Archive for Data Security

Data Breach Fine For UK University

The Information Commissioner (ICO) has imposed a fine of £120,000 on the University of Greenwich for a data breach that left the personal details of thousands of students exposed online.

What Happened?

The breach was discovered back in February 2016, but actually dates back to 2004 and concerns a microsite that was made for a training conference. In the incident that the University attributed to “unauthorised access to some data on the university’s systems”, the personal details of around 96,000 students were accidentally uploaded to the university’s website, as well as minutes from the university’s Faculty Research Degrees Committee. The microsite with the student details left on was not secured or closed down.

What was most shocking and distressing to many of those affected by the breach was the very personal nature of some of the data. For example, as well as the names, addresses, dates of birth, mobile phone numbers and even signatures of students, data concerning medical and other personal issues was also posted. Reports at the time indicated that in some cases, information concerning the mental health and other medical problems of some students were mentioned to explain why students had fallen behind with their work. Also, it was reported that comments about the students’ progress, and even emails between staff and students were revealed.

Made Without The University’s Knowledge

It has been reported that the main reason that the breach was not noticed earlier is that the training microsite was made by one of the University’s departments without the knowledge of the University, which is the data controller.

Fine

Bearing in mind the seriousness and nature of the breach, and the number of people affected, the ICO have imposed a fine of £120,000 or £96,000 for early payment. It is understood that the University will not appeal against the decision.

Changes Made

The ICO saw no need for enforcement action in this case because the University of Greenwich is reported to have made a number of changes to upgrade security. These changes include investing in new security architecture, tools and technologies, hiring new dedicated internal security experts, conducting vulnerability testing across the entire organisation every day, making information security training mandatory for all staff; reforming the system of internal IT governance, and developing a rapid incident response to tackle threats as they arise and learn from incidents.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Even though this incident dates back many years to a time when online security was given less priority by many businesses and organisations, it is an illustration of how things can easily slip through the net with regards to security, particularly in larger organisations and / or where full checks / audits are not carried out and where there is clear no clear line of responsibility for data matters e.g. data controllers and DPOs.

This story is particularly poignant because of the introduction of GDPR on Friday, and should be another reminder to companies that as well as the distress caused to victims of breaches, the ICO will take breaches seriously and can impose stiff penalties.

In this case, the University (which had also suffered another high profile data breach after this one) took the opportunity to seriously upgrade its security, and this will no doubt go a long way to making it GDPR compliant, as all businesses now need to be in order to retain the trust of customers, maintain supplier relationships, protect the business reputation, avoid fines, and deter and protect against attacks by cyber-criminals.

TalkTalk Super Router Security Fears Persist

An advisory notice from software and VR Company IndigoFuzz has highlighted the continued potential security risk posed by a vulnerability in the WPS feature in TalkTalk’s Super Router.

What Vulnerability?

According to IndigoFuzz, the WPS connection is insecure and the WPS pairing option is always turned on i.e. the WPS feature in the router is always switched on, even if the WPS pairing button is not used.

This could mean that an attacker within range could potentially hack into the router and steal the router’s Wi-Fi password.

Tested

It has been reported that in tests involving consenting parties, IndigoFuzz found a method of probing the router to steal the passwords to be successful on multiple TalkTalk Super Routers.

The test involved using a Windows-based computer, wireless network adapter, a TalkTalk router within wireless network adapter range, and the software ‘Dumpper’ available on Sourceforge. Using this method, the Wi-Fi access key to a network could be uncovered in a matter of seconds.

Scale

The ease with which the Wi-Fi access key could be obtained in the IndigoFuzz tests has prompted speculation that the vulnerability could be on a larger scale than was first thought, and a large number of TalkTalk routers could potentially be affected.

No Courtesy Period Before Announcement

When a vulnerability has been discovered and reported to a vendor, it is normal protocol to allow the vendor 30 days to address the problem before the vulnerability is announced publicly by those who have discovered / reported the vulnerability.

In this case, the vulnerability was first reported to TalkTalk back in 2014, so IndigoFuzz chose to issue the advisory as soon as possible.

Looks Bad After Last October

News that a vulnerability has remained unpatched after it was reported 4 years ago to TalkTalk looks bad on top of major cyber attack and security breach there back in October 2017. You may remember that the much publicised cyber-attack on the company resulted in an estimated loss of 101,000 customers (some have suggested that the number of lost customers was twice as much as this figure). The attack saw the personal details of between 155,000 and 157,000 customers (reports vary) hacked, with approximately 10% of these customers having their bank account number and sort code stolen.

The trading impact of the security breach in monetary terms was estimated to be £15M with exceptional costs of £40-45M.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

It seems inconceivable that a widely reported vulnerability that could potentially affect a large number of users may still not have been addressed after 4 years. Many commentators are calling for a patch to be issued immediately in order to protect TalkTalk customers. This could mean that many home and business customers are still facing an ongoing security risk, and TalkTalk could be leaving itself open to another potentially damaging security problem that could impact its reputation and profits.

Back in August last year, the Fortinet Global Threat Landscape Report highlighted the fact that 9 out of 10 businesses are being hacked through un-patched vulnerabilities, and that many of these vulnerabilities are 3 or more years old, and many even have patches available for them. This should remind businesses to stay up to date with their own patching routines as a basic security measure.

Last year, researchers revealed how the ‘Krack’ method could take advantage of the WPA2 standard used across almost all Wi-Fi devices to potentially read messages, banking information and intercept sensitive files (if a hacker was close to a wireless connection point and the website doesn’t properly encrypt user data). This prompted fears that hackers could turning their attention to what may be fundamentally insecure public Wi-Fi points in e.g. shopping centres / shops, airports, hotels, public transport and coffee shops. This could in turn generate problems for businesses offering WiFi.

BYODs Linked To Security Incidents

A study by SME card payment services firm Paymentsense has shown a positive correlation between bring your own device (BYOD) schemes and increased cyber -security risk in SMEs.

BYOD

Bring your own device (BYOD) schemes / policies have now become commonplace in many businesses, with the BYOD and enterprise mobility market size growing from USD $35.10 Billion in 2016 to USD $73.30 Billion by 2021 (marketsandmarkets.com).

BYOD policies allow employees to bring in their personally owned laptops, tablets, and smart-phones and use them to access company information and applications, and solve work problems. This type of policy has also fuelled a rise in ‘stealth IT’ where employees go outside of IT and set up their own infrastructure, without organizational approval or oversight, and can, therefore, unintentionally put corporate data and service continuity at risk.

Positive Correlation Between BYOD and Security Incidents

The Paymentsense study, involving more than 500 SMEs polled in the UK found a positive correlation between the introduction of a BYOD policy and cyber-security incidents. For example, 61% of the SME’s said that they had experienced a cyber-security incident since introducing a BYOD policy.

According to the study, although only 14% of micro-businesses (up to 10 staff) reported a cyber-security incident since implementing BYOD, the figure rises to 70% for businesses of 11 to 50 people, and to 94% for SMEs with 101 to 250 employees.

Most Popular Security Incidents

The study showed that the most popular types of security incidents in the last 12 months were malware, which affected two-thirds (65%) of SMEs, viruses (42%), DDoS distributed denial of service (26%), data theft (24%), and phishing (23%).

Positive Side

The focus of the report was essentially the security risks posed by BYOD. There are, however, some very positive reasons for introducing a BYOD policy in the workplace. These include convenience, cost saving (company devices and training), harnessing the skills of tech-savvy employees, perhaps finding new, better and faster ways of getting work done, improved morale and employee satisfaction, and productivity gains.

Many of these benefits are, however, inward-focused i.e. on the company and its staff, rather than the wider damage that could be caused to the lives of data breach victims or to the company’s reputation and profits if a serious security incident occurred.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

This is a reminder that, as well as the benefits of BYOD to the business, if you allow employees or other users to connect their own devices to your network, you will be increasing the range of security risks that you face. This is particularly relevant with the introduction of GDPR on Friday.

For example, devices belonging to employees but containing personal data could be stolen in a break-in or lost while away from the office. This could lead to a costly and public data breach. Also, allowing untrusted personal devices to connect to SME networks or using work devices on untrusted networks outside the office can put personal data at risk.
Ideally, businesses should ensure that ensure that personal data is either not on the device in the first place, or has been appropriately secured so that it cannot be accessed in the event of loss or theft e.g. by using good access control systems and encryption.

Businesses owners could reduce the BYOD risk by creating and communicating clear guidelines to staff about best security practices in their daily activities, in and out of the office. Also, it is important to have regular communication with staff at all levels about security, and having an incident response plan / disaster recovery plan in place can help to clarify responsibilities and ensure that timely action is taken to deal with situations correctly if mistakes are made.

Police Face Recognition Software Flawed

Following an investigation by campaign group Big Brother Watch, the UK’s information Information Commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, has said that the Police could face legal action if concerns over accuracy and privacy with facial recognition systems are not addressed.

What Facial Recognition Systems?

A freedom of information request sent to every police force in the UK by Big Brother Watch shows that The Metropolitan Police used facial recognition at the Notting Hill carnival in 2016 and 2017, and at a Remembrance Sunday event, and South Wales Police used facial recognition technology between May 2017 and March 2018. Leicestershire Police also tested facial recognition in 2015.

What’s The Problem?

The two main concerns with the system (as identified by Big Brother Watch and the ICO) are that the facial recognition systems are not accurate in identifying the real criminals or suspects, and that the images of innocent people are being stored on ‘watch’ lists for up to a month, and this could potentially lead to false accusations or arrests.

How Do Facial Recognition Systems Work?

Facial recognition software typically works by using a scanned image of a person’s face (from the existing stock of police photos of mug shots from previous arrests), and then uses algorithms to measure ‘landmarks’ on the face e.g. the position of features and the shape of the eyes, nose and cheekbones. This data is used to make a digital template of a person’s face, which is then converted into a unique code.

High-powered cameras are then used to scan crowds. The cameras link to specialist software that can compare the camera image data to data stored in the police database (the digital template) to find a potential ‘match’. Possible matches are then flagged to officers, and these lists of possible matches are stored in the system for up to 30 days.

A real-time automated facial recognition (AFR) system, like the one the police use at events, incorporates facial recognition and ‘slow time’ static face search.

Inaccuracies

The systems used by the police so far have been criticised for simply not being accurate. For example, of the 2,685 “matches” made by the system used by South Wales Police between May 2017 and March 2018, 2,451 were false alarms.

Keeping Photos of Innocent People On Watch Lists

Big Brother Watch has been critical of the police keeping photos of innocent people that have ended up on lists of (false) possible matches, as selected by the software. Big Brother Watch has expressed concern that this could affect an individual’s right to a private life and freedom of expression, and could result in damaging false accusations and / or arrests.
The police have said that they don’t consider the ‘possible’ face selections as false positive matches because additional checks and balances are applied to them to confirm identification following system alerts.

The police have also stated that all alerts against watch lists are deleted after 30 days, and faces in the video stream that do not generate an alert are deleted immediately.

Criticisms

As well as accusations of inaccuracy and possibly infringing the rights of innocent people, the use of facial recognition systems by the police has also attracted criticism for not appearing to have a clear legal basis, oversight or governmental strategy, and for not delivering value for money in terms of the number of arrests made vs the cost of the systems.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

It is worrying that there are clearly substantial inaccuracies in facial recognition systems, and that the images of innocent people could be sitting on police watch lists for some time, and could potentially result in wrongful arrests. The argument that ‘if you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear’ simply doesn’t stand up if police are being given cold, hard computer information to say that a person is a suspect and should be questioned / arrested, no matter what the circumstances. That argument is also an abdication from a shared responsibility, which could lead to the green light being given to the erosion of rights without questions being asked. As people in many other countries would testify, rights relating to freedom and privacy should be valued, and when these rights are gone, it’s very difficult to get them back again.

The storing of facial images on computer systems is also a matter for security, particularly since they are regarded as ‘personal data’ under the new GDPR which comes into force this month.

There is, of course, an upside to the police being able to use these systems if it leads to the faster arrest of genuine criminals, and makes the country safer for all.

Despite the findings of a study from YouGov / GMX (August 2016) that showed that UK people still have a number of trust concerns about the use of biometrics for security, biometrics represents a good opportunity for businesses to stay one step ahead of cyber-criminals. Biometric authentication / verification systems are thought to be far more secure than password-based systems, which is the reason why banks and credit companies are now using them.

Facial recognition systems have value-adding, real-life business applications too. For example, last year, a ride-hailing service called Careem (similar to Uber but operating in more than fifty cities in the Middle East and North Africa) announced that it was adding facial recognition software to its driver app to help with customer safety.

Efail – Encryption Flaw

A German newspaper has released details of a security vulnerability, discovered by researchers at Munster University of Applied Sciences, in PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) data encryption.

What Is PGP?

PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) is an encryption program that is used for signing, encrypting, and decrypting texts, e-mails, files, directories, and disk partitions, and to increase the security of e-mail communications. As well as being used to encrypt and decrypt email, PGP is also used to sign messages so that the receiver can verify both the identity of the sender and the integrity of the content. PGP works using a private key that is kept secret, and a public key that the sender and receiver share.

The technology is also known by the name of GPG (Gnu Privacy Guard or GnuPG), and is a compatible GPL-licensed alternative.

What’s The Flaw?

The flaw, which was first thought by some security experts to affected the core protocol of PGP (which would make all uses of the encryption method, including file encryption, vulnerable), is now believed to be related to any email programs that don’t check for decryption errors properly before following links in emails that include HTML code i.e. email programs that have been designed without appropriate safeguards.

‘Efail’ Attacks

The flaw leaves this system of encryption open to what have been called ‘efail’ attacks. This involves attackers trying to gain access to encrypted emails (for example by eavesdropping on network traffic), and compromising email accounts, email servers, backup systems or client computers. The idea is to reveal the plaintext of encrypted emails (in the OpenPGP and S/MIME standards).

This type of attack can be carried out by direct exfiltration, where vulnerabilities in Apple Mail, iOS Mail and Mozilla Thunderbird can be abused to directly exfiltrate the plaintext of encrypted emails, or by a CBC/CFB gadget. This is where vulnerabilities in the specification of OpenPGP and S/MIME are abused to exfiltrate the plaintext.

What Could Happen?

The main fear appears to be that the vulnerabilities could be used to decrypt stored, encrypted emails that have been sent in the past (if an attacker can gain access). It is thought that the vulnerabilities could also create a channel for sneaking personal data or commercial data and business secrets off devices as well as for decrypting messages.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

It is frustrating for businesses to learn that the email programs they may be using, and a method of encryption, supposed to make things more secure, could actually be providin a route for criminals to steal data and secrets.

The advice from those familiar with the details of the flaw is that users of PGP email can disable HTML in their mail programs, thereby keeping them safe from attacks based on this particular vulnerability. Also, users can choose to decrypt emails with PGP decryption tools that are separate from email programs.

More detailed information and advice concerning the flaw can be found here: https://efail.de/#i-have

Twitter Says Change Your Password

Twitter has advised all users to change their passwords after a bug caused the passwords to be stored in easily readable, plain text on an internal computer log.

The Bug – Passwords Visible Before ‘Hashing’

Twitter reported on their own blog that the bug that stored passwords had been ‘unmasked’ in an internal log. The bug is reported to have written the passwords into that internal log before Twitter’s hashing process had been completed.

The hashing process disguises Twitter passwords, making them very difficult to read. Hashing uses the ‘bcrypt’ function which replaces actual passwords with a random set of numbers and letters. It is this set of replaced characters that should be stored in Twitter’s system, as these allow the systems to validate account credentials without revealing customer password.

Millions Affected?

The fact that the passwords were revealed on an internal server, albeit for what is estimated to be for several months, and that there appears to be no evidence of anyone outside the company seeing the passwords, and no evidence of a theft or passwords turning up for sale on hacker site, indicates that it is unlikely that many of the 330 million Twitter users have anything real to fear from the breach.

Big Breaches

In this case, Twitter appears to have behaved responsibly and acted quickly by reporting the bug to regulators, fixing the bug, and quickly and publicly advising all customers to change their passwords.

Twitter’s behaviour appears to be in stark contrast to the way other companies have handled big breaches. For example, back in November 2017 Uber was reported to have concealed a massive data breach from a hack involving the data of 57 million customers and drivers, and then paid the hackers $100,000 to delete the data and to keep quiet about it.

Breaches can happen for all kinds of reasons, and while Twitter’s breach was very much caused and fixed by Twitter internally, others have been less lucky. For example, an outsourcing provider of the Red Cross Blood Service in Australia accidentally published the Service’s entire database to a public web server, thereby resulting in Australia’s largest ever data breach.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

If you have a Twitter account, personal or business, the advice from Twitter is quite simply to change your password, and change it on any other service where you may have used the same password. Twitter is also advising customers to make the new password a strong one that isn’t reused on other websites, and to enable two-factor authentication. You may also want to use a password manager to make sure you’re using strong, unique passwords everywhere.

In this case, Twitter has acted quickly, appropriately and transparently, thereby minimising risks to customers and risks to its own brand reputation. Twitter will want this message of responsibility to be received loud and clear, particularly at a time where GDPR (and its hefty fines) is just around the corner, and a time when other competing social networks i.e. Facebook have damaged customer trust by acting less responsibly with their data through the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

8 More Security Flaws Found In Processors

Following on from the revelation in January that 2 major security flaws are present in nearly all modern processors, security researchers have now found 8 more potentially serious flaws.

Eight?

According to reports by German tech news magazine c’t, the 8 new security flaws in chips / processors were discovered by several different security teams. The magazine is reported to have been given the full technical details of the vulnerabilities by researchers and has been able to verify them.

The new ‘family’ of bugs have been dubbed Spectre Next Generation (Spectre NB), after the original Spectre bug that was made public along with the ‘Meltdown’ bug at the beginning of the year.

90 Days To Respond

The researchers who discovered the bugs have followed bug disclosure protocols, and have given chip-makers and others 90 days to respond and to prepare patches before they release details of the bugs. The 90 day time limit ran out on Monday 7th May.

Co-ordinated Disclosure

Intel is reported to have been reluctant to simply acknowledge the existence of the bugs, preferring to have what it calls a ‘co-ordinated disclosure’, presumably near the end of the protocol time limit, when there has been time to prepare patches and to mitigate any other issues.

It is not yet clear if AMD processors are also potentially vulnerable to the Spectre-NG problems.

How Serious Are The Flaws?

There have been no reports, as yet, of any of the 8 newly-discovered flaws being used by cyber-criminals to attack firms and extract data. According to the magazine C’t, however, Intel had classified half of the flaws as “high risk”, and the others as “medium risk”.

It is believed that one of the more serious flaws could provide a way for attackers access a vulnerable virtual computer, and thereby reach the server behind it, or reach other software programs running on that machine. It has been reported that Cloud services like Amazon’s AWS may be at risk from this flaw.

Meltdown and Spectre

The original Meltdown and Spectre flaws were found to have been present in nearly all modern processors / microchips, meaning that most computerised devices are potentially vulnerable to attack, including all iPhones, iPads and Macs.

Meltdown was found to leave passwords and personal data vulnerable to attacks, and could be applied to different cloud service providers as well as individual devices. It is believed that Meltdown could affect every processor since 1995, except for Intel Itanium and Intel Atom before 2013.

Spectre, which was found to affect Intel, AMD and ARM (mainly Cortex-A) processors, allows applications to be fooled into leaking confidential information. Spectre affects almost all systems including desktops, laptops, cloud servers, and smartphones.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The discovery of a family of 8 more flaws on top of the original 2 ‘Spectre’ and ‘Meltdown’ flaws is more bad news for businesses, particularly when they are trying to make things as secure as possible for the introduction of GDPR. Sadly, it is very likely that your devices are affected by the several or all of the flaws because they are hardware flaws at architectural level, more or less across the board for all devices that use processors. The best advice now is to install all available patches and make sure that you are receiving updates for all your systems, software and devices.

Although closing hardware flaws using software patches and updates is a big job for manufacturers and software companies, it is the only realistic and quick answer at this stage to a large-scale problem that has present for a long time, but has only recently been discovered.

Regular patching is a good basic security habit to get into anyway. Research from summer 2017 (Fortinet Global Threat Landscape Report) shows that 9 out of 10 impacted businesses are being hacked through un-patched vulnerabilities, and that many of these vulnerabilities are 3 or more years old, and there are already patches available for them.

Facebook Loyalty Intact Says Survey

Even after all the publicity surrounding Facebook’s selling of the personal data of 87 million users to Cambridge Analytica, a Reuters/Ipsos survey has found that most users are still loyal to the social media giant.

Just A Public Relations Problem

The survey conducted April 26-30 was based in the US, the home country of Facebook and the place where the vast majority of those whose data was sold live. Far from indicating that any users have been outraged by the selling of their personal data property without their permission, the survey appears to show that Facebook has so far suffered no ill effects from the scandal, other than a public relations headache.

A Quarter Using Facebook More!

The survey showed that half of US Facebook users said they had not recently changed the amount that they used the site, and, incredibly, a quarter of those surveyed said they were using it more!

The remaining 25% said that they were using it less recently, had stopped using it, or deleted their account.

64% of those surveyed said they still used Facebook at least once a day, down only slightly from the 68% recorded in a similar poll in late March.

The results appear to show, therefore, that the numbers of those using Facebook more has balanced out the numbers of any respondents who said they used the platform less, meaning that, according to the survey, Facebook appears to have suffered no real damage other than a PR hit from the scandal.

Wait Until 2nd Quarter

Facebook actually showed a near 50% increase its sales in the first quarter of this year, with profits up to $4.9bn from $3bn last year. Some commentators have stressed, however, that any of the financial effects of the scandal are likely to be evident in the second quarter.

Cambridge Analytica Closed

While Facebook, a social media giant, appears to have suffered no real damage other than a PR hit, Cambridge Analytica has been forced to go into liquidation blaming negative media attention. Some commentators have pointed out that Cambridge Analytica portrayed themselves as victims of unwarranted press activity, thereby deflecting blame from their activities involving the use of the personal data of millions to influence election and referendum outcomes.

Trusted With Dating Information?

It may appear that customer loyalty is still intact to a large extent now, but the next test for Facebook could be whether customers will trust them with their privacy when Facebook rolls out its dating service app later this year.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

This story shows what many tech commentators had predicted – that the fact that Facebook was so much a part of peoples’ daily routine with no real alternative among the other social media platforms, that it could weather the storm and come out the other end with little real impact on its user numbers. It seems strange that, even though customers personal details were harvested and sold to a third party, without the permission of users, and then used to potentially influence how they voted in the US election (and in the Brexit referendum in the UK) that very few people appear to be prepared to see that as grounds to reject Facebook and the service and value that it offers in their lives.

People actively use Facebook as an integral part of their friendship networks and as a source of news, thereby allowing it unprecedented access to their personal lives and interests, as well as allowing it to help shape their view of the world, and it may be this investment and yes, loyalty, that has allowed them to apparently forgive Facebook for its part in the scandal, and to allow the value that Facebook offers in their lives to outweigh Facebook’s indiscretions.

From a business point of view, this shows how powerful loyalty can be, especially if a service can offer value that links strongly to ‘self’ and things that have emotional and personal connections and importance, and allow and enable real engagement.

Cambridge Analytica Ordered To Turn Over All Data On US Professor

The UK data watchdog, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), has ordered the consulting firm Cambridge Analytica to hand over all the personal information it has on US citizen Professor David Carroll, or face prosecution.

Demand Made in May 2017

The consulting firm, which is reported to have ceased operations and filed for bankruptcy in the wake of the recent scandal involving its access to and use of Facebook users’ details is facing the Enforcement Notice and possible legal action (if it doesn’t comply) because it has not fully met a demand made by Professor Carroll early last year.

Who Is Professor David Carroll?

David Carroll is a professor at the New School’s Parsons School of Design. Although Professor Carroll is based in New York and is not a UK citizen, he used a subject access request (part of British data protection law) to ask Cambridge Analytica’s branch in the UK to provide all the data it had gathered on him. With this type of request, organisations need to respond within 40 days with a copy of the data, the source of the data, and if the organisation will be giving the data to others.

It has been reported that Professor Carroll, a Democrat, was interested from an academic perspective, in the practice of political ad targeting in elections. Professor Carroll alleges that he was also concerned that he may have been targeted with messages that criticised Secretary Hillary Clinton with falsified or exaggerated information that may have negatively affected his sentiment about her candidacy.

Sent A Spreadsheet

Some weeks after Professor Carroll filed the subject access request in early 2017, Cambridge Analytica sent him a spreadsheet of information it had about him.

It has been reported that Cambridge Analytica had accurately predicted his views on some issues, and had scored Carroll a nine 9 of 10 on what it called a “traditional social and moral values importance rank.”

What’s The Problem?

Even though Carroll was given a spreadsheet with some information, he wanted to know what that ranking meant and what it was based on, and where the data about him came from. Cambridge Analytica CEO Alexander Nix told a UK parliamentary committee that his company would not provide American citizens, like David Carroll, all the data it holds on them, or tell them where the data came from, and Nix said that there was no legislation in the US that allowed individuals to make such a request.

The UK’s Information Commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, sent a letter to Cambridge Analytica asking where the data on Professor Carroll came from, and what had been done with it. Elizabeth Denham is also reported to have said that, whether or not the people behind Cambridge Analytica decide to fold their operation, a continued refusal to engage with the ICO will still potentially breach an Enforcement Notice, and it will then become a criminal matter.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Many people have been shocked and angered by the recent scandal involving Facebook and its sharing of Facebook user data with Cambridge Analytica. The action by Professor Carroll could not only shed light on how millions of American voters were targeted online in the run-up to the 2016 election, but it could also lead to a wider understanding of what data is stored about us and how it is used by companies and organisations.

The right to request personal data that an organisation holds about us is a cornerstone right in data protection law, and this right will be brought into even sharper focus by the introduction of GDPR this month. GDPR will also give EU citizens the ‘right to be forgotten’, and has already put pressure on UK companies to put their data house in order, and prepare to comply or face stiff penalties.

This story also shows that American citizens can request information from companies that process their data in the UK.

Online Dating Via Facebook

Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has announced that Facebook, the world’s largest online social network, will soon be providing an online dating service, thereby putting it in competition with the likes of Match Group Inc.

On The Cards

Bearing in mind Facebook’s origin as a college dating website and Mark Zuckerberg’s early ‘Facemash’ program, and the fact that Facebook is known to have been wanting to move into online dating for at least 10 years, this move has been on the cards.

Why Now?

There are several key reasons why Facebook has chosen to actually make the move into the online dating world. These include:

  • The need to make people spend longer on the Facebook platform (and not on other platforms). For example, time spent by Facebook users on the platform fell by 50 million hours a day in 2017.
  • The need to attract more young people to the platform.
  • The commercial attractiveness of the booming and growing dating market.
  • The fact that there are 200 million people on Facebook that list themselves as single.
  • The fact that Facebook already holds many facets of information about users that could be used for matching and dating purposes e.g. interests, local events they could attend.

How Will It Work?

The proposed platform is an optional feature that users will be able to use by clicking on a heart shape at the top-right corner of the Facebook app, and setting up a dating profile. The profile will be based on a first name, won’t be visible to friends and users who aren’t on the dating feature, and won’t show up in the News Feed.

Once set up, users can browse events in their local and groups that match their interests, select ‘unlock’ for dating, and then be able to see the profiles of other potential dates who have unlocked that surface. These profiles will show a few photos plus some basic information about potential dates.

The system will not work using the “swipe” left or right on potential matches like Tinder, but there will be two buttons for “pass” and “interested.”

Users will be able to start a conversation with a potential match by commenting on one of their photos, but the conversations will be text-only, thereby eliminating the risk of unsolicited nude photos being sent. Conversations will take place in a special inbox that’s separate from Messenger and WhatsApp.

Security

In the wake of the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook has been quick to stress that the service has been built and will operate with an emphasis on privacy.

Not Just Hook-Ups

Facebook has also said that the new dating service is intended to be a standalone feature that will focus on legitimate long-term relationships, rather than just hook-ups. There are already many stories of couples who have met via the normal Facebook platform.

Dating Service Competitors – Stock Value Falls

Shortly after Mark Zuckerberg announced the move into the dating arena, and even though Match Group CEO Mandy Ginsberg said that she was flattered by Facebook’s entrance into its space, Match’s stock traded down about 22%. Match is the owner of mobile dating apps Tinder and OkCupid and describes itself (on its website) as the “global leader” in online dating.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

If it wasn’t for the recent scandal about data sharing with Cambridge Analytica and the lack of trust that it has created, Facebook would be almost perfectly position to seriously and quickly take on the current online dating giants such as Match. It remains to be seen, therefore, how quickly Facebook users forget or are willing to throw caution to the wind with the promise of powerful motivators and positive reinforcement in the form of dates and possibly, a love match.

Some competitors, such as Bumble, have seen Facebook’s move as an opportunity rather than just a threat, and Bumble has reportedly reached out to Facebook to explore ways to collaborate.