JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DATA-PROTECTION Archives


DATA-PROTECTION Archives

DATA-PROTECTION Archives


data-protection@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DATA-PROTECTION Home

DATA-PROTECTION Home

DATA-PROTECTION  January 2013

DATA-PROTECTION January 2013

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Addresses being personal data

From:

Richard Hopkins <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Richard Hopkins <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:21:03 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (198 lines)

Re postcodes, there's this from the ICO...

<http://www.ico.gov.uk/foikb/PolicyLines/FOIPolicyAnonymisingpostcodes.htm>

I'm sure that I've previously read somewhere that omitting the last part of 
the "inbound" part was sufficient.

e.g. For "BS8 1UD" (my work postcode), "BS8 1" would be sufficiently 
anonymous.

Cheers,

Richard

--On 10 January 2013 14:31 +0000 Simon Howarth 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I always advise that the entire postcode should be considered personal
> data unless it can be satisfactorily proven otherwise. There are a great
> many rural postcodes that have only one or two abodes which means that
> identification is made easy. Even with half a dozen houses in a road, you
> have to be sure that there are enough people that small numbers does not
> come into play. It all amounts to disproportionate effort in most cases.
>
>
>
> In the case of my example "SH" - Michael is right that it could be
> personal data. However, the example was meant in isolation and may well
> be a bad one, don't let that red herring deflect from the real question.
> Sorry for my lack of exampular (new word? You heard it here first)
> thought.
>
>
>
> Simon.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ray Cooke
> Sent: 10 January 2013 11:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [data-protection] Addresses being personal data
>
>
>
> On the post code issue.  I had to consider release of a spreadsheet
> containing answers to survey questions with postcodes but no names.
>
>
>
> So I did some checks myself and found that just using an unsophisticated
> internet search, without subscribing to any service, it took me about 20
> minutes to identify a postcode with only two addresses and from that to
> identify the individual who had been surveyed and tie that identity to a
> whole host of their personal data.
>
>
>
> I declined to release the data on the basis that the postcodes could
> identify specific individuals.
>
>
>
>
> Ray Cooke
> Information Compliance Officer
> Oxford Brookes University
> Oxford Brookes Information Solutions
> Headington Campus
> Gipsy Lane
> Oxford, OX3 0BP
>
> tel: +44 (0)1865 484354 <tel:%2B44%20%280%291865%20484354>
> fax: +44 (0)1865 483330 <tel:%2B44%20%280%291865%20483330>
>
> www.brookes.ac.uk
>
>
>
> On 10 January 2013 10:27, Grimbaldus <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Taking Simon's argument further, if it is obvious from the content of the
> email that "SH" is Simon Howarth, perhaps by reference to an activity
> performed by Simon, then that email surely constitutes Personal Data.
>
> This discussion begs a number of related questions:
>
> 1) If the subject refers to "SH" and it is (as) obvious from other emails
> in the thread that this is Simon, does that email not constitute PD?
>
> 2) In such a situation, does the entire thread constitute PD?
>
> [Subject, of course, to the mainstream tests.]
>
> It will probably be necessary to read each email to determine this, which
> leads to question (3).
>
> 3) I have a situation at the moment where the Data Subject, an
> ex-employee, has requested those Personal Data in emails, including
> emails sent and received by themselves.  Their Inbox and Sent mailbox
> contain over 10,000 emails.  Because of limitations in the configuration
> of the email system itself, it is impractical to search through this
> number for the myriad content /subject references.  The emails are likely
> to contain
> commercially-sensitive information which is not PD, and which we would not
> wish to supply.  Further, the emails contain innumerable references to
> other parties.
>
> My current thoughts range among:
>
> a) inviting the DS in to read the file, with the stipulation either that
> notes cannot be taken or that any notes must be vetted before being taken
> away.
>
> b) claiming an exemption to supply under s8(2) by reason of
> disproportionate effort;
>
> c) asking the DS to identify the correspondents with whom their PD would
> have been included in emails (e.g. HR), but that would have to be named
> individuals or specific mailboxes.  In and of itself, this raises an issue
> of identifying an email from DS to another (or vv) in which some 'of the
> moment' biographical data was cited, e.g. "I'm in the office now if you
> want to call."
>
> Has anyone faced this challenge and what did ('would' for those who
> haven't) you do?
>
> Interestingly, the advice on disproportionate effort given by the ICO
> Helpline followed Durrant,
> /Ezsias/Elliott rather than the Code of Practice and established ICO
> interpretation of s8(2).
>
> 4) Staying with addresses, but turning to postal ones, what of a Post
> Code? Clearly, in the vast majority of instances a Post Code is not PD,
> but it could refer to a single property with single occupancy.  An LA
> might be able to identify that situation, but it is highly unlikely that
> (say) a retailer will have such information in their possession, or even
> be able to get it.
>
> So, to borrow a phrase, does the panel think that any Post Code need not
> be treated as PD *if* the Data Controller has no (easy) way to confirm the
> number of properties covered and the occupancy of those?
>
> It is clear from the posts on here that there is a world of difference
> between the ordered, detailed information held by public sector bodies
> about their 'customers' and the less-ordered, and variably dimensioned and
> formatted data held about customers in the retail sector.
>
> Many thx - Michael
>
>
> <snip>
>
>   _____
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>      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
>      If you wish to leave this list please send the command
>        leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
> All user commands can be found at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm  Any queries about sending
> or receiving messages please send to the list owner
> [log in to unmask]
>   Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
> needs         To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
> SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
>    (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>



Richard

http://www.bris.ac.uk/infosec

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     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
     If you wish to leave this list please send the command
       leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
 Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
              [log in to unmask]
  Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
        To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
         SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
   (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager