Alex Heshmaty considers the data protection implications of use of smart doorbells following the recent county court judgment.
Topic: I3 Information rights and privacy
GDPR fines: implications of the WhatsApp decision
Alex Heshmaty of Legal Words looks at the implications of the European Data Protection Board’s recent WhatsApp decision.
Pegasus spyware scandal: what lawyers need to know
Back in April 2021 I wrote an article for this newsletter about the Sunburst cyberattack, referencing a blog from Microsoft President Brad Smith in which he warned that mercenary-style technology companies, known as private sector offensive actors (PSOAs), are increasingly selling hacking tools to nation states. He specifically urged the US administration to take action […]
UK mass surveillance breaches the ECHR
In the wake of the 2013 Edward Snowden affair, in which a former contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA) revealed that mass surveillance programmes were being operated by the UK and US intelligence services, a collection of journalists and human rights organisations brought a case against the UK government, challenging the bulk interception of […]
State sponsored cyberattacks: what lawyers need to know
Alex Heshmaty updates us on recent state-sponsored cyberattacks and outlines how lawyers can help.
Mitigating the risks of cyber attacks from remote working
John Goss at 5 Essex Court considers the risks of cyber attacks from remote working and how they can be mitigated.
The Digital Services Act: changing the rules of business
Ian Whitehurst of Exchange Chambers outlines the provisions of the EU’s Digital Services Act and how this is about change the rules of business
Key data protection challenges for 2021
Eduardo Ustaran of Hogan Lovells considers the key data protection challenges we will face in 2021
Employee monitoring software: is it legal?
Joanne Frears and Belinda Lester of Lionshead Law consider the use of employee monitoring software
Police use of facial recognition
Chrysilla de Vere of Clarkslegal considers the recent CA judgment on police use of facial recognitio