 |
 |
> From: Colin J Browne <[log in to unmask]> > To: Paul Miller <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Select Committee Report > Priority: normal > The NWCS has a subgroup which is looking at encryption of messages in > view of the discussions with the BMA. Yes tehy are trying. The BT > Syntegra NHSnet has a secure gateway to the internet which would allow > access to all your favourite sites such as GP-UK. This would be part of > the connection deal to NHSnet. Is this not meant to be "one way" gateway, thus essentially restricting it's use. For example, presumably I couldn't download files by ftp although I could upload ; although I could post to newsgroups, I couldn't receive. What does "Secure gateway" actually mean ? The point stands that if we are forced to take all our internet content through one ISP which is monitoring what we do and what we receive, we will be paying higher prices for a lesser service. Also, what about BBSs and big BBSs like Compuserve etc. Will we get access to them ? > The LA's Social Services would have to conform to an expensive audit to become > a *trusted non-NHS body* on the NHS net. This may prove to inhibit development > of community care which is highly relevant to health in deprived areas > such as ours and Bridgeton unless it has changed dramatically since I > was there. > Agreed entirely. I remain, overall, a little confused by the many issues here. Security seems to be a priority to all concerned, but it seems to be being addressed from the wrong angle (alarmingly), and by taking what increasingly seems like an unworkable and restrictive method of managing it we are likely to create something of limited value, with as many disadvantages as advantages. Paul Dr Paul Miller Bridgeton Health Centre, Glasgow http://users.colloquium.co.uk/~p_miller/index.htm %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%