3 ms·
>Source please – I've not seen this language indicated anywhere. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11970391/Internet-firms-to-be-banne
by anon1385 11y ago
>Source please – I've not seen this language indicated anywhere.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11970391/Internet-firms-to-be-banned-from-offering-out-of-reach-communications-under-new-laws.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/1...
>Poor information security isn't a crime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Act_1998 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Act_1998
- matthewmacleod 11y agoThanks for the source, it's interesting that The Telegraph is the only paper reporting this. IOW, I'll believe it when I see it. The Data Protection Act does not in practice criminalise poor information security – it does criminalise the lack of things like a risk assessment. Short of actual negligence, nobody will be prosecuted due to the hostile actions of a third party. Probably not a bad thing, as it would be obviously ludicrous to do so.
- pjc50 11y agoThe actual language in the bill is unclear as it's not been published yet and all we have to go on is competing Home Office press releases.