ICO statement: investigation into data analytics for political purposes

The ICO statement on 24th March 2018.
I assume this is not the first-time such a civil & criminal investigation by the ICO.

The ICO’s investigation on the DeepMind-NHS saga (not a scandal?) revealed this:

However, an investigation by the ICO discovered several shortcomings in how the data was handled, including that patients were not adequately informed that their data would be used as part of the test. (Extracted from ‘review-agrees-that-deepmind-nhs-deal-lacked-clarity’)

Based on the reported news the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica (CA) scandal (Top EU privacy watchdog calls Facebook data allegations the ‘scandal of the century) and the DeepMind-NHS saga did not involve a breach of technical security and/or organisational security measures (excluding privacy policies and app/SLA-type driven contractual agreements).

What data protection and privacy principles have been violated/breached?

Would ethics be a yardstick in the final determination of the Facebook-CA scandal?

social data – Facebook

A well-crafted post by Mark Zuckerberg:

GDPR press briefing

I started using Shapr early this year out of curiosity to ‘test’ and to ‘play’ with the app. So far I’ve met up with a barrister and we had interesting exchanges, including the GDPR.

Hard to imagine that I got interested in data protection and privacy way back in 2000. Back then I was a consultant (Business Architect role) working on an internet banking project. The governance/compliance & team communications aspects of the project drove me to do a law course at Queen Mary College. I did the Data Protection, IP and advanced IP modules. I subsequently completed the Post-Graduate Diploma in Internation Commercial Arbitration.

When the GDPR was drafted in 2012, I gave a talk at the BCS which I’ve posted here.

Also, during my time at the City, University of London I’ve initiated Privacy Day events.

This year, to mark the GDPR coming into effect on 25th May 2018, together with my colleagues at City, we will be hosting a GDPR press media event on the 17th April.

More to follow…

Privacy-by-design framework

#privacy-by-design framework for the collection and
processing of behavioural #data -an #OASIS COEL TC deliverable http://bit.ly/2Hck3W9

The url:


Article 29 WP revised guidelines on personal data breach notification

Latest (final?) revised ‘Guidelines on Personal data breach notification under Regulation 2016/679 (wp250rev.01) available here

UK Data Protection (HL Bill) & GDPR

This is an amendment of my blog done last Sunday (4th Feb 2018).
The latest UK Data Protection Bill – HL Bill 153 (The Bill) is published here and the Explanatory Notes published here.

It’s going to take more of my free Sunday afternoons to plough through the Bill, the Explanatory Notes and also this Keeling Schedule (GDPR effected by the Bill!).

Data protection (under current DPA) appeal cases

Just catching up on my tweets and found an interesting post curated by “The Data Chain” an online paper (setup by me).

This interesting post: “Data protection in the Court of Appeal & the right to be forgotten” – not #GDPR-related – but will be significant post-GDPR era (from 25th May 2018 onwards).
The appeal cases extracted from the post are:

- DB v General Medical Council (application of mixed data provisions in s. 7 DPA) – due to be heard in March 2018,
- TLT v Home Office (accidental online disclosure of information relating to asylum seekers) – due to be heard in April 2018 – (note, the appeal does not address the quantum of the awards made in that case but instead focuses on the question of whether compensation ought in principle to have been awarded to individuals who were not referred to by name in the disclosed spreadsheet but who were nonetheless affected by the disclosure);
- Stunt v Associated Newspapers (challenge to the stay mechanism under s. 32 DPA) – due to be heard in June 2018 and, last but most certainly not least,
- Various Claimants v WM Morrison Supermarket PLC (group litigation data breach case) – due to be heard by the Court of Appeal before the end of 2018.

The UK Data Protection Bill [HL]

The published Bill- 218 pages.

Will review the Bill soon…

data breach reporting – 5th, 6th, 7th & 8th busting myths from the ICO

What is ‘high risk’ in the context of data breach reporting or notification under the GDPR?
According to the ICO’s website on breach notification:

When do individuals have to be notified?

Where a breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals, you must notify those concerned directly.

A ‘high risk’ means the threshold for notifying individuals is higher than for notifying the relevant supervisory authority.

However, note the ‘fact’ for ‘myth #5′ on the breach reporting blog:

And organisations need to remember that if there’s the likelihood of a high risk to people’s rights and freedoms, they will also need to report the breach to the individuals who have been affected.

So, in essence, organisations will need to assess the ‘no risk, risk and high risk’ to people’s rights and freedoms. This assumes or requires organisations to somehow get to grips with what constitutes ‘people’s rights and freedoms’. Rights and freedoms (privacy?) are not easy to identify..

The ICO acknowledges this by stating in their blog:
Pan-European guidelines will assist organisations in determining thresholds for reporting, but the best approach will be to start examining the types of incidents your organisation faces and develop a sense of what constitutes a serious incident in the context of your data and your own customers.

UK Data Protection Bill

The Data Protection Bill (HL Bill 66) was introduced into the House of Lords on 13 September 2017.
The published Bill.
The press release from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport.

The Bill implements the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and will replace the Data Protection Act 1998.