Category Archives: Third parties

Can you censor?

“China Censors Spark Uproar In Quashing Student Activist,” The Wall Street Journal, April 25, 2018 A7.  Students make a request for open records from the Peking University about 20-year old rape allegations. The government rejects it. And then slams a student who circulated a letter telling her story through social media.  And that story circulates.

It sure is hard to put the genie back in the bottle after information gets to the Internet.  Are your controls adequate?  How do you enforce them?  Even if you have a command and control culture?

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Access, Compliance, Controls, Duty, Governance, Government, Interconnections, Internal controls, IT, Oversight, Third parties, Who is in charge?

Complaints ain’t facts

“CFPB May Restrict Complaint Database,” The Wall Street Journal, April 25, 2018 A5. Government may restrict public access to a database of consumer complaints that haven’t been verified by the government.

All information is not equally reliable.  Does the government, by allowing people to post complaints, somehow vouch for the accuracy of those complaints?  Is the government in the business of publishing complaints, versus government findings?

Sure, it would be nice to have a central clearing house of complaints.  But is that the role of government?

Leave a comment

Filed under Access, Accuracy, Compliance, Controls, Data quality, Duty, Governance, Government, Information, Third parties

Administrative procedures

“EPA Limits Data Used in New Rules,” The Wall Street Journal April 25, 2018 A4. Underlying studies must be made public and the findings must be reproducible before research will be used to justify new regulations.

Does the government need to allow you an opportunity to contest the “facts” upon which regulations are issued?  Is it right for the US government to rely upon scientific studies that in turn rely on secret information in order to establish regulations?  Do the government need to independently validate information before taking regulatory action?   How can an opponent reasonably contest the wording and scope of a regulation if he/she can’t see the evidence?  Or if the evidence doesn’t prove what the scientist says it proves?

Is this about information, or governance, or information governance?  More than one?

Leave a comment

Filed under Access, Accuracy, Controls, Data quality, Duty, Duty of Care, Governance, Government, Internal controls, Oversight, Third parties

Barriers to entry

“Europe’s New Consumer Privacy Law Gives Edge to Tech Giants,” The Wall Street Journal April 24, 2018 A1.  The General Data Protection Regulation, which goes into effect next month, protects consumers but also gives Google and Facebook an advantage.

By wielding their power over advertisers and taking a strict interpretation of the law, Facebook and Google can make it really difficult for competitors to establish competing platforms.

Is this what the European regulators anticipated?

Leave a comment

Filed under Access, Compliance, Controls, Corporation, Duty, Governance, Privacy, Requirements, Third parties, Vendors

Google this

“Google’s Practices Threaten Privacy, Too,” The Wall Street Journal, April 23, 2018 B1. Google’s practices may expose more information related to you.

What is you information worth to you?  What is it worth to someone else?  Who profits? What controls are in place and how effective are they?

Do you read their policies?  Do you care?

Leave a comment

Filed under Access, Analytics, Controls, Information, Ownership, Privacy, Third parties, Uncategorized, Value

Catching up

I was out of town for a bit, and am now catching up  So this will deviate from the usual one-story, one-post format.  19 squibs.

“ISS Opposes Five Equifax Directors,” The Wall Street Journal, April 17, 2018 B2.  A proxy advisor recommends against voting for members of the Board’s technology committee, who had responsibility for technology security.  Is that all that happens, they get fired?  157 millions accounts exposed and they get un-elected but not (yet) sued?  No claw-back of director’s fees?

“Facebook Data Dispute Embroils University of Cambridge,” The Wall Street Journal, April 16, 2018 B4. Cambridge says Facebook approved of the University’s use of Facebook data.  Or your data, if you wish.

“Fired FBI No.2 McCabe Misled Probe, Report Says,” The Wall Street Journal, April 14, 2018 A1.  Misleading an internal investigation into leak to the newspaper is not good.

“Volkswagen Prepares to Replace CEO, The Wall Street Journal, April 11, 2018 B1.  CEO who help VW survive the emissions scandal gets replaced. A palace coup after the company spent $25 billion+ on the scandal.  Is this more price for VW to pay?  And let’s not forget the shareholders, who foot the bill.  See also “VW Picks Chief After Boardroom Coup,” The Wall Street Journal, April 13, 2018 B1.

“Blunder Hits Samsung Securities,” The Wall Street Journal, April 11, 2018 B13. An employee’s mistake leads to mistaken issuance of $105 billion in shares, more than 30 times the company’s existing issued shares.  Do you have the right controls in place?  Is this an information governance issue?

“Facebook Hearings Put Regulation In Spotlight,” The Wall Street Journal, April 12, 2018 A1. Will the Facebook data leak/usage lead to new privacy regulation?

“Adviser Urges Shift On Board Of Equifax,” The Wall Street Journal, April 12, 2018 B10.  Does the company’s failure to avoid a cyber attack mean the board has to go?  Maybe.

“China’s Censors Zero In on Apps,” The Wall Street Journal, April 12, 2018 B4.  Chinese government extends control over a smartphone app that had crude jokes.  Now there’s enforcement of a policy, and a demonstration of what “governance” means.

“Zuckerberg Says Sorry for Harm Done,” The Wall Street Journal, April 10, 2018 B4.  Classic crisis management strategy:  admit you’re wrong?

“Sensing Urgency, Facebook Bolsters User Protections,” The Wall Street Journal, April 10, 2018 B5.  Locking the door after the horse bolted.

“Facebook Sets ‘Issue’ Ads Rule,” The Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2018 A1.  Does a background check on advertisers protect your privacy?

“YouTube Policies Stir Bitterness,” The Wall Street Journal, April 6, 2018 B1.  Following attack at YouTube HQ, taking a closer look at YouTube’s policies on filtering/restricting content.

“Facebook CEO: Lax Privacy a ‘Huge Mistake,'” The Wall Street Journal, April 5, 2018 A1.  Not focusing on privacy protections a “huge mistake.”  Really?

“Police Want to Send AI Into the Street,” The Wall Street Journal, April 4, 2018 A3.  Can body cams be used to collect “Person of Interest”-level information, real time?

“WPP’s Sorrell Faces Probe,” The Wall Street Journal, April 4, 2018 B1.  CEO of advertising company under internal investigation for misusing company assets.  It’s really just a question of duty.

“GM Scraps a Standard in Sales Reporting,” The Wall Street Journal, April 3, 2018 B1.  You manage what you measure.  So, no longer reporting this statistic will reportedly make it easier to measure performance.  Huh?

“Oracle Defeats Google In Court,” The Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2018 B1. Appeals court revives copyright infringement suit against Google.  $9 billion+ in damages alleged.

“Wedbush Accused Of Flawed Oversight,” The Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2018 B12.  SEC charges company with failure to properly supervise an employee involved in “long-running ‘pump-and-dump’ scheme.”

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Accuracy, Board, Communications, Compliance, Compliance, Compliance (General), Controls, Corporation, Culture, Directors, Duty, Duty of Care, Employees, Governance, Information, Internal controls, Investor relations, Oversight, Oversight, Ownership, Ownership, Policy, Privacy, Protect information assets, Security, Third parties, Value

Privacy is dead; suspect under arrest

I don’t know what the record is for consecutive days on which one company’s screw-up was on the front page of The Wall Street  Journal, but Facebook is in the running.

“U.S., States Step Up Pressure on Facebook,” The Wall Street Journal, March 27, 2018 A1.  “[F]ederal regulators [including the FTC] … and 37 state attorneys general demanding explanations for [Facebook’s privacy] practices.” Stock price up 0.4% (when the market was up 669.40 points).  Demands/invitations that Zuckerberg (and Google and Twitter) testify before Congress.  And Europe hasn’t weighted in yet.

There is also a pop-up that describes FB’s practice of logging some calls and texts from Android phones.  Did you (we) know that?  Do you know what companies are doing with “your” data?  Do you care?  Privacy is dead; Facebook investigated as person of interest.

I guess that answers the question of who’s in charge:  the Feds and the states.  I guess I missed the outrage when essentially the same data was collected and used quite effectively by the Obama campaign.

Leave a comment

Filed under Compliance, Compliance (General), Controls, Corporation, Duty, Duty of Care, Governance, Government, Information, Internal controls, Legal, Oversight, Ownership, Privacy, Protect assets, Requirements, Third parties, Vendors, Who is in charge?