Safe Harbour - What It Means For Tech Companies

Image credit: LinkedIn

What is Safe Harbour?

In 2000 an agreement called Safe Harbour came into force in the EU that prohibited citizens' personal data from being sent to places that don't have proper privacy protections. It was decided that American firms could self-certify that data being sent to their data centres would be properly protected, so that transfers to the US wouldn't be slowed down. 

What went wrong with Safe Harbour?

Everyone has heard of the whistleblower Edward Snowden, well in 2013 he leaked documents outlining the US security services' cyber-spying operations, which caused outrage throughout the world. Privacy campaigners have now been questioning what data sites like Facebook have been sharing with the NSA. However, up until recently there was no way of knowing as they were protected under the Safe Harbour agreement. But that's all about to change….Last October a court ruled that national data watchdogs need to review all transfers of data on an individual basis, but an agreement needed to be made with the US first.

What does this mean for tech companies?

Since October Europe and the US have been in negotiations regarding a new data transfer act and were meant to reach an agreement by January 31, however just when they looked like they were no closer to making a compromise, they formed the "EU-US Privacy Shield". Tech companies must be relieved as EU regulators were on the verge of enforcing a data transfer clampdown if an agreement hasn't been made soon. 

The new EU-US Privacy Shield, which will still allows the easy transfer of EU citizens' data, come with promises of better privacy protections from the US. Essentially, Europe is making the US abide by the same data protection standards found in the EU. Tech companies will also face regular compliance checks to ensure that they are still following the deal's rules.

Andrus Ansip, European commissioner for the digital single market said: “We have agreed with our US partners a new framework that will ensure the right checks and balances for our citizens.”

Vera Jourova, European commissioner for justice, said: “For the first time ever, the US has given the EU binding assurances that the access of public authorities for national security purposes will be subject to clear limitations, safeguards and oversight mechanisms.”

Are you still reluctant to share personal data? Let us know your thoughts! 

360ict provides managed IT services and support for SMEs in central London and the south-east, including Croydon and Bromley. For more advice on gaining competitive advantage as a mid-sized company, give us a call on 0208 663 4000 or head to our website. 

What to expect from Theresa May’s new Surveillance Bill AKA Spy Bill

Image credit: Tech Week Europe

Yesterday Home Secretary Theresa May revealed her plans to fight crime and terror through a new surveillance law. The law will track the internet activity of everyone in the UK and all data will be stored for at least a year by service providers. This will allow the police and intelligence officers to check what sites people have visited anytime and without a warrant.

This bill will bring Britain in to the “digital age” according to May, as it will make “provision for the retention of internet connection records (ICRs) in order for law enforcement to identify the communications service to which a device has connected. This will restore capabilities that have been lost as a result of changes in the way people communicate.”

May hopes to bring together all the powers already available to law enforcements and intelligence agencies to obtain communications. This will also allow the state to hack devices and run operations to sweep up large amounts of data through the internet. This is the exact activity that was uncovered by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

So other than keeping a log of everyones browser activities, what else can we expect from the controversial Spy Bill:

• A panel of judges will have the power to block spying operations
• It will be a criminal offence to “knowingly or recklessly obtaining communications data from a telecommunications operator without lawful authority”
• Local councils will retain some investigatory powers
• The Wilson doctrine - preventing surveillance of Parliamentarians' communications - to be written into law
• Journalistic sources can’t be accessed without authorisation of a judge
• UK companies will be expected to help agencies hack devices and acquire information

Some have hailed the bill as a necessity to protect against crime, but others have warned about the unforgivable intrusion on the UK citizens personal information. Where do you stand?