pcstru

Schools send exam collateral to exam boards which may be written exam papers or electronic submissions on digital media. There is little doubt that the contents identify unique living individuals and so constitute personal data under both the DPA and the GDPR. Items are sent to exam boards essentially by registered mail. Last year the ICO fined Greater Manchester Police £150,000 for a witness statement that went missing. The ICO said : While a witness statement might have more of a detrimental impact on the data subject than the loss of an exam paper, such a loss could still be detrimental and have impacts on the data subject themselves. Someone has a duty of care to make sure there is adequate protections. Here when I have raised the issue with the head, the response is basically "well, everyone is doing it so it must be OK". Are any other fellow edugeekers concerned that this is a risk in plain sight and that we should be working with exam boards to ensure that data is given appropriate protection in transit? Also, who in the case of this data is the data controller - the exam board or the school?

We generally use 8 1Gb ports on 2 cards with each card ports split between two vSwitches, one for the main/management network, one for the Storage Network. If either card fails, the host will keep talking to both networks but the (potential) bottleneck will shrink.

Sorry to read your choices have resulted in tears but at least the solution to that is entirely within your control. That would be like a supplier having submitted a price and then, when told they have not won, saying they can do it cheaper if only we will let them submit another quote! To be fair in that situation, I'd have to go back to all the other suppliers and give them an opportunity to re-play. I wonder if I allowed such a thing, how then I would ever get anything done as I'd just be constantly re-running the tender over and over again? I think at that point, the tears would all be mine! Not difficult and it instantly tells me whether it is worth picking the the phone or if I need to keep looking. I can search and evaluate a handful or two of products from supplier websites in the time it takes to talk to one (and that is if they are on point and not chatty), so my first pass is always going to be the website and if it doesn't have any pricing on, I just move onto one that does. Then I have a small list of suppliers who have a high likelihood of being worth spending the time taking to. I suspect others on my side of the counter will work in similar ways.

I'd slap another tab into the workbook and use that for some lookup tables, so the attributes map to the short AR code or if they are false, to an empty cell (or if the AR code is looking for position, mat to a space to pad). You could possibly do this all in one table - no need for separate tables for SEN - T and FSM - T. I'd then use the table in a VLookup and then concatenate the mapped values for the final column. I'd then cut and paste "values", remove unwanted columns and finally spit out a CSV.

No need to apologise, it just means you are less likely to get our business because you make it take more effort than some of your competitors to find out if a particular device is feasible given our budget. If loosing business because putting a range "From £450-£800 depending on configuration" is too difficult, then that is your choice. There are enough suppliers that do make the information easily available that I don't have to worry about those that don't. I'm currently looking for around 200 units, just to give you an idea on what you have missed out on this time round. :-)

Another website with no pricing information - which is just annoying. So how much were yours?

We bought one a number of years ago for the heads PA. She seemed to like it and find it useful but she is also very competent and quick at shorthand, so passed it onto someone who has unfortunately now left, so I can't ask them nor can I find the pen.

Yes, differs by version, these links should help you get started : Deleting a Specific Email from Entire Organization in Exchange 2010 - CareExchange.in https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/exchange/2010/10/27/removing-specific-messages-from-your-exchange-server/

Anyone looked at any of the Open Source solutions?

dd-wrt has some facilities for handoff to a captive portal. Here we use pfsense as a backend to a Meru provisioned SID. We just use the page for AUP agreement, access is controlled by vouchers.

Death of Stalin. Armando Iannucci's rapid fire satire of the death of Stalin and power struggle among the soviet central committee. Very good.

In terms of DPA, the law says : "Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data." IMO that means you should do both. You should have good policy that informs them about Data Protection issues and you should ensure your users understand and accept the consequences of any technical measures, i.e. remote device wipe etc. What is more difficult is the way apps can interact with data on a device. So if you have (say) whatsapp and it starts processing your contacts and inviting you to add them as whatsapp contacts; strictly speaking that should be a breach of DPA. IMO it is questionable that users can be entirely responsible for this. In the same way as we need to warn them of device wipe, we need to be aware of the potential consequences and deal sensibly with the risks.

Sequential gearboxes tend to just be a bit ... fussy, especially on Motorbikes around the 1st/2nd/Neutral. I usually find releasing the clutch to the bite point and then trying to engage or disengage the gear does the trick. Each bike you own will train you on it's individual needs (I've yet to have one that wasn't sometimes fussy around 1st/neutral, some are worse than others).

Personally, I would suggest just trying to be reasonable. Staff should be aware that if they do receive a request, who they need to pass it on to. If you have a communications policy, that might well recommend or require staff to set an appropriate "out of office" notification. Your FOI policy & published information can certainly guide people as to how they can make a request (but it cannot demand). All of that could be helpful if a complaint were made. Someone making a request by sending it to a cleaner who they know does not speak English via email which is never checked, isn't going to be rewarded by having an organisation hung out to dry. Their complaint is likely to result in the request simply landing with the correct person and the organisation then being allowed a fair chance to respond to it.

Not sure how that relates to the question which seemed to be "can you require someone to use a specific means of communication to make a request". That seemed to be looking to mitigate a risk associated with not responding to a SAR or FOI request in the prescribed time. You cannot require someone to make a request using a specific email address and then say "we didn't respond because you did not follow OUR policy and procedure". It doesn't matter where you publish your policy and procedure; it does not, cannot, and will never override rights people have, that have been given to them by law.