BrochuresCartoon

Amberhawk
COURSES (BCS/ISEB)
follow link for detail

Data Protection Training

London: Foundation
Sept 29,30,Oct 1

Leeds: Practitioner
Starts Oct. 13th

Edinburgh: Practitioner
Starts Nov 2nd

London: Practitioner
Starts Nov 16th

FOI Training
London: Practitioner
Starts Oct 6th

Information Security Management Training (CISMP)
London: Foundation
Starts Dec. 1st

Training/Update/Events
Update: Oct 19th
DP Regulation: Sept 28th
PIA: Sept 23rd
DP Audit: Sept 24th

Amberhawk

« Spot the terrorist? Data protection and the seizure of personal data on laptops at airports. | Main | A “Jacobs” question: “should CESG be independent of GCHQ?” »

28/08/2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Can anyone explain why the data processors used by Scottish Borders local authorities for over 20 years, who dumped the files in a rubbish bin, have been protected from public identity throughout this entire saga? The ICO referred to them as "GS" in their penalty notice as did the written tribunal judgement. Three separate FOI requests to the council were all rejected on the grounds it was personal information and could not be revealed.My own FOI to the ICO also resulted in the information being withheld. Surely the data processor should have been fined/sanctioned then been named publicly.

The comments to this entry are closed.

All materials on this website are the copyright of Amberhawk Training Limited, except where otherwise stated. If you want to use the information on the blog, all we ask is that you do so in an attributable manner.