Author: info@amberhawk.com

One of the papers published by the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) with its report into “Privacy and Security” contained a five-page memo from GCHQ’s legal advisers (see last week’s blog and references).  It suggests that the secret organisation is about to offer email services to the public in order to allay concerns about the mass retention of communications data. I have checked with a leading domain name registration company, and it appears that the first steps have already been

Suppose you are on a jury in a case about tax evasion.  What would you think of a defence on the lines: “the accused did not seek to circumvent the law”?  Would you accept this statement and return a not-guilty verdict? Well this, in summary, is what the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) has done.  In its press release associated with its report ‘Privacy and Security: A modern and transparent legal framework’, the ISC states: “The UK’s intelligence and security

In January,  I published a blog on how the Scottish Government were consulting on plans to transform the current NHS Central Register (“NHSCR”) into a population register without much thought about the Data Protection Act (DPA). The ICO has just published a contribution to that consultation  process that, when you strip away the diplomatic language, comes to a similar conclusion. What I did not know at the time of writing the blog was that there was a flourishing “Entitlement Card”

This blog explains why I think the Italian text of the Regulation published just before Xmas is likely to provide data subjects with a lower level of protection than Directive 95/46/EC or even the current Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). In the blog, I raise four areas to make the case: A carve out for the public sector (this allows Member States to legitimise processing that otherwise could be in breach of a data protection requirement). The “risk based” approach

What better way to spend Data Protection Day (yesterday) than having a light-bulb moment; this is especially the case as, at my age, light bulbs tend to go in a different direction. My thoughts on IP addresses were triggered by the Ryneš ECJ case (domestic purposes exemption does not apply to surveillance of public places from a domestically installed CCTV). I think the Ryneš case strengthens the argument that an IP address is personal data in many instances. If I