Data localisation and monetisation can hurt users’ and cloud networks, said chief officer Keith Enright on Wednesday as he urged policymakers to be “extremely circumspect”.


Enright, in a select media roundtable, said anonymous data is safer for personal information but it must be defined. “Anonymous tends to mean different things in different contexts, different legal regimes have defined anonymous or anonymization differently… We need to be thoughtful and deliberate about how we define anonymous data,” he said.


Academics have said that large data sets shared for research consistently over time had their anonymity eroded. “So I would encourage policymakers and companies to be extremely circumspect while proceeding in that direction,” he said.


India in February published a draft for public consultation saying all data collected, generated, and stored by ministries and departments will be open and shareable barring exceptions.


Enright recently took over Google’s chief officer role and he leads the global privacy legal, privacy compliance, and teams.


Speaking about data localisation requirements by governments, Enright said it risks fracturing the benefits of a globally distributed cloud. “The cloud was optimized for security, availability, efficiency, and data localisation sort of retreats for many of those benefits.”


While the governments might think localising data would help in law enforcement, taxation, or bring other economic benefits, none of these areas has gained from such a practice in the last 10 years. “So as a general matter, I would encourage people to look closely at their motivations.”


Enright added that if the policymakers believe that there’s an imperative for data localisation for some reason, it should be as narrowly tailored. “That is the way to minimize the downside and optimize for very specific legitimate requirements that perhaps in a certain context could be advanced by data localization, but do not have these unintended public policy spillover consequences,” he said.


India’s Bill has mandated data localization storage of sensitive personal data and critical personal data only in India. The contentious issue however, according to technology companies, was that there is no clear definition of such data. However, recent media reports suggest that the changes being made to the Bill will take care of this issue.


Enright added that fragmentation of such laws could erode the company’s ability to protect and secure data, eroding individual privacy requirements, which would be an unintentional policy consequence.


“If the costs of compliance and the complexity of compliance gets so high through these radically divergent legal requirements could actually stifle innovation,” he said.

Dear Reader,

Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.

We, however, have a request.

As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.

Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.

Digital Editor





Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.