Datonomy contributors have provided comments for this interesting article by Ellie Burns of Computer Business Review about the data and security threats and challenges (but also opportunities) of virtual reality.
As part of our GDPR readiness webinar series, in this session we will look at the implications on the Executive Search and Recruitment Industry and challenges that the new Regulation (set to apply from 25 May 2018) presents. In particular we will look at the following:
- Who is caught by the Regulation
- What "consent" means and when do you need to get it. How this fits with existing marketing consent rules
- Rules on processing publicly available data as part of the recruitment process
- Notification obligations – what you need to tell candidates and potential candidates and when
- The risks of non-compliance
- Email correspondence
- Q&A Session
As part of our GDPR readiness webinar series, in this session we will look at the jurisdictional changes and challenges that the new Regulation (set to apply from 25 May 2018) presents. In particular we will look at the following:
- Does the Regulation provide for a uniform law across the EU or will different Member States have different provisions?
- If not, which Member State’s law will apply in different circumstances?
- What will be the extra-territorial application of GDPR to non-European entities – who is caught?
- Which will be the lead regulatory authority and what will be its powers of enforcement?
- What will the co-operation procedures be and what will be the role of the new European Data Protection Board?
- What will be the effect of Brexit?
- Q&A Session
Security breaches always get a lot of press attention but to date there haven't been that many large fines imposed by the Information Commissioner's Office (the "ICO") in the UK. However, last week saw a big one (although some have questioned whether it is big enough) with TalkTalk being given a record GBP400,000 penalty due to a violation of the DPA's seventh principle on security. This comes on the back of the GBP1,000 fine a couple of weeks ago in respect of TalkTalk's failure to give notice to the regulator in due time, which we reported on: http://datonomy.eu/2016/09/13/ico-wins-tiny-penalty-but-significant-principle-in-talktalk-security-breach-saga/ This case relates to cyber-attacks perpetrated against TalkTalk between 15 and 21 October 2015 exploiting vulnerabilities in certain webpages. Personal data of 156,959 customers including financial information was impacted with the attacker accessing the personal data of all of the customers along with bank account numbers and sort code of 15,656. When imposing … Continue Reading ››
The case of TalkTalk v ICO UK: Service Providers must comply with the 24 hour notification rule when a customer provides detailed complaint of a personal data breach On August 30, 2016, the Information Rights Tribunal (the "Tribunal") dismissed an appeal from TalkTalk Telecom Group Plc ("TalkTalk") challenging a £1,000 monetary penalty which had been imposed on the company by the ICO for a delay in issuing a personal breach notification back in in March 2016. Whilst a small amount of money, at stake was an important principle as to the point at which the time limits for notification of a security breach commence. The Tribunal held that the ICO did have legal basis for imposing the monetary penalty notice. TalkTalk should have notified the data breach within 24 hours after the detection of the breach, and it was feasible for the company to have done so. Whilst this specific to the … Continue Reading ››