Assessing the Actual Impact of a Cryptojacking Attack on Individual IT Systems and Measuring Legal Responses

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-74
Author(s):  
Mikołaj BOROWSKI ◽  
Jakub DYSARZ ◽  
Maciej REICHWALD

Mining cryptocurrencies is much more profitable if one is not paying for equipment or the electricity used for the mining. This is the main reason why cryptojacking has become so prevalent as one of the predominant cybersecurity threats facing Europe today. While the robustness of an organisation is important, one should also know what to do following a security incident or breach. Whilst post-incident analyses are important, an organization should also ascertain their legal standing as well as any possible ways forward after the damage has been done. In order to have a better idea of such a situation, we conducted an in-depth analysis of what a cryptojacking attack would do to our computer network. We did not do that to better protect ourselves, but rather to assess what management can do after an attack happens. Furthermore, we present areas that should be taken into account when assessing damage and propose legal measures effective at the European Union level, relying on criminal, civil and data protection provisions.

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Ralf Kneuper

In May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR 2016) came into effect in the European Union (EU), defining requirements on how to handle personal data of EU citizens. This report discusses the effects of this regulation on software development organisations outside the EU, and summaries the software requirements that result from GDPR and therefore apply to most information technology (IT) systems that will handle data of individuals based in the EU.


Public Health ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 126 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Saracci ◽  
J. Olsen ◽  
A. Seniori-Costantini ◽  
R. West

Hypertension ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 1029-1035
Author(s):  
Antonia Vlahou ◽  
Dara Hallinan ◽  
Rolf Apweiler ◽  
Angel Argiles ◽  
Joachim Beige ◽  
...  

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) became binding law in the European Union Member States in 2018, as a step toward harmonizing personal data protection legislation in the European Union. The Regulation governs almost all types of personal data processing, hence, also, those pertaining to biomedical research. The purpose of this article is to highlight the main practical issues related to data and biological sample sharing that biomedical researchers face regularly, and to specify how these are addressed in the context of GDPR, after consulting with ethics/legal experts. We identify areas in which clarifications of the GDPR are needed, particularly those related to consent requirements by study participants. Amendments should target the following: (1) restricting exceptions based on national laws and increasing harmonization, (2) confirming the concept of broad consent, and (3) defining a roadmap for secondary use of data. These changes will be achieved by acknowledged learned societies in the field taking the lead in preparing a document giving guidance for the optimal interpretation of the GDPR, which will be finalized following a period of commenting by a broad multistakeholder audience. In parallel, promoting engagement and education of the public in the relevant issues (such as different consent types or residual risk for re-identification), on both local/national and international levels, is considered critical for advancement. We hope that this article will open this broad discussion involving all major stakeholders, toward optimizing the GDPR and allowing a harmonized transnational research approach.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Kuner

The European Union (EU) has supported the growing calls for the creation of an international legal framework to safeguard data protection rights. At the same time, it has worked to spread its data protection law to other regions, and recent judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) have reaffirmed the autonomous nature of EU law and the primacy of EU fundamental rights law. The tension between initiatives to create a global data protection framework and the assertion of EU data protection law raises questions about how the EU can best promote data protection on a global level, and about the EU’s responsibilities to third countries that have adopted its system of data protection.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-91
Author(s):  
Alexandre Veronese ◽  
Alessandra Silveira ◽  
Amanda Nunes Lopes Espiñeira Lemos

The article discusses the ethical and technical consequences of Artificial intelligence (hereinafter, A.I) applications and their usage of the European Union data protection legal framework to enable citizens to defend themselves against them. This goal is under the larger European Union Digital Single Market policy, which has concerns about how this subject correlates with personal data protection. The article has four sections. The first one introduces the main issue by describing the importance of AI applications in the contemporary world scenario. The second one describes some fundamental concepts about AI. The third section has an analysis of the ongoing policies for AI in the European Union and the Council of Europe proposal about ethics applicable to AI in the judicial systems. The fourth section is the conclusion, which debates the current legal mechanisms for citizens protection against fully automated decisions, based on European Union Law and in particular the General Data Protection Regulation. The conclusion will be that European Union Law is still under construction when it comes to providing effective protection to its citizens against automated inferences that are unfair or unreasonable.


2020 ◽  
pp. 36-50
Author(s):  
Olga O. Bazina

Biometrics, as a field of science, analyzes the physical and behavioral characteristics of people in order to identify their personality. A huge amount of technology in the field of biometric data collection is developed by IT giants like Google, Facebook, or Alibaba. The European Union (EU) took an important step towards biometric data confidentiality by developing a unified law on the protection of personal data (General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR). The main goal of this action is to return control over personal data to European citizens and at the same time simplify the regulatory legal basis for companies. While European countries and organisations are introducing the GDPR into force, China since 2016 has launched a social credit system as a pilot project. The Social Credit Score (SCS) is based on collecting the maximum amount of data about citizens and assessing the reliability of residents based on their financial, social and online behavior. Only critical opinions can be read about the social credit system in European literature, although the opinions of persons being under this system – Chinese citizens – are quite positive. In this context, we should not forget about the big difference in the mentality of Asians and Europeans. The aim of this article is to compare EU law and the legislation of the People's Republic of China regarding the use and storage of biometric data. On the basis of statistical data and materials analysed, key conclusions will be formulated, that will allow to indicate differences in the positions of state institutions and the attitude of citizens to the issue of personal data protection in China and the European Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document