Over the past year or so, I've been struggling to articulate exactly why the practice of data protection has frequently felt like a defeatist slog. A few days ago, I read an amazing piece by Zvi Mowshowitz, and it helped to define a form for all the thoughts swirling in my head. It's really very simple: The current approach most of us have towards data protection and privacy does not motivate anyone towards positive action that meaningfully protects data or privacy. Instead, we're encouraged to spend cycles on pointless privacy theatrics, so that we can signal to others and ourselves how much we all care about privacy. This is a broken model, and I've got some ideas for how to fix it.
After the Dutch National Cyber Security Centre published the Greenberg Traurig analysis of data transfers and the US CLOUD Act (, we at Castlebridge HQ realized we needed to provide some practical guidance of our own on the state of hashtag#data hashtag#transfers, particularly to the hashtag#US. This is an abridged version of what we shared with our clients today, but much of this will be relevant to any organisation facing the question of how to navigate in a hashtag#privacyabsolutist world.
Data transfers to third (or restricted) countries are a bit of a mess right now, and this has been made all the more messy by the UK trying to 'get Brexit done' by replacing EU laws and agreements with Brexity ones. After puzzling over the question of what contract UK and EU exporters should be relying on, I decided to actually put it out on a whiteboard and share it with you. I hope this helps. Also, sorry.