Reply to post:

How UK’s GDPR law might not be judged 'adequate'

B*s*

Government are recording all kinds of data, such as the fact that innocent people have been victims of crime.

They then link your name to the criminals file as an alias once it is identified they have used your name and date of birth.

At this stage the victim is treated with suspicion and prejudgement, DBS suggest this is because you could be avoiding the checking g system. But they denied that they can be held accountable due to acting in accordance with the law.

The police suggest they need to record in this manner for the purpose of prevent and detect. They record markers to alert users details have been used.

ICO suggest the law does not require them to carry out assessments, regardless of section 42 request.

Home office suggest that police are responsible.

1975 exemptions orders have been judged as ultra virus.

But police act part V section 113a says that secretary of state for the home dept will disclose all "prescribed details" if a name and date of birth is recorded.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019