369 VIEWS
Pinterest LinkedIn LINE

NewsThese days, I have a mountain of things I want to write about but have not managed to write at all. How is everyone doing?

Since I do not have time to write a proper blog post, here is just a list of news stories I thought I might cover.

French Authority Orders Google to Apply the “Right to Be Forgotten” Worldwide

(Paris, 12, Reuters) – France’s independent data protection authority, the CNIL, instructed Google Inc. (GOOGL.O: Stock Price, Company Information, Reports) that, when asked to remove outdated personal information, it must remove it from Internet search results worldwide, not just in Europe. The authority said it would impose sanctions if Google failed to comply within 15 days. (Source) Reuters

France is certainly taking an aggressive stance. I wonder what is driving it so far….

“But You Have Already Moved Out”—Who Transferred My Resident Record, and Why?

(Jun Takahashi, June 15, 2015, 11:28)
Imagine that one day, without warning, your resident record was transferred to a place you had never heard of. That bizarre event happened to a man living in Fuji, Shizuoka Prefecture. Who did it, and for what purpose? The mystery was investigated. (Source) The Asahi Shimbun Digital

This basically should not happen if an identity-proofing process under a standard such as ISO/IEC 29115 at Level 2 or higher has been followed. In the end, this demonstrates that “how the verification was performed” is far more important than “who performed the verification.” The Basic Resident Register is the foundational database used when issuing My Number Cards, so its operation needs to be much more rigorous. Incidentally, if we seriously intend to issue high-assurance credentials, the approach has to be fundamentally changed. We should begin by re-verifying the identities of public officials, make that the trust anchor, and then gradually expand from there.

Information Disclosure and Personal Information Protection Review Commission

The Information Disclosure and Personal Information Protection Review Commission is an advisory body established within the Supreme Court as of July 1, Heisei 27.
The Commission consists of 3 external experts. At the request of the Supreme Court, it investigates and deliberates on decisions made by courts nationwide concerning the disclosure or nondisclosure of judicial administrative documents or retained personal information, and then issues recommendations. The courts will respond with due regard for those recommendations.
The recommendations will also be published in due course. (Source) Supreme Court of Japan

This is related to information disclosure.

EU Council Agrees on EU Data Protection Regulation

(2014/6/15)

Today, Justice Ministers in the Council reached a General Approach on the new data protection rules confirming the approach taken in the Commission’s proposal back in 2012. Trilogue negotiations between the Council, the European Parliament and the EU Commission will start next week on 24 June. (Source) Privacy Laws & Business

The EU Council has reportedly agreed on its position on the new data protection law [1]. It largely follows the Commission’s proposal from 2012. (Examples include changing an EU Directive into an EU Regulation, applying it to companies outside the EU that provide services in the EU market, a restricted right to be forgotten, and data portability.)

Trilogue negotiations among the EU Council, Parliament, and Commission are scheduled to begin on June 24.

[1] Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation)

 

 

 

Related posts