Data leaks: practical measures now

Although public sector data losses might get the most press coverage, the problem undoubtedly affects the private sector too; we just don’t always get to hear about their mishaps. Nevertheless, the UK Government appears to be highly susceptible to losing sensitive data and, with each freshly reported loss, public confidence drops another notch or two.  

A lost memory stick was found in a pub car-park over the weekend. The USB device contained private access codes for the UK Government gateway, a key portal for public services; so yet another case of poor Information Governance has come to light. They are coming so thick and fast now that the BBC has put together a list of the most recent incidents of government data leakage. Action needs to be taken urgently, to break the downward spiral of data loss, apology and diminishing public confidence. 

Luckily the latest lost [but found] device was encrypted so at least it would have deterred the casual finder from exploiting the data. That’s not to say it couldn’t have been used by a determined and capable finder.

FREE COPY OF INFORMATION GOVERNANCE GUIDELINES.

Please enter your details below if you would like a copy of my paper (updated November 2010), about Information Governance, which sets out a summary of straightforward measures that should help organizations preserve stakeholder confidence in their information governance. :mrgreen:

  • Pingback: Tony Collins's IT Projects Blog

  • http://www.systeminterfacesolutions.co.uk Blake Laocoon

    Excellent analysis

  • http://www.clerkendweller.com/ Clerkendweller

    A useful document and it will be interesting to find out/see more detail on the suggested four zones. Yes, information governance is not IT governance or a “technical issue”.

    I agree that “Weakness in any of these zones… is likely to damage/destroy overall stakeholder confidence”. But similarly, in the example capability profile, using a radar format diagram could suggest that the failure in one aspect is somehow offset by another? Maybe the weakest aspect (e.g. outcome reviewed) should set the actual capability level, rather than the average? Apologies if I’m reading too much into this overview document.