Disclosure log - October 2011
Request Ref: IRQ0418777
Date of Response: 10/10/11
Request: “For each month this year (i.e. starting January 2011) can you tell me:
(i) how many organisations you contacted in that month to ask if you could audit them;
(ii) a breakdown of those organisations into sectors (e.g. Government Department, Finance Companies, Retail Companies etc);
(iii) how many of the organisations contacted in that month agreed to an audit;
(iv) a breakdown of the organisations that agreed to an audit into sectors (e.g. Government Department etc).”
Request Ref: IRQ0418120
Date of Response: 20/10/11
Request: “I would be very grateful if you could provide me with the complete dataset from the October-December 2010 monitoring exercise conducted by the ICO, for all of the bodies subject to scrutiny during that period.
An electronic format such as a spreadsheet file would be ideal.
Should any clarification or modification of this request itself be required in order to provide for the release of the information, please contact me at this email address as per Section 16 of the Act.”
Date of response: 07/10/2011
In order to cross reference websites, and understand the resolution
Foi 1. Please list case ref of all ICO DN's (state if DN upheld in
favour or not) appealed to the first-tier tribunal with MoJ ref?
(If this invokes too much time, then by each year going back as
Foi 2. Please list case ref of all ICO DN's (state if DN upheld in
favour or not) appealed to the upper tribunal with MoJ ref? If
possible give a summary.
Foi 3. Please list case ref of all ICO DN's appealed by the
authority on an error of law that went to the High court with MoJ
ref? If possible give a summary.
Date of Response: 05/10/2011
Request: FOI request: all documents relating to @southribblebc 's refusal to accept FoI requests by email. See e.g. whatdotheyknow.com/request/ticket…
Request Ref: IRQ0419706
Date of Response: 15/10/2011
Request: Please see below some questions that we are seeking answers to under the Freedom of Information Act.
- Since September 2010, how many complaints have you received on the subject of data loss from public or private sector organisations?
- How many of the complaints mentioned above have been upheld?
- What industry sectors did the complaints come from? (local Government, education, finance, retail, transport, hospitality, central government, other)
- How many of the cases of data loss mentioned in the complaints were allegedly caused by lost IT equipment (including but not limited to mobile phones, laptops and tablet computers)?
Request Ref: IRQ0416738
Date of Response: 12/10/11
1. Please advise how many FOIs you received in each month of the 2010/11 calendar year?
2. How many of these were completed within the mandatory 20 working day timescale?
3. What percentage of data breaches in 2010/11 came from the NHS
4. What is your process for deciding which FOIs get published via your publication scheme.
Request Ref: IRQ0418703
Date of Response: 07/10/11
Request: I am currently doing some research into Data Protection breaches within the UK. If possible, please could you advise or forward any different types of breach classifications/categories that are used internally to group any data breach types together.
By groups I mean "misdirected emails", "unlawful disclosures", "malware" etc...
If you need clarification re. this request, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Request Ref: IRQ0418779
Date of Response: 04/10/2011
Request: Would you please let me know if you have approved any Publication Schemes on behalf of the London Borough of Bexley and, if you have, the date on which you did so.
Request Ref: IRQ0417298
Date of Response: 14/10/11
I would be grateful if you could provide me with any recorded information (excluding any exempt information under section 42 - LPP - except to confirm if it is engaged) which sets out the IC's position:
(i) on a data controllers legal responsibilities when using social media web sites (i.e Facebook, where users fail to apply privacy settings) to obtain information in the "public domain" other than for social/domestic purposes
(ii) if when obtaining information data controllers are advised if it is necessary to comply with the data protection principles, including fair processing, or
(iii) in the absence of meeting fair processing requirements whether the IC has formed a view as to whether targeting social media web sites constitutes a form of surveillance, and
(iv) notwithstanding the fact the IC has no jurisdiction over the application and enforcement of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), whether it regards such surveillance undertaken by a public authority as "covert surveillance", and
(v) if the IC regards this as "covert surveillance" if it has decided where a public authority failing to comply with the RIPA rules, risks falling foul of justifying a legitimate interference with an individual's right to private family life under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, or
(vi) whether the IC's position is case sensitive and surveillance of social web sites for (non police) investigations into the commission or suspected commission of a crime may be sufficient justification irrespective of whether or not RIPA rules are followed
If all the requested information is already in the public domain, please treat this as a routine business request.