Watch out for your identity – if you live in Sweden

Hopping mad you should be if you are a Swedish resident, after taking a visit here http://www.ratsit.se, and search for your name. This is against the Data Protection directive, of which Personuppgiftslagen (PUL) is the legal enactment of. I am so bored of asking to have my name removed, only for it to pop up again later, and now I see that it is impossible to remove your personal identifying information (PII) (http://www.ratsit.se/Content/FaqSearch.aspx)… it is PUBLIC for all to see forever! What a smorgasbord for identity thieves!

I can see how old you are, where you live and the first 6 digits of 10 digits from your Swedish ID!

It seems to be that the Kreditupplysningslagen (KuL) has priority over PuL. In PuL you have a right to personal privacy. You should be informed who has had access, or even viewed your personal information. Now KuL does inform you when a request is made for your creditworthiness, but it doesn’t tell you about who has viewed your Personal Identifying Information (PII) through www.ratsit.se who they share your PII with, for example. Your PII includes your date of birth, where you live, etc…

Identity Theft
I am going to make an official compliant to the Datainspektion. If you are interested to add yourself to a petition to support me in this, please Like this Post here on the blog direct, or on LinkedIn or FB status update, wherever you happen to pick this up.

Is Facebook fundamentally EVIL?

This is as claimed by Johan Staël von Holstein. Do you believe that everything you are digitally, and do online should belong to you? This includes your “digital identity” and all data/information you create online associated with your identity?

I placed “digital identity” in quotes because today it is not your digital identity, it is in fact not a digital identity at all. It is purely some fields in a database somewhere, in many databases. In fact you have no idea where you exist digitally. You may know that you exist in social networking tools such as Facebook, but not where your information has propagated to. Social networking tools have enabled you to add contextual information to your identity name, or your ‘digital identity’, i.e. your digital footprint, but you do not own this. These rich corporations makes loads of money from your digital footprint, but it should be you who is making money from this. It is, after all, your intellectual property!

YOUR IDENTITY – YOUR DIGITAL FOOTPRINT IS YOUR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY!

Everything you create online should belong to you. All user-generated content should be the intellectual property of the individual, user, who created this content. You should have control over your digital identity, and your digital footprint. Organisation should have control over their corporate identity, but not yours! I call this not identity management (IAM/IDM), the term used in organisations, but IDENTITY CONTROL. This is the future!

Listen to a recent podcast released 07 May 2014, where Johan talks about these things, like when and why will Google and Facebook die? The future of identity control. Listen to it all, the real cool stuff comes in the second half of the podcast, so hang in there!

‘stupid loop’

Do you have any of these in your organisation? Maybe you have become attached to the old practices, and anyhow who wants change really?

So what would I define as a ‘stupid loop’? It’s pretty straightforward, it is when something strange happens to the integrity of the information, after INPUT and before OUTPUT. Effectively integrity is compromised during PROCESSING. An example could look as follows:

    1. Information submitted by paper (INPUT), by snail-mail, take your tax returns, or your company financial statements, for example;
    2. These statements are converted (PROCESSING) into some picture format for digital storage, i.e. .gif, tif;
    3. Then the picture files are converted back to text/numbers (PROCESSING), as they are unusable as pictures, no indexing (impossible to search);
    4. OUTPUT is distributed to end consumers, e.g. banks.
    5. End consumers use OUTPUT to make lending and other financial decisions.

Okay, this brings us to the integrity part. How much of the information INPUT has become misinterpreted during PROCESSING? The answer is that based on work done using software that translates graphics to text and numbers, that the risk to information integrity is at least 15%. So this means that of the information INPUT, information OUTPUT will not mirror INPUT exactly by 15%.

XBRL for Transparency
This brings us to XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language). XBRL is a global industry standard and is the standard of financial reporting in Basel III (CRD IV). You could liken it to a universal language that everyone understands, hence there is nothing lost in translation after capture. XBRL gives some protection from accidental risks to information integrity. This gives true transparency and improved traceability, because it is easy during any audit process to see the original information at capture and how it has been processed or/and changed from capture through to when it is consumed; by a human or a system because it is all using the same language. If you’ve ever dabbled with XML, you will recognise XBRL like an old friend 😉

Securing XBRL for Traceabiltiy
This is where we get to the security part. XBRL is not secure, and in order to weave legality into submitted digital financial reports, their submission must to be intimately coupled to the individual and ultimately role of the initiated digital interaction. One could liken digitalised financial reports i.e. XBRL instances, to an information vehicle, programmed to get from A to B quickly and without hindrance. In securing digital reports, you have handed over a sealed package to the vehicle. The seal is unique and is watermarked by your signature that encapsulates not only your identity but also your appointed role. This package can only be opened by the intended recipient, and in his/her appointed role.

More CONTROL Less SPEND
No need to ‘teach your grandma to suck eggs’ as I am sure that you’ve worked out yourself by now that secured financial INPUT in XBRL-format should facilitate cost reductions because there is no longer any need to send paper reports by snail-mail, to convert to some strange format, only to be converted back again…. a ‘stupid loop’ indeed 😉

Additional reading:
(en) Securing XBRL – the next challenge (2014)
(en) Improved Business Process Through XBRL: A Use Case for Business Reporting (2006)

What a mess!

All these identity products, or what they prefer to be called ‘solutions’ in every organisation, connecting up… if lucky- disparate applications with their own authentication, authorisation systems, and maybe Single Sign-on.. the security nightmare, but necessary in order for any sane individual to survive in this identity crisis era.

But this is IDENTITY security built around applications, instead of people, how WEIRD!

Provenance

PROVENANCE is rather a nice word. I hadn’t really come across it before a month or two ago, which is weird considering I am English. It means protecting our word, here is wikipedia better definition. I see it like this because it is to do with saving the truth. George Orwell’s 1984 was all about re-writing history, living a lie. Provenance is about preserving history.

So why the interest from my side? Well everything we do online is written digitally somewhere, and I think it would be good if our word is protected, its integrity is protected, even after we die.