Regulatory reporting for GDPR compliance requires effectively operationalising the use of appropriate technical and organisational measures to allow for reporting at the enterprise and project level.
Data Protection
Certain types of personal data are very valuable to criminals, and can be very damaging to an individual or business if it falls into the wrong hands. As the world becomes more digital and more connected, more of this sort of data is generated and passed between various sources on a regular basis.
Government regulations and supervisory authorities aren’t just about keeping irresponsible parties in line. They also provide vital security guidance to every type of organization that handles sensitive personal, business or government information.
Data protection regulations also ensure that the end user has a transparent view of and a say in the processing of personal data. These safeguards play a significant role in everything from the preservation of civil rights to ensuring that democratic institutions function properly.
Some types of personal data are clear candidates for regulation: medical records, banking information, national ID numbers and so on. But some of these regulations also cover items that might seem relatively innocuous at first glance: home addresses, email addresses, website profile information and so on. For example, the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) has stipulations about anything that is unique to an individual to include phone numbers and social media accounts. People have varying levels of privacy preference with these items, but they are often protected by regulation because they can be used for targeted scams and attempts at identity theft.
Given that regulations often take the size and customer count of businesses into consideration in terms of penalties and the scope of protection of personal data, compliance is particularly important for enterprise-scale organizations. You do not necessarily have to have an active business presence in a country or region; simply storing data on or moving it through servers there may subject you to their data protection rules.
A new report from the FPF and ABLI promotes a shift from consent-based models to a focus on accountability for data processors in the interest of improving consistency between different jurisdictions and different data protection laws.
Facebook has come up with a clever workaround that takes advantage of Brexit; it's simply going to move local users to California to evade EU privacy rules.
The exit of the United Kingdom from the EU has caused turmoil in world markets and has far reaching consequences for those companies in the European Union doing business with the country – and vice versa. There has also been some uncertainty about how the authorities based in London will be treating data security and privacy issues. The consensus seems to be that companies doing business with the second largest economy in Europe (after Germany) should be adopting a ‘business as usual’ approach. However, will this necessarily be the case in the future? Will global companies with a British connection (including those in Asia) be forced to revisit how they treat data security and privacy issues when dealing with the United Kingdom – and will British companies move away from the rules that have been set in place by Brussels? We take a closer look.
The Austrian data protection authority has found that the IP addresses and identifiers in Google Analytics cookie data were sufficiently personal to constitute a GDPR violation for purposes of transfer to the US.
Austrian GDPR Complaint Claims OpenAI Refuses to Correct Potentially Libelous ChatGPT Hallucinations
Filed by data privacy crusader Max Schrems and his group "noyb," the GDPR complaint asserts that OpenAI refuses to correct ChatGPT output about individuals and will simply try to filter or block requests tied to that name. The complaint also accuses OpenAI of failing to live up to their subject access request (SAR) responsibilities under EU rules.
New law has passed in Washington state which will limit the use of facial recognition technology but some are concerned that it does not offer enough protections against marginalized groups.
Many claim that data protection laws are preventing the use of data to track the COVID-19 pandemic which seems to be based on a false understanding of the laws.
Headed up by Meta, a collection of the biggest names in tech and AI research has sent a letter to the European Union warning that EU decisions on regulating AI training threaten to hold the region back.
Recent ruling by the CJEU has given the region's data protection authorities a much greater ability to pursue cases against Big Tech companies that are not headquartered in their territory.










