Gaduh Data Facebook

This post was first published by Indonesian Daily Harian Republika in its Op-ed column on Monday, 26 March 2018. Reproduced here for educational and non-commercial purposes.

Oleh: Sonny Zulhuda

Berita terungkapnya penggunaan data 50 juta pengguna Facebook di Amerika Serikat (AS) menambah panjang daftar keresahan dan keluhan masyarakat internasional terhadap media sosial yang dipimpin oleh Mark Zuckerberg itu.

Terungkap, data tersebut digunakan konsultan pemilu Cambridge Analytica di AS untuk menganalisa pola dan kecenderungan warga calon pemilih di Pemilu AS. Perusahaan ini juga dianggap menyukseskan kemenangan Donald Trump pada Pemilu 2016 lalu.

Walaupun sepak terjang konsultan Pemilu sudah sering kita dengar, kali ini kita mendapatkan fakta gamblang bagaimana analisis big data dilakukan terhadap jutaan calon pemilih dengan tujuan melakukan pemetaan pemilih serta penyebaran propaganda peserta pemilu secara langsung ke sasaran.

Gambaran mudahnya, jika dalam pilkada daerah X diketahui sejumlah besar warga pemilih dalam di wilayah itu menyukai sepakbola, maka sang konsultan akan mengemas si cagub atau cabup sebagai seorang yang gemar sepakbola serta mengusung agenda terkait sepak bola untuk bahan kampanyenya.

Yang menjadi kegundahan dan kegaduhan adalah data analytics tersebut dilakukan berdasarkan data pribadi pengguna media sosial yang sebelumnya tidak pernah diberitahu bahwa datanya akan dipakai untuk keperluan komersial oleh konsultan pemilu itu.

Dalam konteks etika dan hukum, hal ini bisa dianggap breach of confidence atau breach of privacy, semacam pelanggaran atas privasi dan kerahasiaan yang bisa mengakibatkan kesalahan perdata bahkan pidana.

Apalagi, kita tahu data pribadi kita di Facebook bisa sangat menyeluruh. Mulai dari identitas (nama, tanggal lahir, nomor KTP/Jaminan sosial); data historis (asal daerah, pendidikan, pekerjaan, karier); data geografis (tempat tinggal, perjalanan, komunikasi); biologis (gambar wajah dan anatomi tubuh yang memaparkan tinggi dan berat badan, wana kulit, rambut dan mata); sampai data lainnya, seperti preferensi, anggota keluarga, pilihan politik, pertemanan dan lain-lain.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Personal Data Protection Law in Indonesia: The Law No. 11/2008 (“UU-ITE”) and its Amendment in 2016

By: Sonny Zulhuda

wonderful indonesiaIndonesia slowly emerges to put some regulations in place pertaining to the cyberspace activities. Few laws and regulations now come up that address personal data protection (PDP). In this first post, I would like to highlight some rules of personal data protection law as found in the first Indonesian cyberlaw, i.e. Law on e-Information and e-Transaction.

Law No. 11/2008 (“UU-ITE”)

First is the “Undang-undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik” (popularly known as UU-ITE in Indonesian) or the Law No. 11 Year 2008 on the Electronic Information and Electronic Transaction (“Law No. 11/2008”).

This Law only has one section that addresses the issues of informational privacy or personal data protection, namely section 26. I had written some comments on this provision in my previous blog. In sum, section 26(1) provides for a general rule that consent is required whenever personal data is being electronically “used” (instead of “processed” – see my comments below). Section 26(2) provides that any breach or infringement of section 26(1) can be a basis for remedies.

Article 26 of the Law No. 11/2008 on the Electronic Information and Electronic Transaction (UU-ITE) stipulates that:

(1) Otherwise stipulated by the laws and regulations, the use of any information by means of electronic media relating to someone’s personal data shall be carried out with the approval from the person concerned.

(2) Every person whose privacy right is infringed upon as referred to in clause(1), may file a law-suit [action-added] for the loss incurred based on this Law. (As translated by the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology).

Meanwhile, the statutory elucidation of the Act explains that this provision is an acknowledgement of the privacy right protection. It goes on explaining that, the meaning of privacy right includes the following:

  1. A right to enjoy a private life free from interference;
  2. A right to communicate with other persons free from spying/surveillance;
  3. A right to access to information about his private life and private information.

Continue reading

Ransomware Attack: How a PDP law compliance can be of any help

By: Sonny Zulhuda

Ransomware

No! We are not talking about how to cure a ransomware attack such as “WannaCry” after it happens. That is not going to happen. Legal compliance is, from the perspective of business continuity and data disaster management, always at the “preventive” side rather than “curative” or “recovery” domain. Just like how technically a data backup is more preventive rather than reactive.

Then, are we saying that complying with Personal Data Protection law is going to prevent incidents like ransomware attack? Not necessarily true. But obviously, by keeping yourself updated about legal requirements pertaining to personal data protection, you will activate a “standby” mode.

Complying with the legal requirements on data protection such as Data Security and Data Retention standards, for example, people in your organisation are made aware that some security measures had to be put in place to protect the personal data system, which often overlaps with other database or information systems in your organisation: payroll system, human resources system, financial system, CRM system, and so on, because in each of those there are personal data of data subjects that you or your organisation process/processes.

That is why, a compliance with PDP law such as the Malaysian Personal Data Protection Act 2010, can be a gateway to better data protection in your organisation from unwanted attacks or other risks to the data integrity and security. In fact, the PDPA 2010 hints that a data due diligence

In fact, the PDPA 2010 hints that a data due diligence such as your data risk management that you conduct in your organisation will not only mitigate the risk to data attack but also will be your “legal defence” in case such attack takes place despite your mitigating measures. This is what transpires from the provisions of the PDPA 2010.

So, the equation is not complicated:

Data due diligence = legal compliance + risk management = legal defence

Good luck! 🙂

Readings on SOSMA 2012 and the Electronic Monitoring Devices

By: Sonny Zulhuda

emd-sample-ag-250813

Electronic tagging is a form of surveillance which uses an electronic device (a tag) fitted to the person. It is commonly used as a form of electronically monitored punishment for people who have been sentenced to electronic monitoring by a court, or required to wear a tag upon release from prison. The use of electronic monitoring devices in Malaysia has been first introduced by the  Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA) (Act 747). This article sourced few online reading materials relating to the use of electronic monitoring devices vis a vis the SOSMA. Therefore the similar concerns under the new amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) 2012 are beyond the ambit of this survey.

In December 2015, Bernama reported that more than 200 people detained under the Prevention of Crime Act (POCA) have been strapped with an electronic monitoring device (EMD), quoting the Federal CID director, Datuk Seri Mohmad Salleh as saying. Salleh added that this effort was taken to monitor the movements of those people (apparently upon release – added), as well as to test the effectiveness of the device. Based on the similar report by Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed, the Home Deputy Minister, those who were detained under POCA include mainly those involved in gangsterism, violent crimes, property crimes as well as drug-related crimes. The report can be read here.

A similar provision on the use of EMD is also found in the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). In section 7(1), the SOSMA provides for special procedures relating to the electronic monitoring device. It prescribes that, upon application by the Public Prosecutor under section 4 (which provides for the arrest and detention of a person believed to be involved in security offences), the Court shall order the person to be attached with an electronic monitoring device for a period as the Court may determine but which shall not exceed the remainder of the period of detention allowed under subsection 4(5) for purposes of investigation. Section 4(5) of SOSMA grants the maximum of extension to 28 days after the initial 24 hours of detention for the purpose of investigation.

Continue reading

Developing Privacy-Friendly Mobile Apps: Takeaways for Mobile Developers

By: Sonny Zulhuda

Image credit: computerworld.com

Image credit: computerworld.com (click on the image for full display)

This week (28th Aug) I will be participating in a national event dedicated for the modern digital lifestyle in Malaysia, named KL CONVERGE! which runs from 27th-29th August 2015 at Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre (KLCC) in the heart of the Malaysia’s capital. Visit the site here: http://www.klconverge.my/.

As the site highlights, KL CONVERGE! is a multi-platform digital content and creative industry event showcasing the world’s latest achievements and opportunities in the music, film, gaming and Internet space. It seeks to provide an immersive experience to show “how technology and content is an everyday part of our lives.” The event is bringing together leading industry executives from multimedia, applications, Internet and creative content to discuss, deliberate, showcase and celebrate the issues, opportunities and successes in digital space.

I have a honour to be part of the event to speak about key privacy issues for mobile apps developers – thanks to my friends and partners at the Data Protection Academy (DPA) LLP (Noris and Eddie). The discussion will reflect the new legal landscape brought about by the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 that concern mobile apps designers and developers. It’s this Friday, 28th August 2015 at 4.00PM (not one of the best time to listen a talk – sigh) at Room 306 KLCC Convention Hall. It is adjacent to the majestic Petronas twin tower, and it is a free admission event 😉 (ugh.. still..) (*_*)

In the one-hour talk, I will demonstrate the salient features of the data privacy laws in Malaysia and the emerging global trend, especially concerning the users/consumers of mobile apps. Issues such as data collection, notification and retention will be touched. Not less importantly will be the issue of personal data security that each mobile apps developer will have to consider when they decide to retain users’ personally identifiable information (PII). But on top of all those, I am posing a big question: “Should you ever collect the users’ personal information at all?” — I am at the moment finalising my presentation and will share here the key points in due course. See you there, if you make it:)

“Mirror mirror on FB Wall… Should you comment of them all?!”

(CASE CHAT ON ONLINE DEFAMATION)

By Sonny Zulhuda

ImageThe online wall that you have on your Facebook or other social networking sites is not like a wall in your private bedroom where you can always at your own freedom stick things from your own photos to class schedules, to your favorite Football Club posters. Those things would remain as your “private’ enjoyment and view.

But things that you, or others, post on your social networking sites wall is not private. There are people who share such wall and are ready to read your posts every time you have something new.

So this is a rather common-sense thing; just be careful, mindful and.. don’t do fool!

Let me just share with you this incident:

“Retiree to pay RM100,000 over FB posts

It was reported by the Star on October 1st, 2011, that a retiree from Penang has been ordered by a High Court here to pay a total of RM100,000 in damages and costs to a private automotive technology training centre where his son had studied over three defamatory postings on Facebook.

Continue reading

Breach of Personal Data — Telco was Sued for Leak of Communications Data

By: Sonny Zulhuda

What would you do when you realised an unknown has in his/her possession records of your SMS exchanges and a the actual recordings of your telephone conversations and sent them to your own desktop? Shocked, fear, terrorised, humiliated (somehow), and so on, you name it. But yes, it’s a nightmare! A lady who experienced this had brought a lawsuit against her telecommunication provider for allegedly revealing the content of her private communication to a third party.

Read the news report here. This particular lawsuit is the first that could trigger the provisions of Personal Data Protection Act 2010. Since the case proceeding has not started yet, nothing much can be heard from the case. Hopefully we can hear more updates in near future.

Meanwhile, the telecommunications company involved had issued a statement that they would carry out an investigation relating to the said allegation. Read the statement here.

  • September 2018
    M T W T F S S
    « Mar    
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
  • Visitor

    free counters

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 1,592 other followers