Categories
Blog

AI and GDPR

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized various industries, but with great power comes great responsibility. Regulators in the European Union (EU) are taking a proactive approach to address compliance and data protection issues surrounding AI and generative AI. Recent cases, such as Google’s AI tool, Bard, being temporarily suspended in the EU, have highlighted the urgent need for regulation in this rapidly evolving field. I recently had the opportunity to visit with GDPR maven Jonathan Armstrong on this topic. In this blog post, we will delve into our conversations about some of the key concerns raised about data and privacy in generative AI, the importance of transparency and consent, and the potential legal and financial implications for organizations that fail to address these concerns.

One of the key issues in the AI landscape is obtaining informed consent from users. The recent scrutiny faced by video conferencing platform Zoom serves as a stark reminder of the importance of transparency and consent practices. While there has been no official investigation into Zoom’s compliance with informed consent requirements, the company has retracted its initial statements and is likely considering how to obtain consent from users.

It is essential to recognize that obtaining consent extends not only to those who host a Zoom call but also to those who are invited to join the call. Unfortunately, there has been no on-screen warning about consent when using Zoom, leaving users in the dark about the data practices involved. This lack of transparency can lead to significant legal and financial penalties, as over 70% of GDPR fines involve a lack of transparency by the data controller.

Generative AI heavily relies on large pools of data for training, which raises concerns about copyright infringement and the processing of individuals’ data without consent. For instance, Zoom’s plan to use recorded Zoom calls to train AI tools may violate GDPR’s requirement of informed consent. Similarly, Getty Images has expressed concerns about its copyrighted images being used without consent to train AI models.

Websites often explicitly prohibit scraping data for training AI models, emphasizing the need for organizations to respect copyright laws and privacy regulations. Regulators are rightfully concerned about AI processing individuals’ data without consent or knowledge, as well as the potential for inaccurate data processing. Accuracy is a key principle of GDPR, and organizations using AI must conduct thorough data protection impact assessments to ensure compliance.

Several recent cases demonstrate the regulatory focus on AI compliance and transparency. In Italy, rideshare and food delivery applications faced investigations and suspensions for their AI practices. Spain has examined the use of AI in recruitment processes, highlighting the importance of transparency in the selection process. Google’s Bard case, similar to the Facebook dating case, faced temporary suspension in the EU due to the lack of a mandatory data protection impact assessment (DPIA).

It is concerning that many big tech providers fail to engage with regulators or produce the required DPIA for their AI applications. This lack of compliance and transparency poses significant risks for organizations, not just in terms of financial penalties but also potential litigation risks in the hiring process.

To navigate the compliance and data protection challenges posed by AI, organizations must prioritize transparency, fairness, and lawful processing of data. Conducting a data protection impact assessment is crucial, especially when AI is used in Know Your Customer (KYC), due diligence, and job application processes. If risks cannot be resolved or remediated internally, it is advisable to consult regulators and include timings for such consultations in project timelines.

For individuals, it is essential to be aware of the terms and conditions associated with AI applications. In the United States, informed consent is often buried within lengthy terms and conditions, leading to a lack of understanding and awareness. By being vigilant and informed, individuals can better protect their privacy and data rights.

As AI continues to transform industries, compliance and data protection must remain at the forefront of technological advancements. Regulators in the EU are actively addressing the challenges posed by AI and generative AI, emphasizing the need for transparency, consent, and compliance with GDPR obligations. Organizations and individuals must prioritize data protection impact assessments, engage with regulators when necessary, and stay informed about the terms and conditions associated with AI applications. By doing so, we can harness the power of AI while safeguarding our privacy and ensuring ethical practices in this rapidly evolving field.

Categories
Blog

The Importance of Effective Policies and Training in Data Protection: Lessons from a Scottish Hospital Breach

I recently had the chance to visit with Jonathan Armstrong on a recent data breach case that occurred in the health service provider NHS Lanarkshire (Scotland) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This breach serves as a stark reminder of the challenges organizations face in maintaining data protection and compliance, especially when it comes to communication platforms like WhatsApp. In this blog post we will explore the lessons learned from this incident and discuss practical advice for organizations to ensure robust data protection measures.

Background

According to the Cordery Compliance Client Alert on the matter, over a two-year period between 2020 and 2022, 26 staff at NHS Lanarkshire had access to a WhatsApp group where there were a minimum of 533 entries that included patient names. The information included 215 phone numbers, 96 with dates of birth and 28 included addresses. 15 images, 3 videos, and 4 screenshots were also shared, which included personal data of patients and clinical information, which is a “special category” health data under both EU and UK law. Other data to the WhatsApp group was also added in error. Other communications were also identified where the staff in question had used WhatsApp.

WhatsApp was not approved by NHS Lanarkshire for processing personal data of patients.  The use of WhatsApp was an approach adopted by the staff apparently without organizational knowledge. It was used by the staff as a substitute for communications that would have taken place in the clinical office but did not do so after staff reduced office attendance due to the COVID-19 pandemic. No Data Protection Impact Assessment was in place and no risk assessment relating to personal data processing was completed concerning WhatsApp, as WhatsApp was not approved by NHS Lanarkshire for the sharing of personal data relating to patients. NHS Lanarkshire undertook an internal investigation and reported this matter to the ICO.

ICO Holding

The UK ICO determined that NHS Lanarkshire did not have the appropriate policies, clear guidance and processes in place when WhatsApp was made available to download. Additionally,  there were a number of infringements of UK GDPR, not the least being not implementing appropriate technical and organizational measures (TOMs) to ensure the security of the personal data involved, as a consequence of which personal data was shared via an unauthorized means and an inappropriate disclosure occurred. There was also a failure to report this matter, as a data breach, to the ICO in time.

Armstrong noted that ICO recommended that NHS Lanarkshire should take action to ensure their compliance with data protection law, including:

  1. Considering implementing a secure clinical image transfer system, as part of NHS Lanarkshire’s exploration regarding the storage of images and videos within a care setting;
  2. Before deploying new apps, consideration of the risks relating to personal data and including the requirement to assess and mitigate these risks in any approval process;
  3. Ensuring that explicit communications, instructions or guidance are issued to employees on their data protection responsibilities when new apps are deployed;
  4. Reviewing all organizational policies and procedures relevant to this matter and amending them where appropriate; and,
  5. Ensuring that all staff are aware of their responsibilities to report personal data breaches internally without delay to the relevant team.

Armstrong concluded that “In light of the remedial steps and mitigating factors the ICO issued an official reprimand – a fine has not yet been imposed. The ICO also asked NHS Lanarkshire to provide an update of actions taken within six months of the reprimand being issued.”

Discussion

This case highlights the challenges organizations face when it comes to communication during internal investigations. In many instances, the most interesting documents are not found in emails, as one organization discovered. Employees often turn to alternative platforms like WhatsApp to avoid leaving a paper trail. However, it is crucial to understand that these platforms may not provide the expected privacy and security.

While platforms like WhatsApp may seem secure, they still share data with big tech companies, raising concerns about privacy. Organizations must adapt to the preferences of digital-native employees who may find email restrictive and opt for alternative communication methods. However, this adaptation should be done consciously, ensuring that policies and procedures are in place to protect sensitive information. Armstrong emphasizes the importance of revisiting emergency measures implemented during the pandemic. As remote work continues, organizations must conduct thorough data protection impact assessments to ensure compliance across all communication platforms and measures.

As with all types of compliance, setting policies and procedures is just the first step. It is essential to communicate and educate employees on these policies to ensure their understanding and compliance. Annual online training sessions are not enough; organizations should provide engaging training that goes beyond passive learning. In addition to targeted and effective training there must be ongoing communications provided to employees. Armstrong also related on the ineffectiveness of off-the-shelf online phishing training. Waiting for an incident to occur and then providing training is not enough to prevent people from clicking on malicious links. Organizations should focus on providing better training before incidents happen, rather than trying to enhance training afterwards.

The next step is monitoring as compliance with policies and procedures should be actively monitored. Technical solutions are available to help companies track compliance, but it’s crucial to involve individuals at all levels of the organization when designing these policies. Additionally, a balanced approach is needed, where employees are recognized for their service but also held accountable for policy breaches. The days of solely relying on punishment for enforcement are gone.

The data breach in the Scottish hospital serves as a wake-up call for organizations to prioritize data protection and compliance. Communication challenges during internal investigations, privacy concerns associated with alternative platforms, and the need for effective policies and training are crucial areas to address. By conducting regular data protection impact assessments, providing engaging training, and ensuring buy-in from employees, organizations can strengthen their defense against cyber threats and protect sensitive information. Always remember that compliance is an ongoing process, and continuous evaluation and improvement are necessary to adapt to the evolving digital landscape. Finally stay vigilant and proactive in safeguarding data privacy and protection.

Categories
Compliance and AI

Compliance and AI – Jonathan Armstrong on Unleashing Generative AI: Privacy, Copyright, and Compliance

What is the role of Artificial Intelligence in compliance? What about Machine Learning? Are you using ChatGPT? These questions are but three of the many questions we will explore in this exciting new podcast series, Compliance and AI. Hosted by Tom Fox, the award-winning Voice of Compliance, this podcast will look at how AI will impact compliance programs into the next decade and beyond. If you want to find out why the future is now, join Tom Fox on this journey to the frontiers of AI.

Welcome back to another exciting episode of our podcast, where we delve into the fascinating world of compliance and artificial intelligence (AI). Today I am joined by Jonathan Armstrong from Cordery Compliance to discuss how regulators in the EU are looking at AI.

Regulators in the EU are taking action to address the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI. A recent case involving Google’s AI tool, Bard, being temporarily suspended in the EU highlights the need for regulation and compliance in this rapidly evolving field. Concerns are raised about data and privacy, as generative AI uses large amounts of data, potentially infringing copyright and processing individuals’ data without consent. It is crucial for organizations to conduct data protection impact assessments and consider GDPR obligations. Transparency and consent are also key, with Zoom’s data practices being questioned in terms of transparency and obtaining user consent. The conversation emphasizes the potential legal and financial consequences organizations face for non-compliance.

Remember, compliance professionals are the co-pilots of our businesses, guiding us through the complexities of the AI revolution. Let’s not wait too long between podcasts and continue this journey together!

Key Highlights

·      Concerns with Bard

·      Regulators’ Actions on AI

·      Concerns over Data and Privacy in Generative AI

·      Transparency and Consent in Zoom’s Data Practices

 Resources

For more information on the issues raised in this podcast, check out the Cordery Compliance, News Section. For more information on Cordery Compliance, go their website here. Also check out the GDPR Navigator, one of the top resources for GDPR Compliance by clicking here.

Connect with Jonathan Armstrong

●      Twitter

●      LinkedIn

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Blog

Protecting Personal Data in the Banking Industry: Lessons from the Farage Controversy

Today I want to consider a burgeoning imbroglio in the UK involving Nigel Farage. While you might not think of Farage as a candidate for the FCPA Compliance Blog, it turns out that his current banking situation has some very interesting data privacy issues, shedding light on the data protection risks faced by banks and the importance of compliance with GDPR regulations. So in this blog post, we will explore the lessons learned from this incident and provide practical advice for financial institutions to ensure the security and privacy of customer information.

The recent episode surrounding Nigel Farage’s banking situation has sparked concerns about data protection and compliance within the banking industry. Farage, a prominent figure in the Brexit movement, had his bank account with Coutts, a high-end bank owned by NatWest, closed and was offered an account with another associated bank. The alleged reason was that he did not have a high enough net worth to merit the account with Coutts. It turned out the real reason was his right-wing politics, particularly around leading the charge for Brexit.

NatWest then compounded its problem by leaking a story to the BBC, that Farage had been dropped because, as reported in the Guardian, the CEO of NatWest, Dame Alison Rose had been the source of the leak to the BBC of this false information. All of this raised concerns about a potential data breach. Coutts had closed his account after lengthy discussions over the reputational risk that his political views posed for the bank.

Rose tried to apologize to Farage but as the New York Times reported, “The apology and a promise to review the bank’s policies were not enough to ease the pressure on Ms. Rose. Reports late Tuesday that the government, which has a 39 percent stake in the bank, was “significantly concerned” about Ms. Rose’s leadership seemed to seal her fate. Before dawn, the bank announced her immediate departure” in late July. Peter Flavel, the boss of its private bank, Coutts was also sent packing.

From the regulatory, data privacy and GDPR responses, NatWest is in severe trouble. Not only had the Bank violated its own data privacy regulations in providing the information to the now former CEO but it also released that same information to the BBC. The consequences of non-compliance with GDPR regulations can be severe, particularly in regulated industries like financial services. Banks may face potential violations and internal policy breaches, which could lead to legal action and impact their banking license and fit and proper provisions. CEOs can be held liable for consent and connivance in data protection cases, emphasizing the importance of understanding data protection laws and potential criminal offenses associated with them.

The controversy surrounding Nigel Farage’s banking situation serves as a wake-up call for the banking industry to prioritize data protection and compliance. Financial institutions cannot afford to overlook these issues, as the consequences in the era of GDPR can be significant. It is crucial to establish proper policies and procedures, provide training and education for top-level management, and ensure a compliance culture is embedded throughout the organization.

There are multiple lessons to be learned from this controversy and several key takeaways that can help banks navigate the complexities of data protection and compliance:

1.Be cautious with written communication: The incident underscores the importance of being mindful of what is written in emails, as subject access requests can expose them. Consider whether a controversial email would be better discussed through a phone call or read aloud before sending.

2. Learn from previous compliance issues: NatWest had previous issues with data protection compliance, leading to the resignation of CEO Dame Allison Rose. This highlights the need for organizations to build a compliance culture at all levels, including those in top positions.

3. Allocate resources for subject access requests: The bank’s CFO has provided extra resources to handle subject access requests, as the cost of non-compliance is usually higher than the cost of compliance. It is estimated that it takes a six-figure sum for a bank to respond to a subject access request.

4. Scrutinize politically exposed persons and connections to Russian individuals: Financial institutions have an obligation to carefully scrutinize politically exposed persons and individuals with connections to Russian individuals. Balancing legitimate activities with obeying the law is crucial.

This affair provides valuable insights into the importance of data protection and compliance in the banking industry. The Farage controversy serves as a reminder that the security and privacy of customer information should be paramount for financial institutions. By learning from past incidents, allocating resources for subject access requests, and adhering to GDPR obligations, banks can safeguard their reputation, avoid legal repercussions, and build trust with their customers.

Categories
Life with GDPR

Life With GDPR: Banking’s Data Dilemma – Farage’s Account Closure & the Risks of Data Breach

Tom Fox and Jonathan Armstrong, renowned expert in cyber security, co-host the award-winning Life with GDPR. The recent controversy surrounding Nigel Farage’s banking situation highlights the risks and compliance challenges faced by the banking industry in relation to data protection.

In this episode, Tom and Jonathan discuss the closure of Farage’s bank account with Coutts, a high-end bank owned by NatWest, and the potential data breach that ensued. They discuss the risks of internal emails being exposed through subject access requests (SARs) and emphasize the importance of caution in email communication. The conversation also explores the cost and consequences of non-compliance with GDPR obligations, particularly in relation to SARs. The potential legal implications for banks that violate their own policies or delete data that should be provided in response to a SAR are highlighted. Overall, the episode underscores the need for banks to prioritize data protection, compliance, and proper decision-making in the financial industry.

 Key Takeaways:

·      Nigel Farage’s Banking Controversy

·      Data Protection Risks in Banking

·      The Cost and Consequences of Subject Access Requests

·      Serious concerns about data protection and access to banking

 Resources

For more information on the issues raised in this podcast, check out the Cordery Compliance, News Section. For more information on Cordery Compliance, go their website here. Also check out the GDPR Navigator, one of the top resources for GDPR Compliance by clicking here.

Connect with Tom Fox

●      LinkedIn

Connect with Jonathan Armstrong

●      Twitter

●      LinkedIn

Categories
2 Gurus Talk Compliance

2 Gurus Talk Compliance – Episode 10 – Ethical Remote Workers Edition

What happens when two top compliance commentators get together? They talk compliance of course. Join Tom Fox and Kristy Grant-Hart in 2 Gurus Talk Compliance as they discuss the latest compliance issues in this week’s episode!

Tom and Kristy consider the possibility of an international anti-bribery court, challenges in enforcing judgments against countries without strong anti-corruption laws, and the United States’ unlikely participation. The European Commission issued an adequacy decision regarding data transfers between the US and EU, resolving a long-standing issue, but privacy advocate Max Schrems plans to challenge its validity. The importance of on-site due diligence, and the value of on-site audits and cybersecurity disclosure were also explored. The benefits of remote work, global anti-corruption efforts, AI safeguards, and the dangers of zero tolerance policies were covered as well. The conversation provided insights into various compliance-related topics.

Highlights Include

·      World ABC Court

·      No DOJ control on Cognizant investigation.

·      SEC adopts Cyber disclosure rules.

·      Fight against corruption in Ukraine.

·      Goldilocks Compliance.

·      Data Privacy Framework Program Launches New Website Enabling U.S. Companies to Participate in Cross-Border Data Transfers

·      Site Visits: Sometimes the Best Due Diligence is Done on Foot

·      New Data Reveals that Remote Workers are Likely More Ethical than their Office Counterparts.

·      White House Says Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft Agree to AI Safeguards

·      Man Steals Vehicle, Crashes it into Building during Search for WiFi Connection

 Resources 

  1. WSJ Risk and Compliance Journal
  2. FCPA Blog
  3. Radical Compliance
  4. Dept. Of Commerce Press Release
  5. WSJ
  6. Conflicts of Interest Blog
  7. GAB
  8. Fast Company
  9. Fox 35 Orlando

Connect with Kristy Grant-Hart on LinkedIn

Spark Consulting

Tom 

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Daily Compliance News

Daily Compliance News: July 12, 2023 – The US-EU Data Sharing Agreement Edition

Welcome to the Daily Compliance News. Each day, Tom Fox, the Voice of Compliance, brings you compliance-related stories to start your day. Sit back, enjoy a cup of morning coffee, and listen to the Daily Compliance News. All from the Compliance Podcast Network. Each day we consider four stories from the business world, compliance, ethics, risk management, leadership, or general interest for the compliance professional.

Stories we are following in today’s edition:

  • EU-US agree on data sharing pact. (NYT)
  • EU privacy advocates slam pact.  (BBC)
  • Max Schrems slams back, vows legal challenge.  (YaHooNews)
  • Challenges to data sharing pact likely.  (Reuters)
Categories
Compliance and AI

Mastering ChatGPT: Part 2 – ChatGPT and Ethical AI

Welcome to a special five-part podcast series on mastering ChatGPT. My special guest throughout this journey is Larry Roberts, an accomplished professional with over 25 years of multifaceted experience. Having initiated his career in the corporate training sphere, he exhibited a remarkable shift to IT, contributing greatly as a Business Intelligence Analyst. His proficiency lies in harnessing predictive analytics for inventory and sales projections, which led him to tap into the realm of AI. In 2021, Larry chose to cozy up with podcasting and content creation. His tryst with ChatGPT began in November of the same year, and he has been fully engrossed with it since then. His insights into data models, large language models, and his overall passion for AI are certain to illuminate any forum.

In this Episode 2, we look at the ethical considerations of AI models such as ChatGPT.

In the age of AI, the ethical consequences of this transformative technology present pressing concerns for developers and industry professionals alike. In this episode 2, Tom and Larry shed light on the myriad ethical issues surrounding AI, from securing data privacy and GDPR compliance to mitigating the misuse of AI tools and addressing job displacement. There is a wealth of information and best practices to guide your ethical approach to AI, ensuring transparency, user control, and adaptability in a rapidly evolving landscape. Embark on this journey with us to ensure that the power of AI is harnessed responsibly, respecting every stakeholder’s rights and privacy.

In this episode, you will be able to:

  • Discover the crucial ethical questions surrounding AI and ChatGPT.
  • Uncover hidden truths about data privacy concerns and your control options.
  • Explore the significant role of GDPR and the collective effort required for privacy.
  • Understand how to combat the misuse of AI instruments through user collaboration.
  • Learn about AI ethics and why transparency, bias evaluation, and human supervision are paramount.

Key Highlights:    

  • Data Privacy
  • AI and Disinformation
  • Human in the Loop

Resources:

Larry Roberts

Larry Roberts on LinkedIn

Red Hat Media

Tom Fox

Instagram

Facebook

YouTube

Twitter

LinkedIn

Categories
Life with GDPR

Life With GDPR – Joe Sullivan Sentence

Tom Fox and Jonathan Armstrong, renowned expert in cyber security, co-host the award-winning Life with GDPR. Matt Kelly and Jonathan Marks join Tom and Jonathan Armstrong on this episode, as they explore the case of former Uber CISO Joe Sullivan and the lessons compliance officers can learn from his lenient sentence. From growing trends of personal accountability to conflict of interests, the hosts provide six tips for chief compliance officers to protect themselves, including rehearsing responses and seeking external advice when necessary. This eye-opening episode also delves into the challenges faced by compliance officers in situations like Etsy’s ransomware scheme and how they must be cautious with threat actors’ demands. Don’t miss out on this insightful episode that will leave you questioning whether Sullivan was unfairly punished and whether executives’ remuneration packages will receive greater scrutiny going forward. Tune in now to Life With GDPR.

 Key Takeaways:

·      The Joe Sullivan Uber Case and Lessons Learned

·      Individual Liability in Corporate Malpractice

·      Compensation and Conflicts of Interest

·      The Challenges of Compliance Officers in Wrongdoing Incidents

 Resources

For more information on the issues raised in this podcast, check out the Cordery Compliance, News Section. For more information on Cordery Compliance, go their website here. Also check out the GDPR Navigator, one of the top resources for GDPR Compliance by clicking here.

Connect with Tom Fox

●      LinkedIn

Connect with Jonathan Armstrong

●      Twitter

●      LinkedIn

Categories
Life with GDPR

Life with GDPR-$1 Billion Fine: Meta’s GDPR Violation

Tom Fox and Jonathan Armstrong, renowned experts in cyber security, co-host the award-winning Life with GDPR. In this episode, they discuss the recent billion-dollar fine imposed on Meta (formerly Facebook) for violating data protection laws. They break down the significance of this ruling, which limits standard contractual clauses and requires due diligence checks when transferring data from the EU to the US. Discover the consequences and potential appeal arguments of the European Court of Justice’s ruling on data privacy. They delve into the challenges of harmonizing data protection authorities in the EU and how this affects corporations. Find out why the lack of consistency among regulators cannot be fixed overnight. Take advantage of the engaging and informative discussion that can help organizations navigate the complex landscape of GDPR and data privacy. Tune in to “Life with GDPR” now!

 Key Takeaways:

·      Facebook fined $1 billion for data transfer

·      Meta’s GDPR Noncompliance and Data Transfer Suspension

·      Irish Data Protection decision overruled by EDPB

·      Challenging GDPR court order in Ireland

·      Data Transfer from EU to US: Safe or Unsafe?

·      GDPR differences in privacy enforcement

 Resources

For more information on the issues raised in this podcast, check out the Cordery Compliance, News Section. For more information on Cordery Compliance, go their website here. Also check out the GDPR Navigator, one of the top resources for GDPR Compliance by clicking here.

Connect with Tom Fox

●      LinkedIn

Connect with Jonathan Armstrong

●      Twitter

●      LinkedIn