Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Articles - Why Data Protection Is More Than Just A Tick Box For Charities
Articles

Why Data Protection Is More Than Just A Tick Box For Charities

Kingsley HayesBy Kingsley HayesDecember 6, 2021Updated:January 9, 20235 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Structured And Unstructured Data Secure
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

It pays to think twice before you send an email, especially when it comes to sending bulk emails. The charity HIV Scotland was recently fined £10,000 by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in the wake of a 2020 data breach. The fine came after the charity sent out an email containing personal information to over 100 people.

The email was without using the blind carbon copy (bcc) function, which is an all-too common error when it comes to data protection. This, however, meant that all the email addresses and some names were visible to all recipients. HIV Scotland helps people living with HIV, or who are at risk of the disease. Given the nature of its work, the those who received the email could assume the HIV status or risk of those who had their details disclosed.

Following the breach, the ICO – the UK’s data protection regulator – investigated the incident and found a series of shortcomings in the charity’s email procedures. These included:

  • Inadequate staff training
  • Incorrect methods of sending bulk emails by bcc
  • Inadequate data protection policy.

Interestingly, HIV Scotland was aware of the data protection risks its emailing practices posed, but it chose not to adequately address them. The ICO’s investigation even discovered that the charity had in fact procured a more secure system for bulk messages several months earlier after identifying the risk. However, it nonetheless continued to use the unsecure method. The regulator therefore found that there was a “serious and negligent failure to take appropriate organisational and technical steps to reduce the possibility of an incident occurring”.

Ironically, HIV Scotland had shown it was aware of data protection risks when it commented critically on a similar issue involving a Health Board. As such, the ICO took the view that the charity should have implemented adequate processes to prevent such an incident.

HIV Scotland’s interim chief executive Alastair Hudson apologised unreservedly to those affected by the data breach and stated that the charity took full responsibility for it. Following the fine, the ICO is urging all organisations to revisit their bulk email practices. Ken Macdonald, Head of ICO Regions, said:

“All personal data is important but the very nature of HIV Scotland’s work should have compelled it to take particular care. This avoidable error caused distress to the very people the charity seeks to help. I would encourage all organisations to revisit their bulk email policies to ensure they have robust procedures in place.”

Organisations particularly at risk of committing data breaches include smaller organisations, such as local clubs and charities.  These often have limited training or resources, and are operated by voluntary staff, who send out group emails or texts. Yet even adding a person’s number to a WhatsApp group without their consent risks exposing their name and number to others.

Many volunteers will be unaware of the importance of using the bcc function with care. Training and proper processes are essential, as there is no exemption from data protection laws for smaller voluntary organisations, clubs or charities.

Charities hold a lot of sensitive data. Often this relates to the vulnerable people they support and protect. This information must not fall into the wrong hands or be misused in any way. However, all too often, charities either aren’t aware of their obligations, or they simply haven’t taken the necessary steps to meet them.

HIV Scotland is not the first organisation to be fined for failing to use the BCC function correctly. In 2018, the ICO fined the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse £200,000 after a staff member sent an email on 27 February 2017 directly to 90 inquiry participants, thereby revealing emails and names.  Of the 90 addresses emailed, fifty-two email addresses contained people’s full names, or had a name label attached which identified the person.

Similarly to the HIV Scotland case, the ICO investigation into this matter found that the inquiry had a particular email account which could send an separate email to each individual participant, but it failed to use it. The ICO also found that the inquiry’s staff had not been given adequate guidance or training in terms of checking that email addresses were in the bcc field. Perhaps the wisest course of action is to always use technical solutions for group emails that make it impossible to accidentally share the groups email addresses and names of an entire group.

Forgetting to send a group email via bcc is an easy mistake to make, which is precisely why organisations should adopt procedures, training and technical solutions to prevent this from happening.

Those affected by data breaches committed by charities are often their supporters, or those whom they are helping. Such people may feel reluctant to take action against charities. Yet holding charities to account for data protection failures is often the only way to improve standards and ensure the continuation of their good work, and to protect the privacy of others.

Kingsley Hayes
  • Kingsley Hayes
    Is The NHS Rushing Into Tackling Record Waiting Lists With AI

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

Visual data is the blind spot in enterprise security: that’s about to change

May 4, 20267 Mins Read

Making stolen data worthless: why security must start with the data

March 30, 20265 Mins Read

Meta’s Smart Glasses Privacy Scandal Expands After Sama Credentials Found on the Dark Web

March 10, 20264 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

No se ha podido establecer conexión. Error 429

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}