Yep.  You have convinced me.  That's it folks: no more use of live data please for testing purposes (except perhaps parallel running with the real system and so - if it all works properly - you will only ever change the data in an accurate fashion).
 
I really can't see a way round the 4th principle.   (Of course, this might also be an illustration of the all-pervasiveness and "business unfriendly" black-and-white aspects of the DPA, of which there are many examples, but that's another debate.)
 
Renzo

Renzo Marchini
Dechert LLP
+44 (0) 20 7184 7563 direct
+44 (0) 20 7184 7001 fax
[log in to unmask]
www.dechert.com

 

From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tim Trent
Sent: 15 October 2009 10:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] sharing data with system developers

To me it comes down, as always, since I am by no means a legally trained person, to good sense and good ethics.  We know that the "live data" set has no intrinsic value as a testing tool, and I think that horse is dead. I shall flog that one no more.  What it has allowed me to do is to develop my thinking into the 4th principle area.

Taking your quandary, let me look at it first on the real, live system.  On that system, if I change something about you to be patently incorrect - let us change your sex to Female, for example, that is a clear breach. yet we cannot say that is now data that is not about you, for it is. It is simply incorrect.  Were that not so we could argue (with no legitimacy) that any data incorrectness rendered the data record somehow impersonal.

Now, let us set the scenario where we have replicated that data set and placed it on a new system.  At the moment there are no differences because no tests have started.  This remains personal data. It is identical in all respects save for the environment in which it is held.  Now I change your sex to Female.  However hard I think, I cannot conceive or argue that this is no longer your personal data. What it has become is inaccurate personal data.

By the way I may have confused  you with the "your daughter is dead" element as referring to consent. I meant it to be an example of gross mishandling of data and the testing process together. Even consent for such processing would not have removed any duty of care to ensure that letter be not mailed. But consent would certainly have removed any doubt about whether the data record may be played with or not.

Marchini, Renzo wrote:
[log in to unmask] type="cite">
Tim, I was up to now against you - but I am beginning to have doubts. 
 
I agree (contra your view) that 1st principle can be fulfilled without consent but with para 6.   On the foolishness of the "your daughter is dead" letter scenario - of course tragic, but not an argument for saying you must have consent; only an argument for saying that the other data protection principles should be adhered to.  Some of these principles will be easy to comply with:  keep the secure and so that letter won't be sent - if the letter is sent then that is a breach of 7th principle. 
 
The 4th principle is not so easy to address so, and you are giving me doubts.  You are right, testing will on the face of it inevitably render the data inaccurate.  I am not sure how to square that one but have a quick thought to be shot down over:  perhaps the processing inevitably gone through as part of testing makes the data no longer the personal data about the individual.     Example: I am on a database (say a bank's account system).  For testing purposes, I am given a very generous credit balance in the new system.  Its no longer really about me so perhaps it is no longer data which "relates to" me as the data is only now test data and not real data.   ie its no longer my personal data.  It would become my personal data again when it is then used to make decisions about me (letter of death, wrong HIV status) that it then engages the other data protection principles. 
 
Just a thought ... probably can be criticised on a number of grounds, but then how else do we address 4th principle?
 
R
 

Renzo Marchini
Dechert LLP
+44 (0) 20 7184 7563 direct
+44 (0) 20 7184 7001 fax
[log in to unmask]
www.dechert.com

 

--

Tim Trent - Consultant
Tel: +44 (0)7710 126618
web: ComplianceAndPrivacy.com - where busy executives go to find the news first
personal blog: timtrent.blogspot.com/ - news, views, and opinions
personal website: Tim's Personal Website - more than anyone needs to know

Marketing by Permission

Important: This message is private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify us and remove it from your system. This email and any attachment(s) are believed to be virus-free, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to make all the necessary virus checks. This email and any attachments to it are copyright of Meadowood Associates, owners of Compliance And Privacy, unless otherwise stated. Their copying, transmission, reproduction in whole or in part may only be undertaken with the express permission, in writing, of Meadowood Associates, at Meadowood House, 30 Redditch, Bracknell, Berkshire, RG12 0TT.

All archives of messages are stored permanently and are available to the world wide web community at large at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html

Selected commands (the command has been filled in below in the body of the email if you are receiving emails in HTML format):

All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm and are sent in the body of an otherwise blank email to [log in to unmask]

Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner [log in to unmask]

(Please send all commands to [log in to unmask] not the list or the moderators, and all requests for technical help to [log in to unmask], the general office helpline)

 


  
 This e-mail is from Dechert LLP, a law firm, and may contain information that is confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments, and notify the sender. Dechert LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England & Wales (Registered No. OC306029) and is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. A list of names of the members of Dechert LLP (who are solicitors or registered foreign lawyers) is available for inspection at its registered office, 160 Queen Victoria Street, London EC4V 4QQ.









All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html


Selected commands (the command has been filled in below in the body of the email if you are receiving emails in HTML format):



All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm and are sent in the body of an otherwise blank email to [log in to unmask]


Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner  [log in to unmask]


(Please send all commands to [log in to unmask] not the list or the moderators, and all requests for technical help to [log in to unmask], the general office helpline)