The question of data privacy has become one that is shaping the business world of the 21st century. With many technologies advancing in leaps and bounds – as well as the increasing importance of ‘The Internet of Things’ the appointment of a professional Data Protection Officer to ensure legal and mandatory compliance has become a business imperative. We look at how failure to appoint such professionals who can operate at all levels of an organisation can be a costly mistake – not only in terms of revenue – but also in terms of customer trust.
The number of cyberattacks continues to rise and organisations need to come to terms with the fact that traditional approaches to mitigating the effects of malicious attacks may no longer be viable. One of these approaches is to harness the power of big data technology to help companies improve their proactive and reactive cyber-defence capabilities. David White and Annie Tu examine how old approaches may be found wanting and a paradigm based on new defence models can help companies not only stop hackers, but also help to better identify and respond to malicious activities.
Living in the age of Big Data, consumers are slowly awakening half in doubt regarding the ownership of the data which they generated. As more enterprises start utilising user-generated data for so-called target marketing, more consumers begin questioning about unfairness in sharing the profit earned by commercialising that data. This question motivates us to think about the essence of privacy. Is privacy just about the right to be let alone? Or might it include the right to sell the users' own data?
Are individuals more likely to allow use of their data when it’s ‘for the greater good’ – even if permission is not sought? It may be that they don’t have a choice. Even as data protection measures increase and regulatory bodies increase their ability to punish bad behaviour by data custodians, there are still some thorny issues when it comes to the moral and legal obligations governing the sharing of Big Data and personal information.
In June 2016 the Korean government announced new guidelines on personal data de-identification measures which have contributed to a greater clarity around the use and transfer of personal data for purposes other than those consented to by the data subject. How will they positively impact the big data market?
In this first part of a two-part series, we explore some of the issues around government surveillance and the search for that elusive balance between security and privacy. In this first part, we explore how serious the threat of cyber snooping by government surveillance is and why we shouldn’t panic just yet.
This article is based on a presentation made by Steven Klimt, a partner in the Sydney office of Clayton Utz during the Data Privacy Asia 2016 conference held on 9-11 November 2016. It outlines the new mandatory data breach reporting legislation, how Australian privacy regulation impacts Big Data and the differences between Australian Privacy legislation and the proposed EU GDPR.
Big data in politics has become big news in the United Kingdom as the Guardian newspaper reports that the vote for the UK to leave the European Union saw two international companies manipulating public opinion through the use of big data mining techniques.
With every new opportunity comes new challenges. How can innovative enterprises capture the vast potential and rise up to the challenge of big data privacy?
The EU GDPR signals a move towards a technology-based approach that can enforce data protection policies for personal data. What’s the solution?