|
 |
|
|
|
Interview with Lëtzebuerger Gemengen, translation by itrust consulting.
On 28 May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into force in the EU. Three and a half years later, many organisations are slow to comply, considering it too complex. For Carlo Harpes, the situation is worrying. The Managing Director of itrust consulting recommends PIMS, a Privacy Information Management System, helping companies in order to comply with the GDPR requirements.
Explanations.
What is a PIMS?
A ‘privacy information management system’, abbreviated ‘PIMS’ even in French, is an ‘information security management system that manages the protection of privacy as potentially affected by the processing of personal data’. Personally, this is what I would have called a ‘management system to protect personally identifiable information’ and I would present it as a way to comply with the GDPR. To implement this, there are 1,001 solutions, usually valid for small organisations where data protection is not the primary concern. But for the past 26 months there has been one PIMS, which has been described so precisely that organisation can be certified on this basis, the one documented in ISO/IEC 27701.
Who needs it?
3,5 years was not enough time for most organisations to comply with the GDPR. How many have not appointed a DPO (although this is a legal requirement for any public entity)? How many do not have a register of processing that complies with the requirements? How many cannot prove to the CNPD their compliance with the principles of the GDPR, including the one requiring ‘appropriate technical and organisational measures’? Faced with the difficulty of knowing what is appropriate and how to demonstrate it, leaders (policy makers, mayors, heads of administration, CEOs and manging directors), often give up and hide behind the non-compliance of their neighbours. From my observations, this situation is worrying, and only the CNPD, which has the obligation to sanction, should be aware of this state. All the organisations involved here would have benefited from this PIMS.
Who defined this PIMS?
The Luxembourgish authority ILNAS, which I represented at ISO in multiple expert meetings dedicated to this standard since 2014, was arguing with its European partners for a fast and fully GDPR compatible standard. To support compliance with these requirements, we have made numerous suggestions for improvements to the overly complicated numbering and certain overly cumbersome wording. In France, the CNIL has welcomed its participation and encourages the adoption of this standard while leaving organisations the possibility to opt for other systems to create evidence of accountability.
Who supports PIMS in Luxembourg?
In Luxembourg, unfortunately, the CNPD has not communicated on this standard, which I perceive as a strategic mistake probably due to the absence of CNPD representatives at ISO or a lack of knowledge of management systems at all. This misjudgement also led it to create a national certification framework in 2018, which aimed at a Luxembourg certification that was very expensive to obtain, and I dare say, economically unjustifiable in the absence of international recognition. Given the multiple inaccuracies in the criteria for this certification, the establishment of dedicated certification processes (instead of using the recognised ISO 17065 process that has been practised for decades) the initiative remained an unused flop and the collateral damage remains the lack of support for other more mature and affordable standards and approaches.
So is the CNPD partly responsible for poor compliance?
Absolutely not. Every citizen is accountable to the law, and in no case can the police be held responsible for a crime they have not detected. Criticising the CNPD is a way for some people to look away from their own responsibilities. Of course, the CNPD also has an information and awareness-raising mission. They could have done more, but they have done this at other levels.
Where and how to get PIMS certification?
From any foreign certifier or from the only accredited certifier in Luxembourg, Certi-Trust, which issues certification under internationally recognised accreditation. Due to lack of demand, ISO/IEC 27701 certification is not yet available. In the meantime, a certification against ISO/IEC 27001 with an indication on the certificate of the full implementation of the ISO/IEC 27701 measures is possible. itrust consulting obtained it on 9 June 2020.
What are the advantages of this certification?
In the preparation of this certification, itrust consulting has made extensive use of this standard to draw up a data protection policy which lists all the measures proposed in this standard, the implementation choices and internal guidelines, e.g. references to other security measures, internal documentation or an indication of the responsibilities and processes to be followed by the employees. Thus, this policy, together with a risk analysis report and the register of processing activities, is the cornerstone for demonstrating that data are adequately protected, independently of a certification.
During an external audit by the certifier, the conformity to this policy and the correct application of the measures were verified. Without being able to guarantee 100% that there will be no incidents, this inspires the confidence of our clients, and ultimately of most Luxembourg citizens whose data might be processed by us.
‘3,5 years after the entry into force of the GDPR and 26 months after the definition of a PIMS’
What is the cost of certification and its limits?
The cost of certification (including audit) is on average 4 000 euros per year for an organisation with less than 25 employees but increases logarithmically with this number. An organisation that does not have adequate systems in place could have to spend up to 50 000 euros on consultancy, preparation and implementation of processes and measures. Of course, the cost is theoretically zero for companies that are already managing security and data protection in the right way. The costs of business process-specific security measures can also be substantial. However, these measures are not imposed by certification if this is aligned with the risk appetite and if the residual risk is accepted. In other words, certification does not ensure that there are no risks, nor that there is compliance with the GDPR, but only that all risks and compliance issues have been fully detected, understood and accepted by top management and that the interests of data subjects have been respected.
What is the philosophy behind the PIMS of ISO/IEC 27701?
This PIMS is based on the information security management system, i.e. on specific requirements related to understanding the context, leadership, planning, support (e.g. staff training), day-to-day operation of processes, performance evaluation. In other words, it starts from the idea – often overlooked from a legal perspective – that it is pointless to spend time reviewing the specific rights of a data subject if the processing fails to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information (CIA). However, protecting CIA is not sufficient in terms of privacy protection: risks shall be considered from the perspective of the data subjects and the rights of the data subjects under any applicable legislation. These requirements are comprehensively reflected in 48 controls that are set out in the standard with requirements and implementation guidance. It is also guided by pragmatism and the fact that a law is not complied because of penalties, but by upgrading the management of any organisation that must comply with it.
Dr Carlo Harpes to explain the potential of the EU Certification initiative, the role of regulators and public procurement to require certification, the pitfalls in certification such as with the LU CARPA initiative, the need for collaboration among all actors, the need to learn and improve ICT development lifecycle and testing, the danger of dependency after mergers of today's certification authorities and the importance to care about 'high' certification that should stay feasible for innovative company, not only for market leaders.
An SES-driven consortium that seeks to develop a satellite-terrestrial quantum communication infrastructure and the roadmap for wider European integration, setting the path for next-generation cybersecurity.
To design the LuxQCI, Luxembourg has put in place a consortium comprising InCert, itrust consulting, LuxConnect, LuxTrust and the University of Luxembourg (SnT), that is led by SES’s fully owned affiliate SES Techcom.
Interview by Adeline Jacob from SmartCities, translation by itrust consulting.
There are viruses that attack bodies while there are others that attack computer systems. Neither type will have spared us in 2020, challenging both health and cybersecurity experts. Carlo Harpes, founder and managing director, and Guillaume Schaff and Matthieu Aubigny, Security Consultants at itrust consulting, analyse these current events and present the solutions proposed by the company to best navigate in this cyber-insecurity climate.
Has Covid-19 resulted in a more favourable setting for the resurgence of cyber-attacks?
Carlo Harpes: We were astonished when, at the beginning of the pandemic, the Luxembourg authorities announced that there had been no measured increase in cyber-attacks. This message went against our perception and our predictions. Finally, in August, Avast stated that the threat had increased by 27% for Luxembourg citizens. Most recently, we also learned that certain pieces of American security software had been breached. Almost at the same time, the world witnessed the longest shutdown of authenticated services from Google, WhatsApp, etc., in the world. We can indeed say that insecurity is increasing.
Guillaume Schaff: Studies have shown that phishing attacks increased significantly during the first lockdown (1). Hackers play a lot on human emotions to achieve their goals. The climate of fear in which we lived in March was therefore beneficial to them.
Matthieu Aubigny: In addition, there has been stress phenomenon at the telecommunications infrastructure level, and small vulnerabilities have probably become more significant as a result. These failures, however, have had the virtue of increasing the level of resilience of a certain number of tools.
In the United States, one attack, in particular, made a lot of noise...
Carlo Harpes: The Treasury Department and the National Telecommunications Administration were victims of a cyber-attack orchestrated by expert hackers inventoried APT29 who, according to the FBI, are linked to the Russian government. The attack in question on the Orion management software (network control/surveillance tool) of the American company SolarWinds was indirectly aimed at its clients: in addition to American federal agencies, the malware infiltrated leading companies in the IT world such as Cisco, Intel, Nvidia, Belkin or Microsoft without us knowing its real impact. To this day, it remains an unknown and a risk, because anyone capable of using SolarWind to penetrate Microsoft could also have used Microsoft to infiltrate its customers. These are speculations, but the underlying method, called a supply chain attack, is dangerous because it is difficult to detect. To such an extent that companies like Microsoft are calling for coordinated, international, legal and technical initiatives to deal with this problem (2). It is therefore legitimate to ask whether it is always advisable to use tools that are used on a large scale and therefore attractive to cyber-attackers. In general, we note that managers tend to invest in market-leading software more easily than to consult an expert who will know how to correctly use a less widespread product and set up real monitoring procedures via this product. This is a mistake. It is better to use lighter and simpler tools, ideally Open Source, and to use the services of a specialist to deal with anomalies.
Matthieu Aubigny: To use an image, let’s say that people tend to invest in the best tanks, but have neither a crew to observe the opponent’s movements nor a driver to defend themselves. What is needed is someone behind the screen who can spot failures and counter-attacks. Even in this age of Big Data and artificial intelligence, there is no substitute for a trained expert. You have to be aware that security products are necessarily in the sights of the attackers, since they have to be fooled before they can go any further. On the other hand, given the mass of data to be processed, the experienced expert will also have to use artificial intelligence and automatic learning to discover what is often a needle in a haystack.
What services do you offer when it comes to data protection issues?
Guillaume Schaff: Since May 25th 2018, we have been assisting our clients in complying with the GDPR by establishing registers of processing activities and preparing Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs). In a basic approach, we also propose the establishment of security policies as well as data privacy notices pertaining to the processing of personal information. We also offer an external Data Protection Officer (DPO) service - mainly used by public entities - as well as incident management measures, for example in case of personal data breaches. In addition, we offer a wide range of documents to support our clients in their compliance and help them adopt good practices.
Carlo Harpes: We have also improved our security management system after introducing around 50 measures in line with the ISO 27701 standard, which provides recommendations on privacy management (PIMS). itrust is the first company to be certified for this under the OLAS accreditation.
‘It is better to use lighter and simpler tools (...) and use the services of a specialist’
What tools are you currently developing?
Carlo Harpes: First of all, we have refined our documentation to generate pandemic plans and deploy 'templates' that take into account 'Privacy by Design' and 'Security by Design'. Secondly, we are carrying out a research project to develop a lightweight tool in terms of deployment and cost to provide intrusion detection capabilities and a Luxembourg-based support service for both industrial and private clients with no security knowledge. And, finally, as part of the Quartz project, with partners such as SES, we are developing new algorithms and sophisticated tools to secure a satellite-based quantum key distribution service. In this way, we will help to ensure the confidentiality of communications in a future where attackers will have quantum computers at their disposal. In parallel, we want to carry out research to develop security tools based on post-quantum cryptographic algorithms (i.e. secure against attacks by quantum computers), simulators and components for these computers, along with associated test tools.
Has the pandemic caused delays in the implementation of certain security or data protection measures?
Carlo Harpes: At our customers’ premises, many projects aimed at reducing IT risks have been logically postponed due to the unavailability of people or stagnating revenues. These companies have therefore agreed to act with greater than expected, but still acceptable risks. On the other hand, none of our customers have suspended their security certification or discontinued measures already in place. The majority of our customers used the opportunity to refine their crisis and pandemic plans.
Guillaume Schaff: Although our customers focused on their business activities at the beginning of the crisis, we are now seeing an increase in demand for Business Continuity Management, i.e. maintaining business activity in the event of a crisis, and for secure teleworking. We had detected shortcomings on both these levels in March, but I think that top management has really become aware of the need but also of the risks of accelerating the digitalization of their activity.
What do you expect to see in 2021?
Carlo Harpes: The past year has been very demanding. Our teams are exhausted by a workload that is likely to increase again this year. However, we are hopeful that this lack of human resources will strengthen solidarity and cooperation between the public and private sectors. It is by joining forces, with longer-term partnerships, that we will have the greatest impact.
(1) Dominique Filippone, « Avec le coronavirus, le phishing augmente de 667% en mars », https://www.lemondeinformatique.fr/actualites/lire-avec-le-coronavirusle-phishing-augmente-de-667-en-mars-78582.html
(2) https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2020/12/17/cyberattacks-cybersecurity-solarwinds-fireeye/
