[LINK] Microsoft slams local data centre edict

[Richard Chirgwin]

Correcting myself: the international trade threat isn't a "what next"? 
Now that I have been pointed to the submission (thanks, BRD), it's there 
in black and white:

> Microsoft submits that the proposed section 42 of the Bill as 
> currently drafted could be interpreted as a non-tariff barrier to 
> trade and as such may contravene provisions of the AUSFTA and/or the GATS.

All your rights are belong to us ...

RC

On 25/11/11 10:18 AM, Richard Chirgwin wrote:
> Jan,
>
> The way American tech evangelists talk about other countries re the
> cloud is starting to irritate me. Last week, it was Gartner complaining
> that the Westminster System crimps cloud implementations; this week,
> it's MS obfuscating the data jurisdiction issues.
>
> In both cases, the argument is that if someone's institutions are
> incompatible with the IT industry's preferences, then it should be the
> institutions that change, not the industry. What next?  A complaint to
> the WTO that Australia's privacy laws - and our concern that the PATRIOT
> act means our data *cannot* be absolutely protected in a US data centre
> - is constraining their ability to sell stuff here?
>
> This kind of "IT is all" attitude is probably what lies behind Westpac's
> decision to demote IT out of the boardroom and make it one line of
> reporting to the COO.
>
> RC
>
> On 25/11/11 9:35 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
>> Re Karen Dearne's article about the submissions on the PCEHR legislation
>> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/microsoft-slams-local-data-centre-edict/story-e6frgakx-1226205393994
>>
>> MS says in their submission:
>>
>> "Healthcare information stored in a PCEHR will not necessarily be better
>> secured and protected simply by virtue of data being held within
>> Australia's territorial boundaries, as compared to (offshore) storage
>> repositories and portals operated under world's best practice security
>> and privacy systems," it says in a just revealed submission on the draft
>> bill.
>>
>> "By regulating the geography where the data is held rather than the
>> level of security under which it is held implicitly establishes criteria
>> for data protection that are not related to principles of technology
>> security."
>>
>> Exactly right! There are more important things than the specific
>> technology, like accountability, right of action, law, little things like that.
>>
>> I went to a briefing on ehealth info with an APF colleauge about 3 or
>> 4 years ago. We met the person from Microsoft at the time running
>> Healthvault or whatever it was called, the MS offering for storing
>> personal health information at the pleasure of the individual rather
>> than the government.
>>
>> The key question I asked him was: Will MS guarantee the information
>> is stored in Australia to be under our legal jurisdiction? The answer
>> was an unequivocal, yes, it will be stored in Australia. It was that simple.
>>
>> The position MS takes about not focusing on the security misses the
>> governance problem: whose law will cover the screw ups? It's not just
>> about technical security or even privacy. It is about jurisdictional
>> accountability. IANAL, but the issue of server location has seemed to
>> be powerful enough for other actions where jurisdiction comes into
>> play. Why does Microsoft say in their submission (as quoted in the
>> article) that the government could contract them to meet the local
>> jurisdictional requirements? Is that accurate?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>
>> Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
>> jwhit at janwhitaker.com
>> blog: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/
>> business: http://www.janwhitaker.com
>>
>> Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or
>> sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
>> ~Madeline L'Engle, writer
>>
>> _ __________________ _
>> _______________________________________________
>> Link mailing list
>> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
>> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>