OAIC – Page 3 – Cyber Law Watch

Was your Facebook data taken by Cambridge Analytica? Here’s how to find out

Apr 11 2018

Over the last few weeks we’ve been blogging about the data “sharing” scandal that has rocked Facebook, and has lead to a boycott of the popular social media site, and sent CEO Mark Zuckerberg to face the music on Capitol Hill.

In case you’d missed the story (which you can read about here, here and here), Facebook estimated 87 million people globally, including 300,000 Australians, had their data shared with Cambridge Analytica, a political consultancy firm used by US President Donald Trump in his 2016 election campaign.

What Pokémon ‘needed’ to know about you

Jul 22 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The hugely popular Pokémon GO app is at the centre of privacy and security concerns after recent media reports noted that its installation required access to a significant amount of users’ personal information. This prompted Australian Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim to make enquiries with the developer of the app, Niantic Labs, to “ensure the personal information of users is being managed in accordance with the Australian Privacy Act.” Read the OAIC statement here.

Available on iOS and Android platforms, the smash-hit game uses augmented reality technology and your smart-phone GPS and camera to display fictional Pokémon which users then aim to find and capture.

Privacy concerns arose after users noted that installing the iOS version of the app required full access to users’ Google accounts. In response, Niantic Labs reported that the access was requested erroneously and that Google would reduce Pokémon GO’s permission to only the basic profile data that it needs. Niantic and Google have since corrected the permissions. Read Niantic’s statement here.

Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim warned that the security scare was a “timely reminder that people need to read the privacy policies of all smartphone apps before signing up. This way people can make an informed decision about if they want to use an app.” However, we will wager that 99% of people just click “accept”.

OAIC releases draft guide for conducting big data activities

Jun 03 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Simon Ly

Last week the OAIC released their consultation draft Guide to big data and the Australian Privacy Principles, with feedback on the Guide open until 26 July 2016.

The main purpose of the Guide is to facilitate big data activities while protecting personal information (being information or an opinion about an identified individual, or an individual who is reasonably identifiable). The Guide addresses issues such as notice and consent, retention minimisation and use limitation in regards to such data. Whilst not legally binding, the Guide will be referred to by the Privacy Commissioner in undertaking its functions under the Privacy Act.

One of the key aspects dealt with in the Guide is that entities should consider undertaking big data activities on an anonymised manner by de-identifying personal information. If so, this has the favourable outcome that such data will not be considered personal information so accordingly less onerous obligations apply under the Privacy Act to such data. Of course, if this is the case it also lessens the chance that personal information will be compromised should a data breach occur (speaking of which, we note OAIC’s April 2016 guide to deal with data breaches). However, in our experience most of our clients want to analyse and then drill down to take actions or campaigns in relation to a then identified group of customers.

The Guide also highlights how big data interacts with the APPs as well as discussing other related concepts, such as “privacy by design” frameworks. For more information, you can access the OAIC’s consultation draft Guide here.

Privacy Commissioner releases a Guide to deal with data breaches

Apr 19 2016

By Cameron Abbott, Rob Pulham and Simon Ly

On 11 April 2016, the Privacy Commissioner released a guide to deal with issues associated with data breaches. This is aimed at entities regulated by the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) in order to assist them with complying with the Australian Privacy Principles.

When (and it is likely to be a matter of when and not if) your entity is subject to a data breach, whether it be through your system being hacked or if devices are lost or stolen, it is important that you are equipped to deal with it. It is important to get in front of such problems and have pre-prepared action plans given that it is likely that the first 24 hours will be the most crucial in determining your level of success in dealing with a data breach. Data breaches can be expensive, both in a monetary and reputational sense.

In the guide, the Privacy Commissioner highlighted that a written data breach response plan is an important tool to help deal with such issues. Such a plan should include:

actions to be taken if a breach is suspected, discovered or reported by a staff member, including escalation measures;
the members of the data breach response team; and
the actions the team are expected to take.

Such a plan needs to be regularly reviewed and updated, with all relevant staff kept up to date so that they know what actions they are expected to take.

The Privacy Commissioner suggests the following four steps to be taken when a data breach is discovered:

contain the breach and do a preliminary assessment;
evaluate the risks associated with the breach;
develop a plan for notifying affected individuals and consider what information should be in any notification; and
determine steps to be taken to prevent future breaches.

For more information, please feel free to contact us. You can find out more information on practical steps you can take here.

Mandatory data breach notification legislation up for discussion

Dec 04 2015

By Jim Bulling, Cameron Abbott, Michelle Chasser and Meg Aitken

The Attorney-General’s Department has released for discussion, an exposure draft bill regarding mandatory reporting of serious data breaches. Notification requirements will apply to companies and information subject to the Privacy Act.

Under the proposal, a company would have up to 30 days after it is aware of a breach, or ought reasonably to be aware of a breach, to assess whether a data breach is a ‘serious data breach’. A serious data breach occurs if:

there is unauthorised access or disclosure of information; and
there is a real risk of serious harm to any of the individuals to whom the information relates.

When considering whether there is a real risk of serious harm to an individual the draft legislation lists a number of factors that should be considered including:

the kind of information;
whether the information is in a form that is intelligible to an ordinary person;
whether the information is protected by security measures;
the kinds of person who could obtain the information;
the nature of the harm; and
any mitigation steps taken by the company.

If the company determines that a serious data breach has occurred, it must notify the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) and the affected individuals as soon as practicable. The draft legislation also gives the OAIC additional powers to direct companies to undertake notification.

The proposal has a number of differences from the previous attempts to legislate mandatory data breach reporting which were made in 2013 and 2014. Most notably, previously the trigger for notification involved a belief that there had been a data breach, the current draft requires a company to be aware, or when it ought reasonably to be aware, of a breach. Additional types of specific harm are included in the current draft, however, this is unlikely to have a major impact in practice.

Currently, data notification is only mandatory for unauthorised access to eHealth information under the My Health Records Act 2012. However, the OAIC operates a voluntary data breach notification scheme which also uses the real risk of serious harm notification threshold.

The exposure draft and accompanying discussion paper can be found here. Submissions are due by 4 March 2016.

10 Considerations for Developing a Data Breach Response Plan

Nov 16 2015

By Jim Bulling and Michelle Chasser

A quick response to a data breach is key to mitigating its impact. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) recommends that all entities have a data breach response plan in place and has recently released draft guidance on how to develop such a plan.

The guidance recommends that the plan include setting out the actions to be taken in the event of a breach and the team members involved in those actions. Here are some questions for your organisation to consider based on the OAIC’s draft guidance to developing a data breach response plan.

1. What constitutes a data breach?

2. What actions should your staff take?

3. Who is a member of the response team?

4. When does a breach needs to be escalated to senior management?

5. Who is responsible for contacting and managing any affected individuals?

6. Who decides whether to contact law enforcement or regulators?

7. How are records of data breaches kept?

8. How will you identify and address any weaknesses in data handling that contributed to a data breach?

9. Are there any steps your cybersecurity insurance policy requires you to follow?

10. How will you test your response plan?

The OAIC’s Guide to developing a data breach response plan Consultation draft can be found here.

New Data Retention Laws Implementation Deadline

Oct 12 2015

By Cameron Abbott and Melanie Long

From 13 October 2015, telecommunications service providers that use communications infrastructure in Australia to provide any of their services may be required to retain and secure certain data for two years. The new obligations under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Act 2015 (Cth) apply to licensed carriers, carriage service providers and internet service providers. However, some services are specifically excluded including, for example, broadcasting services. The data retention obligations will apply regardless of the size of the company and/or its customer base.

Broadly, the type of data that must be retained includes:

the source and destination of a communication
the date, time and duration of a communication
communication type
location of communications equipment.

Ashley Madison Hackers Release User Data

Aug 29 2015

By Cameron Abbott and Melanie Long

On 19 August 2015 the group known as ‘The Impact Team’, who a month earlier hacked into online affair website Ashley Madison, made good on its threat and released a “data dump” of Ashley Madison users’ personal information. A second and larger release of stolen data occurred 2 days later and appears to have included emails sent by Noel Biderman, Ashley Madison’s founder and CEO of parent company Avid Life Media.

Following the release of the stolen data, acting Australian Information Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim, announced the launch of an investigation into the breach which is to be conducted in liaison with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (where Avid Life Media is based). On 28 August 2015 Noel Biderman stepped down from his role as CEO of Avid Life Media.

Read the ABC news’ article in relation to the first data release here.

ABC news’ article relating to second data release can be found here.

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner’s press release relating to its investigation can be found here.

Tag:OAIC