"UK census data is safe"
"UK census data has not been lifted this time"
There, fixed.
UK census data is safe
The Office for National Statistics has confirmed that UK census data collected in March is safe and has not been hacked. The rumour that LulzSec had pinched the data on 25 million UK households started when someone put a fake note on PasteBin. LulzSec had already denied the break-in two days ago. The hacking collective, …
-
-
-
Friday 24th June 2011 09:51 GMT Anonymous Coward
Made them look
The scary thing is the allegation needed to be investigated. One would have hoped the data was kept somewhere without a connection to the Internet, so they could instantly refute it. The delay and investigation speaks volumes for their confidence in their own security.
Now, everyone knows it's held somewhere connected to the Internet. Whilst it was a false alarm this time, it may not be next time. The hackers only have to get 'lucky' once, and they now know it's a credible target.
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2011 11:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
DDOS
I thought that he had done the dirty on the British Pornographic Industry and International Federation of the Pornographic Industry and thought that really would be a denial of service, but then I put my glasses on and saw that it was the British Phonographic Industry and International Federation of the Phonographic Industry. So how come there is any question of denial of service, surely you need a service to exist before it could be denied?
Still it is better news that the census was not hacked, I cannot now remember what data they collected but it is better that it was not lost if only to reduce the resulting flow of conspiracy slush. Unless of course the denial of loss was also a conspiracy, Oh dear where will this end?
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2011 12:02 GMT Ian Yates
Top priority
So, you know, we're going to put it on a network that isn't accessible from teh Interwebs.
Oh no, wait, everything has to be accessible for some reason no one knows. Or maybe I'm just missing the obvious non-cynical reason for having a shit-ton (official term) of personally identifiable information on a non-private network.
This goes for all government departments.
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2011 12:04 GMT BlueGreen
doesn't matter either way to me
Census guy came a-knocking and I refused on moral grounds which he said was a first (ie his first refusal for any reason). Explained my concerns and printed out the reg article <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/25/confidentiality_of_census_data_not_guaranteed/> for him.
So far, so nothing. Slow, or do they not wish to contest what might be messy for them?
-
Thursday 23rd June 2011 12:11 GMT Southern
Great news
Lockheed Martin and co must be breathing sighs of relief that the data is not out in the open after all. Now the only thing left to do is to PR management of any bad press and tighten their procedures in case any official government department comes knocking to double check their security.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Thursday 23rd June 2011 14:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
No Knowledge
I was very relieved to hear that this data was safe. I though this website was guilty - and still is from the way this article has been written - of sensationalist journalism. There was no evidence of a data leak but the issue was given too much publicity for a non-story.
I am a Lockheed Martin UK employee but not part of the census team. Notice the UK part of that. LM has a big presence in the UK and one of the main reasons for getting the census contract was that we have provided handwriting recognition software to Royal Mail to read envelopes at the sorting office.
Lockheed Martin Corporation is a big arms contractor, and also into space, electronic systems and security. Those people who connect the contract for the UK census with US arms need to realise that most big US corporations are doing a lot of work in the UK. That's the way of the modern world.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2011 19:32 GMT Chief sub
Being El Reg means never having to say you're sorry...
" I though[t] this website was guilty - and still is from the way this article has been written - of sensationalist journalism. There was no evidence of a data leak but the issue was given too much publicity for a non-story."
Too true. The Register was as responsible for spreading this story as anyone else. But don't expect a hands-up-we-woz-wrong from this smart-arse lot.
-
Friday 24th June 2011 06:56 GMT Spanners
But
If some US lawyer for the Music And Film Industries Association of America, the NSA or whatever went to court, would they be able to get access to the data? I am all for international trade - if we are keeping the data out of the hands of mega corporations and other criminals.
LM is a subsidiary. They have to do what the boss says - we might never know anyway.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
