Skip to main content

Remove the HMRC CD Burners

I have been appointed by Vince Cable to head up the Lib Dem investigation into Government Data (in)Security.

My first call is a simple one. Remove the CD Burners from the HMRC computer room until they have sorted out security.

There is no sense allowing any more horses to depart through the same stable door.

Thanks due to b3ta for the image.


Chris Black said…
Great Graphic!

But seriously, good luck!
Michael said…
Here are some other suggestions for your review. The Open Rights Group would be very happy to connect you with data security experts for further comment.

- Government should in future think seriously about the alternatives to amassing data centrally. You can use
procedures to manage the risk associated with allowing 5 people access to 10,000 records, whereas you cannot effectively manage the risk associated with allowing 300,000 people access to 50 million records.

- No single user should have privileges to access the entire database.

- To avoid the risks associated with shipping sensitive data, it simply should not leave the building. An external organisation with a valid reason to access data should instead come to the organisation holding the data.

- If personal information absolutely must leave the building, in a laptop, DVD, or any thing else it should be encrypted.

- Audit logs should be kept on who is accessing data, and importantly
someone needs to regularly check these logs (often this crucial second part does not happen)

- A basic idea in security in the real world and in computer is 'defence in depth' i.e. many layers of security. Which means that many security features must fail before a breach occurs. It seems at HMRC that a single failing compromised the entire system.
escape said…
I beleive this information has gone to be used by the Authorities to start data collection information on all the children in the UK. I dont think it was lost, I think someone uncovered the copies did not arrive to where they were supposed to be going. The government as so sure that there is no need to worry or change bank accounts etc. Isnt it funny how they got everyone to have the money paid into their banks, and all of a sudden that info is lost, I would rather know a criminal has it than some government secret department. This is information sharing gone to far. I got a letter today saying sorry for letting my details get lost and not to worry etc but be more vigilant in what goes on in your account. Where were the copies meant to go but didn't arrive. I am going to request my payment in another way and not payed into my bank, I am then going to close my bank account and open another one.
peakerboo said…
I agree with Michael, get some expert help.

A big problem I see with modern government is that politicians tend to think they are experts at everything, your normal people like the rest of us, you know what you know, but you should also know that you DONT know everything and you cannot be expected to.

Example :- How many members of he house of commons are technically qualified in the area of IT security? I'll make a wild guess here at 0. But how many of those same people think they know how to solve this problem?

Sorry to say this John, but removing burners is not the best of answers.

In the case of the 25m records lost, the manager in charge was explicitly told by the NAO about not exporting sensitive data, so what does he do export it. He had two options a) not send it because of the cost involved b) spend the money. The manager involved should at the very minimum be sacked for gross negligence. And considering how sensitive the data was he should be facing criminal charges.

One question which has not been answered is, why does the standard for sending external data appear to be using a password protected zip file? Password protected zip files are not secure and have never been secure.

Also, one reason for the 'HMRC mistake' I have read about is that HMRC refused to filter the data exported because it would cost £5000. OK £5000 is peanuts considering the importance of data protection, but still why so high? £5000 for a VERY easy one weeks work sounds like a very nice earner to me. I'm an IT contractor can I get a job at HMRC ;-) Sounds like someone is getting ripped off by their outsourcing company.

Technically this is actually only a couple of hours work to code/test, but getting doc's written / approved it should still only take a week max.

I was just doing some fact checking before sending and came across this excellent article.
john said…
The point about removing the hardware is that then people cannot get around the management controls.

Before you comment on my CV, however, try looking it up.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…