British companies to face big fines if data breaches occur

[KynloStephen66515]

Despite being inclined to have firms collect endless amounts of data on their customers, the British government does at least want them to protect it. Accepting a new EU law, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), means that when introduced in 2018, British firms will be mandated to disclose any breaches that occur, and could be fined if enough protections are not in place.
Over the past few years we’ve seen a number of high profile companies hit with big data breaches as hackers steal away user information by the truckload. In some cases these companies let their users know straight away, but in others it can take weeks, months or even years before the public is made aware. To combat that in future, it is now a legal mandate that firms must disclose the information in a timely manner.

Read More: http://www.kitguru.n...data-breaches-occur/

[KynloStephen66515]

By SYLVIA HUI, Associated Press

LONDON (AP) — The European Court of Justice ruled Wednesday that governments must not indiscriminately collect and retain people's emails and electronic communications, dealing a blow to Britain's contentious new cyber-surveillance law.

Europe's highest court said "general and indiscriminate retention of data" by governments is unlawful and cannot be justified within a democratic society. Only targeted retention aimed at fighting serious crimes could justify such state interference, it said.

"The fact that the data is retained without the users of electronic communications services being informed of the fact is likely to cause the persons concerned to feel that their private lives are the subject of constant surveillance," the court said.

Last month, Britain's Parliament passed legislation that expanded the reach of state surveillance. Dubbed the "snoopers' charter" by opponents, the law requires telecommunications companies to keep records of all customers' emails and web activity for a year, and gives officials unprecedented access to such information. A range of government departments, from police to customs officials, can access the data without a warrant.

Read More: http://www.usnews.co...-data-retention-laws

[Deozaan]

By SYLVIA HUI, Associated Press

LONDON (AP) — The European Court of Justice ruled Wednesday that governments must not indiscriminately collect and retain people's emails and electronic communications, dealing a blow to Britain's contentious new cyber-surveillance law.

Europe's highest court said "general and indiscriminate retention of data" by governments is unlawful and cannot be justified within a democratic society. Only targeted retention aimed at fighting serious crimes could justify such state interference, it said.

"The fact that the data is retained without the users of electronic communications services being informed of the fact is likely to cause the persons concerned to feel that their private lives are the subject of constant surveillance," the court said.

Last month, Britain's Parliament passed legislation that expanded the reach of state surveillance. Dubbed the "snoopers' charter" by opponents, the law requires telecommunications companies to keep records of all customers' emails and web activity for a year, and gives officials unprecedented access to such information. A range of government departments, from police to customs officials, can access the data without a warrant.

Read More: http://www.usnews.co...-data-retention-laws

-Stephen66515 (December 21, 2016, 12:51 PM)

But UK is leaving the EU, so the UK can still do that, right?

[Deozaan]

Despite being inclined to have firms collect endless amounts of data on their customers, the British government does at least want them to protect it. Accepting a new EU law, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), means that when introduced in 2018, British firms will be mandated to disclose any breaches that occur, and could be fined if enough protections are not in place.
Over the past few years we’ve seen a number of high profile companies hit with big data breaches as hackers steal away user information by the truckload. In some cases these companies let their users know straight away, but in others it can take weeks, months or even years before the public is made aware. To combat that in future, it is now a legal mandate that firms must disclose the information in a timely manner.

Read More: http://www.kitguru.n...data-breaches-occur/

-Stephen66515 (December 21, 2016, 12:50 PM)

But Britain is leaving the EU, right? So they won't need to obey that EU law.

[KynloStephen66515]

But UK is leaving the EU, so the UK can still do that, right?

-Deozaan (December 21, 2016, 03:16 PM)

It will probably be re-submitted once we have left, but we are not expected to have fully left until the end of 2018 (I think) so for now, it's overturned (which can only be a good thing).

[KynloStephen66515]

But Britain is leaving the EU, right? So they won't need to obey that EU law.

-Deozaan (December 21, 2016, 03:18 PM)

But UK is leaving the EU, so the UK can still do that, right?

-Deozaan (December 21, 2016, 03:16 PM)

It will probably be re-submitted once we have left, but we are not expected to have fully left until the end of 2018 (I think) so for now, it's overturned (which can only be a good thing).

-Stephen66515 (December 21, 2016, 03:18 PM)

[wraith808]

Aren't both of these threads (this one and this one) talking about the same thing?  Which is one of the reasons for the confusion of that last post... it would seem good to discuss both in the same thread?

[mwb1100]

Aren't both of these threads (this one and this one) talking about the same thing?

-wraith808 (December 21, 2016, 03:35 PM)

This thread is talking about a regulation that makes companies legally responsible for protecting against breaches (and disclosing them), the other thread is about a ruling that prohibits governments from requiring all emails for all users to be retained for 1 year.

Both of the threads have the common, uh...  thread... that the ruling or regulation is by the EU, so there is the question about whether they will apply to the UK.

[IainB]

Note that: (my emphasis)

Europe's highest court said "general and indiscriminate retention of data" by governments is unlawful and cannot be justified within a democratic society. ...
__________________________

-Stephen66515 (December 21, 2016, 12:51 PM)

Slight irony there: The EU can tolerate it, because it is not a democracy (it's a federal state run by unelected "representatives"), but it's telling the UK how to suck eggs anyway.

However, though they may have it right if they are effectively saying that the law is "bad" per se, it would be a non sequitur ("does not follow") to say that it "...cannot be justified within a democratic society", because, well it just has been justified within a democratic society - i.e., the UK parliament passes the laws, and, last time I checked, the UK parliament is a pukka democratically elected body - unlike the EU, which is not.

[IainB]

Yes, do try to keep up @wraith808.   

[IainB]

@Stephen66515: Had you intended a discussion on the OP - and if so, then what? -  or were you just posting the OP for information purposes? (Thankyou for posting it anyway.)

[wraith808]

Aren't both of these threads (this one and this one) talking about the same thing?

-wraith808 (December 21, 2016, 03:35 PM)

This thread is talking about a regulation that makes companies legally responsible for protecting against breaches (and disclosing them), the other thread is about a ruling that prohibits governments from requiring all emails for all users to be retained for 1 year.

Both of the threads have the common, uh...  thread... that the ruling or regulation is by the EU, so there is the question about whether they will apply to the UK.

-mwb1100 (December 21, 2016, 04:42 PM)

But as you said, they have a common thread, so discussing them in separate threads seems self defeating, since there will be much crossover. 

[KynloStephen66515]

@Stephen66515: Had you intended a discussion on the OP - and if so, then what? -  or were you just posting the OP for information purposes? (Thankyou for posting it anyway.)

-IainB (December 21, 2016, 06:00 PM)

It was mainly for informational purposes, but discussion is obviously welcome (otherwise why would I post it on a forum?) haha

Aren't both of these threads (this one and this one) talking about the same thing?

-wraith808 (December 21, 2016, 03:35 PM)

This thread is talking about a regulation that makes companies legally responsible for protecting against breaches (and disclosing them), the other thread is about a ruling that prohibits governments from requiring all emails for all users to be retained for 1 year.

Both of the threads have the common, uh...  thread... that the ruling or regulation is by the EU, so there is the question about whether they will apply to the UK.

-mwb1100 (December 21, 2016, 04:42 PM)

But as you said, they have a common thread, so discussing them in separate threads seems self defeating, since there will be much crossover. 

-wraith808 (December 21, 2016, 10:35 PM)

I will merge them

[KynloStephen66515]

Posts merged