GrumbleDook

I like the look of it but had to read the T&Cs via google translate as they are in French. Presuming that this is a fault and there is a full English version, I'll give it a go. I've been looking for a decent app to help sync to cloud backup. I use to use LiveDrive but the MacOS App became so flaky that unless I rebooted once a week it would first hog all my memory and then throttle itself so that you could only upload about 50 meg a day!

So are you saying they will or won't do these actions? Have I misread a comment when it should have been taken as sarcasm? If sarcasm then fine, but I get frustrated with people saying the T&Cs mean a certain thing and then fail to give evidence of it. Apologies if the frustration is wrongly expressed.

Again, references for all three?

Are you talking about their legal requirements to work with enforcement agencies or are yu referring to a specific section in the T&Cs where they say something about sharing with commercial partners, etc? Either way ... please reference.

Don't worry about old guard / new blood ... otherwise it will turn into a 3 Yorkshireman sketch (the 4th Yorkshireman went to work in London with @Domino of course). People will talk about how they had to knit their own thick Ethernet cable and who had to use Tractor tyres as platters in hard drives.

To be honest, if I had sent something like that out I would have been carpeted by the NCC Chief Exec and the DCS. I know we put out some interesting stuff at times .. but that one was just bizarre. The lack of logos, links, etc also makes me query the authenticity ... but no-one has turned round and slammed it yet so ...

Model clauses are not affected. Already had that chat with ICO Helpline. It was in relation to O365 but works for others using them too.

To be honest, and I have shared this with the Exa employee involved, there are lots of ways stuff gets caught and I really do find that the news article is blatantly bashing without having all the facts (which no-one does it seems). I've sat on that side of the fence, the same as Dos_Box, and seen emails get marked as spam. I've seen some folk get mightily upset about it and accuse individuals (including me) of doing it on purpose ... when it has been automated systems doing the blocking. Without knowing the LGfL infrastructure, there are a number of ways where emails in other locations would get the domain (or sending servers) blocked. It happens ... it is a pain to root out the cause and sometimes it is a fine point that the use of RBLs is a double-edged sword. You get this with large scale web filters too, where a site gets blocked because of a recategorisation. Heck, EduGeek was blocked in 4 RBCs for several months at one point (in spite of some of the RBC staff trying to stop it from happening) and it took intervention at a senior level to sort! I tend to prefer Hanlon's Law - Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Some of that stupidity is the way IT systems work ... Do I think that there should be more competition? Yes ... but I also think that schools should be educated about the choices they make and the educational benefits they get from those choices. At the moment there is no-one truly independent in this ... and high pressure sales (which comes from all sides) is a problem, not just for broadband but for other areas too.

Translation - There are lots of legal and politic things that need to be worked through so whilst we do that don't stress. If you do have to change we will advise you. However, the advice from the IT folk at that LA in London is not as daft as it seems. Whilst it is not a case that you should panic, it is a case that you should twice about starting to use services that you have not used before if they were previously covered by Safe Harbor. It looks like the ICO has only said don't make changes ... nothing about there being no risk if you deciding whether to start using such services.

Had an Apple Engineer on the other day. Running some diagnostics, I opened up a terminal session. AE: Soon have this Bashed out GD: Oh yes we Shell. AE: hopefully there will be no Awk-ward wait GD: The less Sed about that the better. AE: It will be good to get a Finger on the problem. GD: Man, we could go all day like this AE: well, we had better Halt before we Kill the flow. Not quite waving chickens ... but good fun.

46 on first look .... Hmmm ... Going to be a fun weekend on that one.

Flat networks? But why? As others have said, there is no security reason that cannot be covered elsewhere. If the LA is only looking after the admin side of your network and so have to restrict the machines on there, then it is false economy. I spent years trying to break schools of this in Northants and thankfully the various external support teams there were switched on ...

Always pays to keep the boss happy.

I'm going to be a rebel ... I vote for ... TEAM AL!!!!

Afternoon all Had a query from a friend about the National Schools Procurement Database from Kaltz. I vaguely remember seeing it many moons ago, but do people still use or rate it?

Would love to gate crash if there is a meet up.

This ruling has nothing to do with any part of the US Judiciary requesting data held overseas. This ruling as about the safety and security of data that has been transferred to, and then held in, the US. Data cannot be transferred without consent (unless covered by transfer due to EU laws), which is one of the reasons there is a new pact for transfer of data between enforcement agencies (which covers the EU laws bit), and also why Microsoft are fighting the case tooth and nail. Jokingly, one person said to me a few months back that it would make more sense for a number of US companies to move to EU, and then just play EU and US off against each other. Starting to think that is what is happening already. This is politics at this point.

No, not all email is unsecured.

Did you read the above blog post from Microsoft? A lot has changed over the years.

To some extent this supersedes that demand to release the data. The recent pact between authorities in EU and US on data exchange during investigations was to partly deal with the judicial demand, but now this ruling basically means that if it hasn't gone via the new pact then a company would be in serious trouble in the EU if the data is transferred. To some extent the Model Clauses are there to patch up the failings of the Safe Harbor Framework, and it is almost a case that the US judicial system is in complete denial that there are other rules .. and better rules at that! Anyone would think that this is now also getting political ... :-) I have had a chat with the ICO helpline and they have some clear guidance for schools on this, but I can't respond yet.

Having sat in on staff disciplinary sessions as an Independant Member, I can say that some schools are good at dealing with it. Policies and procedures should be backed up by information and training. Personal accounts are a big no-no for school business as there is no accountability ... for those areas where clear accountability and audit trail is needed! Your EG account? A very minor risk and policies on professional conduct when 'representing' the school should deal with that. Using personal accounts to share files? A big risk and should be squashed asap. Read my article on Dropbox to understand some of that. Localzuk has covered the questions so far, but I am puzzled why people think that dealing with this is problem. Schools that are rubbishy on data protection ... It will make no difference to them. They are still rubbish. Maybe the high profile story can help change things? Schools that are good will have done due diligence and chosen someone doing more than just relying on Safe Harbor.

Yep, the 'opinion' that was released previously was for guidance ... and it has been pretty much taken on completely (including the rephrasing). https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2015/10/ico-response-to-ecj-ruling-on-personal-data-to-us-safe-harbor/ is the latest statement from the ICO and I know that lawyers, etc. are working away on this for the big names. Until I have firm advice on this anything I state will just be opinion, so I will leave it a bit until things are firmed up.

And to resurrect an old thread ... Facebook data transfers threatened by Safe Harbour ruling - BBC News This will run for some time but the position is about transfer of data outside of the EEA.

Safe Harbor is going to take a hell of a beating over the next year, but it is mainly politics that is going on. The recent pact for law enforcement to share data is one thing but this is going to cause all sorts of problems, especially for the ruling on whether data can be subpoenaed when held overseas Microsoft 'must release' data held on Dublin server - BBC News Advice from experts for a number of years has been to complete some form of risk assessment when using a company via the Safe Harbor scheme. The most basic form of this is to see what they qualify as data in their entry in the register. An example would be a company that covers process of payment data ... doesn't cover data stored in files you host with them. This is why EEA or UK sovereignty is important to a number of organisations. This will run for some time (appeals, etc) but at this point, I would advise people to investigate how much data goes overseas and how much stays with UK and/or EEA. Measure the risk, try to work out what you would do if you *have* to change, and let your SLT know that there *could* be an issue further down the line. As always, make a call to the ICO helpline for initial advice but be prepared for a holding answer as they are unlikely to have a firm grasp on this as it is so new.

A very good job but with some horrendous targets, relying on some external contractors. I know a few folk applying and it is very high calibre ... good luck for those who get through to the sorting hat phase!