Nos derniers articles

"This article examines the two contrasting approaches for determining identifiability that are prevalent today: (i) the risk-based approach and (ii) the strict approach in the Article 29 Working Party’s Opinion on Anonymization Techniques (WP 216). Through two case studies, we illustrate the challenges encountered when trying to anonymize unstructured datasets. We show that, while the risk-based approach offers a more nuanced test consistent with the purposes of the GDPR, the strict approach of WP 216 makes anonymization of unstructured data virtually impossible as long as the original data continues to exist."

"... the proposed reforms risk (1) undermining the data subjects’ rights that were ensured with the adoption of the EU GDPR into UK law; (2) introducing an accountability framework that is inadequate to address harm prevention; and (3) eroding the regulatory probity of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). We also comment on the analysis of the expected impact of the reform, discussing the negative impact for both public and private stakeholders, especially in light of the “Brussels effect” and growing international compliance with the EU GDPR."

"... in a world where algorithmic opacity has become a strategic tool for firms to escape accountability, regulators in the EU, the US, and elsewhere should adopt a human-rights-based approach to impose a social transparency duty on firms deploying high-risk AI techniques."