Tag:privacy

1
The police are reading … a lot … more than half a million times last year
2
Draft law proposes security assessment of data exported out of China
3
McDonald’s India (inadvertently) delivering more than just burgers in India
4
Old-school data breach sees hospital investigated
5
Australia’s new data breach notification laws: what they mean for you
6
Update: Mandatory Data Breach Notification Laws closer to being introduced
7
SAP criticises impending EU data protection laws
8
Privacy Commissioner investigates alleged sale of telco customer information
9
Victorian ruling clarifies application of privacy principles to social media accounts
10
Ashley Madison data breach joint findings released

The police are reading … a lot … more than half a million times last year

By Cameron Abbott and Edwin Tan

News Corp reported today that law enforcement agencies accessed the private data of Australian individuals about 541,300 times during the past 12 months. This is an estimated increase of about 60 percent compared to the previous year.

This is in addition to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) confirming on Friday that an officer had accessed phone records without a warrant earlier in the year. No action was taken against the officer.

The 2015 amendments to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth) made it mandatory for telecommunications companies and internet service providers to retain metadata. This metadata can be accessed without a warrant by 21 government agencies, including the AFP.

However, journalists’ telecommunications data cannot be accessed by agencies without first obtaining a “Journalist Information Warrant”. An agency must apply to a Federal Court judge or a nominated Administrative Appeals Tribunal member to be granted the warrant.

The breach has sparked calls for an independent and public inquiry into the AFP, with Senator Nick Xenophon calling the incident “a complete failure with no real explanation”.  Not the last we will hear about this issue we think.  Read more about this here.

Draft law proposes security assessment of data exported out of China

By Cameron Abbott and Allison Wallace

The Cyberspace Administration of China has released a draft law that would impose an annual security assessment on firms exporting data out of China.

The proposed legislation would apply to any business which transfers more than 1000 gigabytes of data, or which affects more than 500,000 users, and is the latest of several safeguards announced in recent times against threats such as hacking and terrorism.

Under the draft law, economic, technological or scientific data whose transfer would post a threat to public or security interests would be banned, and there would be extra scrutiny of sensitive geographic data.

Businesses would also have to obtain the consent of users before transmitting it overseas.

The draft law follows another passed in November 2016 which formalised a range of controls over firms that handle data in industries the Chinese government labels critical to national interests.

McDonald’s India (inadvertently) delivering more than just burgers in India

By Cameron Abbott and Allison Wallace

McDonald’s has fallen foul of customer expectations after its McDelivery app leaked the personal information of about 2.2 million users.

Access to the names, emails, home addresses and phone numbers of users was made readily available due to a poorly configured server, according to security firm Fallible.

The fast food giant told the Times of India that the app is safe to use – but Fallible tested the app again after McDonald’s said it had updated it to fix the issue, and found that it was still leaking data.

Old-school data breach sees hospital investigated

By Cameron Abbott and Allison Wallace

While health institutions around the world work to secure patients’ personal information and prevent the hacking or leaking of data from their systems, one Melbourne hospital is being investigated after medical records were found lying in a gutter in a nearby street.

Fairfax Media reports Australia’s Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim is investigating how the paper records of 31 patients of the John Fawkner Private Hospital were removed from the premises last month.

The documents, which were found by a local resident, were sent to both the Privacy Commissioner, and Victoria’s Health Complaints Commissioner.

Under current legislation, there is no obligation for the hospital to notify the affected patients that their privacy has been breached. All this will change under the new data breach notification laws, which were passed by the Australian government last month, and are expected to come into force within the next 12 months.

This breach is a timely reminder for all businesses, government agencies and other organisations covered by Australia’s privacy laws to take stock of how they store personal information – whether it be in a filing cabinet, on a hard-drive, or in a cloud – and ensure it is secure.

Australia’s new data breach notification laws: what they mean for you

By Cameron Abbott, Rob Pulham and Allison Wallace

Further to our blog post yesterday, we’ve prepared a summary into the implications of the Privacy Amendment (Notifiable Data Breaches) Bill 2017 that has now been passed by both houses of Parliament. Read our article here.

Update: Mandatory Data Breach Notification Laws closer to being introduced

By Cameron Abbott and Allison Wallace

As foreshadowed by the Attorney General’s Department last year, the Australian government is pushing ahead with its plan to introduce mandatory data breach notification laws, with Parliament today agreeing to a third reading of the Privacy Amendment (Notifiable Data Breaches) Bill 2016. You can find more about the proposed legislation here. We’ll keep you updated as the bill makes its way through parliament.

SAP criticises impending EU data protection laws

By Cameron Abbott and Allison Wallace

SAP has expressed concerns over the implications of the landmark EU data privacy regulations, saying the penalties that will be imposed are too high, and could impede the development of Europe’s start-up culture.

The data privacy regulation will be implemented in May 2018, and includes fines for EU companies up to 4 per cent of their global revenues if they commit a significant breach of data privacy.

In an interview with the Financial Times, SAP’s head of products and innovation, Bernd Leukert said he believes the penalties are too high, and put companies at risk of losing their entire revenue if they commit multiple breaches.

Mr Leukert said he also fears that the EU regulations were not properly aligned with laws in other jurisdictions, such as the US.

Privacy Commissioner investigates alleged sale of telco customer information

By Cameron Abbott and Allison Wallace

Australia’s Information and Privacy Commissioner Timothy Pilgrim is making enquiries into allegations that the personal information of customers of three Australian telcos is being sold online.

Fairfax uncovered an alleged rort involving ‘corrupt insiders’ at the offshore call centres of Telstra, Optus and Vodafone, which has allegedly seen details including customers’ addresses, dates of birth and billing statements leaked to at least one private company in India, which is then allegedly selling the information for up to $1000.

Commissioner Pilgrim has said in a statement that he is working to determine what further action may need to be taken.

All three telcos have also released statements, reiterating that they take the privacy of their customers seriously. Vodafone and Optus have met with the AFP, which has now passed the matter on to Indian authorities.

Victorian ruling clarifies application of privacy principles to social media accounts

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Victorian Supreme Court recently confirmed that an employer was not obliged to immediately notify an employee that it was accessing her Facebook messages during a disciplinary investigation. This case clarifies the manner in which the Victorian Information Privacy Principles (IPPs) apply to social media.

In this case, an employer conducted an investigation into an employee after a colleague reported her for making a number of abusive remarks over Facebook. During the investigation, the employer accessed the employee’s Facebook messages without her knowledge. She was subsequently found guilty of misconduct and given a final warning.

The employee appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Victoria after the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) found that her employer had complied with the IPPs. In her appeal, she questioned whether the ways her employer collected and used the information was necessary “for the purposes of a workplace disciplinary investigation” and whether accessing it without her knowledge or consent was “necessary for one or more of the organisations functions or activities’ for the purposes of IPP 1.1”.

The Supreme Court of Victoria confirmed VCAT’s finding that collecting further information was necessary under IPP 1.1 as the employer was conducting a misconduct investigation “which was a legitimate purpose” and said there was nothing to suggest its approach was inconsistent with the right to privacy. Furthermore, the court found that VCAT was correct in finding that IPP 1.3 (and 1.5) did not impose an obligation of immediate notification on the employer as it could have jeopardised the integrity of the disciplinary investigation. Access the IPPs here. and read the court’s decision here.

Importantly, this case demonstrates that privacy law doesn’t automatically prevent employers from accessing the social media accounts of their employees to conduct investigations in appropriate circumstances.

Ashley Madison data breach joint findings released

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Australian Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim and The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Daniel Therrien have released a joint report on the data breach of cheating website Ashley Madison which affected approximately 36 million Ashley Madison user accounts last year. Read our post on the breach here.

Controversially, despite the company not having a physical presence in Australia, the Commissioners found that Ashley Madison’s parent company Avid Life Media (ALM) was regulated as an “APP entity” due to the fact that it carried on business and collected personal information in Australia. This finding was based on the fact that ALM conducted marketing in Australia, targeted Australian residents for its services and collected the personal information of Australians.

ALM agreed to a number of enforceable undertakings to the Commissioner. Amongst other things, ALM has undertaken to augment its security framework, provide extensive security training for staff and cease its practice of retaining the information of users with deleted, deactivated or inactive accounts. Consistent with the trend in undertakings it requires independent verification of certain compliance steps. Find the undertakings here.

It also seeks to address the accuracy of the records, which is a challenge for a cheating website. Letting someone sign up using for example Tony Blair’s email address captured the attention of the regulators. They focused on the interests under Privacy laws of those whose email addresses were falsely added to the sign up. A confirming email with an option to opt out was not considered an adequate measure.

Read more about the report here.

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.