*/
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 finds common ground on legal services between our two jurisdictions, plus an update on jury trials
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
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
With at least 31 reports of AI hallucinations in UK legal cases – over 800 worldwide – and judges using AI to assist in judicial decision-making, the risks and benefits are impossible to ignore. Matthew Lee examines how different jurisdictions are responding
What has changed, and why? Paul Secher unpacks the new standards aligning the recruiting, training and appraising of judges – the first major change to the system for ten years
The deprivation of liberty is the most significant power the state can exercise. Drawing on frontline experience, Chris Henley KC explains why replacing trial by jury with judge-only trials risks undermining justice
Ever wondered what a pupillage is like at the CPS? This Q and A provides an insight into the training, experience and next steps
The appointments of 96 new King’s Counsel (also known as silk) are announced today