous and costly exercise.  Now, however, the whole process of creating the gap analysis, providing robust policies and procedures, and obtaining certification can be made much simpler.

If you’d like to know more about getting ISO 27001 quickly, simply and cost-effectively, please get in touch on 01787 277742 or email victoria@datacompliant.co.uk – we’ll be happy to have a chat and answer your questions

Services at December 2014

Phishing, e-commerce and retail

phishing

Britain is targeted by up to 10,000 cyber attacks per hour, making it a business imperative for organisations to strengthen their data security systems and processes.

Retail and financial services websites are at the highest risk from attack, and Christmas – with a projected online spend of £17.4bn** – is the most popular time of year for cyber criminals.

A Google study from a couple of weeks ago made an astonishing statement:

Phishing stats 45%

This is a particularly worrying statistic given that data security breaches carry a huge cost – both to reputation and financially.

phishing stats Nov 2014

The costs of a breach increase every year, and will inevitably continue to rise as new legislation comes in with greater powers to the ICO.

So it’s time for retailers to make sure their staff don’t fall into the 45% of successful phishing attacks, and understand how to minimise security risks to the business.

Christmas Offer

25% Christmas Discount

Data Compliant  provides data security training workshops for companies who want their employees to understand how to keep their data secure.

2-hour security workshops for up to 10 attendees per session are available from January 5th 2015.  The usual cost is £1,100*.  Within the workshop, we’ll demonstrate how to recognise and avoid phishing attacks.

Any organisation making a firm booking for a data security workshop before 23rd December will receive their 25% discount – ie a reduction in cost from £1,100 to just £825.*

For more information or to book your workshop, call 01787 277742 or email victoria@datacompliant.co.uk

* Stats taken from UK 2014 Information Security Breaches Survey – Department for Business Innovation and Skills

**stats from internetretailing.net

* Costs exclude VAT and expenses.

 

CCTV Data Protection Guidelines from ICO

drone delivering parcelClearly surveillance has both benefits and drawbacks, and the level of public interest and debate about both is increasing. Technology is advancing swiftly, and surveillance cameras are no longer simply passively recording and retaining images. They are now also used proactively to identify people of interest, to keep detailed records of people’s activities both for social (eg schooling, benefits eligibility) and political (eg terrorist) reasons.

There’s a real risk that, despite the benefits, use of CCTV can be very intrusive.

The ICO’s new CCTV code of practice continues its focus on the principles that underpinned the previous code of practice. However, it has been updated to take into account both the changes in the regulatory environment and the opportunities to collect personal data through new technology.

There is some fascinating information in the guidelines – specifically around some of that new technology, where three of the key recommendations are:

  • Privacy Impact Assessments – a requirement that involves ensuring that the use of surveillance systems is proportionate and addresses a pressing need (see the
  • Privacy Notices / Fair processing – a key issue for many of the new technologies is finding creative says of informing individuals that their personal data is being processed – particularly where such processing is simply not obvious.
  • Privacy by design – for example, the ability to turn the recording device (audio and / or sound) on and off as appropriate to fulfil the purpose; the quality must be high enough to fulfil the purpose; the use of devices with vision restricted purely to achieve the purpose

The new technology specifically covered in the guide includes:

Automatic Number Plate Recognition (when to use it, data storage, security issues, sharing the data and informing individuals that their personal data is being processed – something of a challenge needing some creative thinking);

Body Worn Video (warnings against continuous recording without justification; the use of BWV in private dwellings, schools, care homes and the like – and, again, the thorny issue of informing subjects that they are being recorded);

Unmanned Aerial Systems drones are now increasingly used by businesses as well as the military (Amazon has stated its intention to use drones to deliver parcels …). Some of the key issues are privacy intrusions where individuals are unnecessarily recorded when the drone has some other purpose; the distinction between domestic and commercial use; providing justification for their use; the ability to switch the recording system on and off; the whole system of data collection, storage, accessibility, retention periods and disposal requires compliance.

Automated recognition technologies are increasingly used commercially to identify individuals’ faces, the way they walk, how they look at advertising and suchlike. Again, the issues of fair processing, degree of accuracy of images and their identification, storage, retention, transfer, disposal and security are all key to compliance.

If you are using surveillance devices to view or record and / or hold information about individuals, then it’s worth noting that such use is subject not only to the Protection of Freedoms Act (and its Surveillance Camera Code of Practice), and the Data Protection Act, but you also need to consider your obligations under The Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Human Rights Act 1998.

If you have any concerns about your data compliance in general or your surveillance camera compliance specifically, contact us on 01787 277742.  Or email victoria@datacompliant.co.uk

Services