Security concerns and the need to increase cyber security measures have recently boosted the use of Bring Your Own Device policies in France. Recent events have exacerbated fears of data breaches and hacking for IT managers who were not overly concerned before. As a consequence, IT security teams are seeking to apply the same security and device management systems that apply to their own company’s equipment to employees’ devices when employees use their devices for work purposes. The expansion of an employer’s control over its employees’ devices raises concerns for the privacy and protection of employees’ personal data. The CNIL has published new guidelines on BYOD. An unofficial English translation of the guidelines appear in this post.
The chairwoman of the French data protection authority (the CNIL), Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, has long been an outspoken proponent that companies should have internal accountability mechanisms for data protection compliance. On January 13, 2015 the CNIL published a standard defining what accountability means in practice. Companies that demonstrate that they comply with the new standard will be able to obtain an “accountability seal” from the CNIL.
Following on the heels of the IAPP Congress in Brussels, the CNIL’s (the French data protection authority) international chief, Florence Raynal, engaged in a dialogue with the members of the American Chamber of Commerce’s Digital Economy Committee in France. Raynal engaged with AmCham members on questions relating to the EU-US Safe Harbor framework, focusing on the practicalities of onward transfers. The discussion involved two kinds of transfers.
On November 12, 2014, the CNIL issued a new compliance pack for the insurance sector drafted in collaboration with the sector trade associations. Compliance packs are a new tool that the CNIL has been promoting for the past few months as an operational response to the needs of professionals concerning the application of the French data protection law. The CNIL has previously published compliance packs about electric “smart meters” and about social housing. Two new compliance packs are already announced to be published soon: one about banking activities and one about social services.
Addressing the French Parliamentary Commission on Digital Rights, CNIL and Article 29 Working Party Chair Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin commented on the current state of negotiations of the proposed European General Data Protection Regulation, warning that excessive reliance on a risk-based approach could undermine fundamental rights. A risk analysis is useful as a guide to allocate resources, but should not affect the underlying rights of the data subject, she said. To illustrate her point, Falque-Pierrotin used the analogy of a home owner who lives in a part of the city where burglaries are frequent. The risk-based approach means that the home owner will buy more locks for doors, and that police authorities may devote more resources to patrolling. It does not mean, however, that home owners have different rights depending on where they live. Falque-Pierrotin is concerned that the current negotiations on the risk-based approach may confuse these two concepts, leading to a situation where individuals’ rights are reduced or ignored for low-risk processing.
The French data protection authority has announced that following the “cookie sweep day” due to take place the week commencing 15 September 2014, it will launch a program of website audits in October to verify compliance with the CNIL’s 5 December 2013 cookie recommendations.
Three weeks after the FTC’s seminar on Consumer Generated and Controlled Health Data, the French data protection authority, the CNIL, held its own workshop on connected health and wellness devices. This blog post summarizes the results of the CNIL workshop.
The CNIL, France’s data protection authority, published on 25 February 2014 a new recommendation relating to the collection of credit card information, replacing an older 2003 recommendation. The new recommendation, which represents a de facto standard for online merchants and payment services providers who collect data from French consumers, is more prescriptive than the old, particularly regarding how online merchants should seek consent for the retention of credit card information.
The French data protection authority has just published an amended version of its standard authorization for professional whistleblowing helplines which results in a significant broadening of its scope but also tightens the requirements for anonymous reporting. Under French data protection legislation, whistleblowing helplines are subject to prior authorization by the French data protection authority. Indeed, French data protection legislation require that processes which may result in the exclusion of a person from the benefit of a right or a contract are subject to prior authorization, as could be the case when resorting to a whistleblowing helpline (employees may incur sanctions and be terminated).
Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, the recently reelected president of the French Data Protection Authority, the CNIL, was elected today to head the Article 29 Working Party for two years effective immediately.
In June 2013, the French National Commission on Information Technology and Liberties announced that, following a question of Member of European Parliament Françoise Castex, it was going to investigate IP Tracking practices that e-commerce sites allegedly used to illegitimately increase their prices. This investigation was carried out in close connection with the French Directorate General for Competition Policy, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control. In January 2013, MEP Françoise Castex had already alerted the European Commission about this alleged unfair commercial practice. The Commission concluded that national authorities in charge of protecting personal data were competent as the IP address is personal data.
France’s December 18, 2013 law on military spending contains two provisions that facilitate the collection of data by the French military and intelligence services. The first provision relates to the collection of passenger name records (PNRs) while the second, more controversial provision permits French intelligence and security agencies to collect metadata from telecom operators and hosting providers in real time.
In a decision of 16 December, the French data protection authority (the “CNIL”) issued new recommendations with regards to the appropriate fashion in which businesses should implement the so-called “cookie consent law”.
On 14 October, the Article 29 Working Party of EU data protection commissioners published a Working Document providing guidance on obtaining consent for cookies, some eighteen months after the effective date of the so-called “cookie consent law” which required EU websites to obtain consent from Internet users before before placing cookies on their devices. The document analyses, to some extent, the practices more commonly used by website operators to obtain the required consent, and attempts to answer the question as to what measures would “be legally compliant for a website operating across all EU Member States.”
On Monday, a European Parliament Inquiry established to investigate the recent U.S. National Security Agency surveillance revelations indicated that its final report would recommend suspension of the popular EU-U.S. Safe Harbor Framework.
Price discrimination based on tracking of Internet Protocol addresses – numerical identifiers assigned to devices that are connected to the Internet – was in the news again this week after a Belgian Member of the European Parliament, Marc Tarabella, called for action from the European Commission to investigate the practice.
On June 11, the French Minister for Digital Economy indicated during questioning by a French Member of Parliament about the status of the draft data protection regulation that the Minister of Justice had rejected, during the meeting of the European Council held last week, the latest version of the draft regulation.
On April 23, the French data protection authority, the CNIL (Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés), published its annual report for 2012, emphasizing a significant increase in complaints, audits, and sanctions. In this blog post, we review each of these topics addressed by the CNIL’s report.
The German publication, Zeitschrift fur Datenschutz, has just published a piece authored by Christopher Wolf, director of the global Privacy and Information Management practice, entitled “A Critical Time for the EU Data Protection Regulation.” The article highlights issues that have been raised about the proposed Regulation, described as “real and substantial.” The point of the piece is […]
France’s data protection authority, the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL), released on November 14, 2012 English-language versions of its compliance guides for businesses. The first guide, “Methodology for Privacy Risk Management”, provides a step-by-step guide for identifying risks and prioritising remedial actions. The second guide, “Measures for the Privacy Risk Treatment“, provides practical guidance on […]
CNIL’s recently-released annual report gives insight from France’s authority into sanctions, the right to be forgotten, whistleblowing, and what it believes are several shortcomings in the proposed EU regulation.
The French CNIL’s new guidelines on cloud computing revisit the tricky question of whether a cloud provider is a data processor or a data controller under French data protection law. The CNIL’s guidelines contain seven recommendations for cloud customers, and a list of recommended contractual clauses. The CNIL points out that when the cloud provider is located in a non-European country “local government authorities can send requests to the provider to have access to the data.”
Are BCRs the key to global interoperability? Some think so at the IAPP London conference. This post discusses opinions from conference presenters — will BCRs will become more and more popular as corporations implement new accountability measures, or will they fade under the weight of continued bureaucracy?