*/
Confidential client information stored in the ‘cloud’ could be accessed by US authorities, the Bar Council has warned.
The IT Panel issued advice in February to help ensure practitioners do not inadvertently infringe the Data Protection Act.
It explains that a combination of the US Patriot Act and other US laws confer powers on the American security services to access personal information stored on facilities provided by US persons or companies, without the knowledge or consent of their customers.
This occurs when the information is stored on computers owned directly or indirectly by US corporations, for example: where case files, emails and accounts are stored on cloud services; where files and administrative software is hosted externally as part of chambers’ back-up or disaster recovery plan; and where chambers use other miscellaneous IT services. Such information may be inadvertently disclosed to the US authorities.
Barristers were warned to check where legally privileged and confidential information is stored, whether any company which stores professional information has US parentage, and if they could be subject to the provisions of the US Patriot Act, and to consider encrypting access to data placed on external servers.
Jacqueline Reid, Chair of the Bar Council IT Panel, said US laws confer considerable surveillance powers on US authorities.
‘Barristers routinely retain legally privileged information relating to their clients, and they should be aware that these surveillance powers can place the confidentiality and security of this highly confidential information at risk.’
Confidential client information stored in the ‘cloud’ could be accessed by US authorities, the Bar Council has warned.
The IT Panel issued advice in February to help ensure practitioners do not inadvertently infringe the Data Protection Act.
It explains that a combination of the US Patriot Act and other US laws confer powers on the American security services to access personal information stored on facilities provided by US persons or companies, without the knowledge or consent of their customers.
This occurs when the information is stored on computers owned directly or indirectly by US corporations, for example: where case files, emails and accounts are stored on cloud services; where files and administrative software is hosted externally as part of chambers’ back-up or disaster recovery plan; and where chambers use other miscellaneous IT services. Such information may be inadvertently disclosed to the US authorities.
Barristers were warned to check where legally privileged and confidential information is stored, whether any company which stores professional information has US parentage, and if they could be subject to the provisions of the US Patriot Act, and to consider encrypting access to data placed on external servers.
Jacqueline Reid, Chair of the Bar Council IT Panel, said US laws confer considerable surveillance powers on US authorities.
‘Barristers routinely retain legally privileged information relating to their clients, and they should be aware that these surveillance powers can place the confidentiality and security of this highly confidential information at risk.’
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
With gender earnings inequality at the Bar getting worse, not better, Judith Ayling KC discusses concrete solutions and collective action – including steps taken by the Personal Injuries Bar Association
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
