Incongruity
Can anyone else spot the slight clash between what people say and what they do?
Here’s what Neath Port Talbot say:
Cabinet member for children and young people councillor Olga Jones said: “We need to embrace the new technologies used by young people but we need to support our children and young people to take measures to protect themselves while on-line.”Neath Port Talbot: ‘Keeping Our Kids Cybersafe’
And this is what they do:
A [Neath Port Talbot] council employee has lost a memory stick believed to contain confidential information about vulnerable children [...]
ne foster carer has claimed the information could put children at risk. The anonymous carer told the South Wales Evening Post the children he cared for were “end-of-the-line kids”. “If the people around here knew about their backgrounds, I would probably get a brick through the window,” he added.BBC News
…and this coming only a couple of weeks after Leeds Council managed to lose the details of 5000 children on an unencrypted memory stick which was found by a member of the public.
As yet, no mention has been made as to whether the data on Neath Port Talbot’s memory stick was encrypted or not — although I would have presumed that if it had been, they would have said so, for damage limitation purposes — which makes me wonder.
Why are people allowed to put sensitive data onto portable devices that aren’t encrypted? It’s not difficult to get them — my previous employers used memory sticks which required fingerprint recognition, and when you consider the potential risk, as well as the fact that some organisation or other appears to lose details in this manner approximately once every ten minutes, isn’t it about time that these organisations removed all non-encrypted devices and issued their staff only with encrypted ones?
Hello. I am 
