Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 184 posts

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#171

Post by yuhong »

clienthunter wrote: post #133
buro9 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The government can do whatever the hell they like with my data - on the condition that anyone else can too. Wonderful. Now consider how a potential employer might use your data: Have you ever seen a GP for stress or mental health issues? Oh, maybe we are dis-inclined to hire you. Suffer from back pain? Well that's one of the most given reasons for needing time off from work, which means you are a liability and we w…

Although I didn't say it explicitly in the particular sentence you quoted, I did say (pseudo|a)nonymously just after. I'm not suggesting identifiable health records should be searchable by all! You raise interesting points. I think you are quite correct in saying these things are likely to happen. But I wonder whether hiding such information is actually the most efficient strategy. I mean if some divine power gave us…

I said before that I do want the problems with using real names to be fixed. And I am thinking that insurance for periodic doctor visits is probably flawed.

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#172

Post by pja »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #166
pja wrote: post #2

It's worse than that: Ben Goldacre is reporting ( https://twitter.com/bengoldacre/status/440475049880195073 ) that the data was made publicly available. This is beyond parody.

It's beyond parody because it's just plain false. Par for the course for The Guardian over the last few months. http://www.earthware.co.uk/default.aspx

It had nothing to do with the Guardian. What on earth are you talking about?

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#173

Post by shocks »

bananas wrote: post #170
shocks wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny. I've written to several of my local MPs and always received a direct response regarding the issues I have raised. How many times have you received boilerplate replies?

Three times now to three different MPs. Gave up then. Glad you got something more.

I'm actually sorry to hear that. What topics were you contacting them about, if you don't mind my asking? I wrote about private issues, copyright and digital rights issues, and various local council issues (fences and paths). I got a good response every time.

It would be cool to compile a list of responsive and unresponsive MPs…

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#174

Post by wetafur »

raldi wrote: post #163
Silhouette wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who do you think that should be, and why do you think their systems would be more secure than Google's? The security isn't the only point here. They transferred the data outside of the jurisdiction where our laws apply, and they're not allowed to do that without fulfilling conditions that they appear not to have satisfied. Note that it is not within the power of PA Consulting to vary these conditions, whatever any co…

> I'm openly stating that I think they would do tap those files in a heartbeat if (a) it would help them to earn more from their advertising or other profit-generating activities, and (b) they thought they could get away with it. Wow. Do you feel that Google has ever done anything so flagrantly over the line before? If so, when?

http://digiday.com/platforms/google-tracking/

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#175

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Silhouette wrote: post #161
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they have permission of government officials then what? // They wouldn't - without wilful negligence - accept such "permission" from anyone other than a senior official who had in depth knowledge of the necessary requirements of privacy laws. A person in that permission is unlikely to be acting lawfully and is likely to be aware of that - there's no way they should retain a post with responsibility over anything…

To be fair, there are a few grey areas in the law as it currently stands in the UK that might be relevant if we're arguing about government permission. The main one is probably s251 NHS Act 2006, which grants the Secretary of State for Health certain powers to set aside the default confidentiality rules for specific medical purposes. I'm investigating whether those powers are a relevant factor in this case, but so fa…

>The main one is probably s251 NHS Act 2006, which grants the Secretary of State for Health certain powers to set aside the default confidentiality rules for specific medical purposes. //

Most laws seem to have these SoS exclusion clauses. In this particular case, S.251(1)¹ says

"The Secretary of State may by regulations make such provision for and in connection with requiring or regulating the processing of prescribed patient information for medical purposes as he considers necessary or expedient—

So it's by regulations², ie "rules". Whilst they don't need a new law to be passed they're still a statutory instrument, it's not like this section allows the SoS to just decide by himself.

See for example S.252(2); and S.251(7), quoted here:

"Regulations under this section may not make provision for or in connection with the processing of prescribed patient information in a manner inconsistent with any provision made by or under the Data Protection Act 1998 (c 29)."

---

1 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/41/part/13/crosshea...

2 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/1438/pdfs/uksi_20021..., http://www.hra.nhs.uk/documents/2014/02/cag-frequently-asked...

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#176

Post by lern_too_spel »

pja wrote: post #172
lern_too_spel wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's beyond parody because it's just plain false. Par for the course for The Guardian over the last few months. http://www.earthware.co.uk/default.aspx

It had nothing to do with the Guardian. What on earth are you talking about?

Ben Goldacre writes for The Guardian. What else would I be talking about?

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#177

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

fixermark wrote: post #142
easyfrag wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Americans get how distrustful other nations are of American-based cloud providers. It is not a matter of Google's or any other providers' behaviour but of the US Government (warrant-less searches and the like). This lack of trust predates the current NSA-Snowden affair and goes back to the Patriot Act (IMHO). Of course I can't speak for all nations or industries (or even companies) but in my part of the…

As an American, I'll be a little surprised if that mistrust runs deeply in Britain, given how closely the Snowden disclosures revealed GCHQ and the NSA to be working. If the NSA had a vested interest in getting health records on a British citizen, I doubt it'd be difficult to get the British government to send them over. You know, to fight terrorism. Of course, people aren't strictly rational actors, so I suppose one…

Whatever the UK Government thinks, EU and UK Data Protection law should make this illegal.

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#179

Post by blueskin_ »

ataggart wrote: post #110
swombat wrote: post #5

Surely PA Consulting should immediately be sued out of existence. This kind of behaviour must be considered beyond negligent, practically criminal. I would strongly support throwing anyone involved in this into jail for a long time as a deterrent against future criminals. This is just unbelievable.

Taking a sentient human being and throwing them in a cage is a profoundly violent act. I find it troubling that you guys so casually reach for it as a punitive tool, particularly when the subject has neither committed physical violence nor poses such a threat to others. Surely you clever people can think of forms of punishment/deterrence less destructive to both the individual and society as a whole.

What they did is destructive to individual privacy and liberty.

This may be a strange concept to you, but you can commit a crime non-physically. After all, lots of people think bankers should be arrested for having traded bad debt and precipitating the recession.

Re: NHS England patient data 'uploaded to Google servers', Tory MP says

#180

Post by bananas »

shocks wrote: post #173
bananas wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three times now to three different MPs. Gave up then. Glad you got something more.

I'm actually sorry to hear that. What topics were you contacting them about, if you don't mind my asking? I wrote about private issues, copyright and digital rights issues, and various local council issues (fences and paths). I got a good response every time. It would be cool to compile a list of responsive and unresponsive MPs…

So was I at the time. It dented my confidence in politicians. This was then immediately followed by the expenses scandals in which one of the MPs I contacted was implicated.

Three different MPs. The issues were about planning permission being denied for a structure that everyone else down the road has, an issue I had with the CPS who lost the evidence after I was stabbed and refused to formally charge the person and the reduction of the number of parking spaces in my area by 50% resulting in people fighting in the streets over spaces (literally!).

Privacy, copyright and digital rights issues, I vote with my feet.

With other issues, I wield a solicitor now. It's a much better use of time and money and that is saying something.

Post reply on HN