... it must be a morning for questions!
I also have an issue of all my client data being on my 'home office' PC and, now I have my 'proper' office, will need access there too - is something like Dropbox the answer so I can 'see' the files (and, more importantly, make changes to them) wherever I am?
Related resources
Replies (70)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
I disagree with you Mr Forbes.
Dropbox is not encrypted in any meaningful way or in the accepted meaning of the word as: -
1. DB control the key or keys, you do not (unlike Wuala).
2. Data de-duplication would not be possible if the files themselves were not stored in fairly clear form (or unless the same encryption key covers the whole of DB, ie it is not account specific) . For those not familiar with the term, DB's software matches uploads to existing files (on other peoples' accounts) and where they match (ie the file is identical) the 2nd file is uploaded effectively as a link to the first. You can try this using 2 different accounts - upload (say) a 100mb file (probably an hour), but from the 2nd account it will be "there" in a matter of seconds! - I've tried it. If the files were truly encrypted, this simply wouldn't be possible.
3. You are mistaken if you believe that a warrant is required to access your files, and DB's Privacy policy makes no such assertion saying: -
"Compliance with Laws and Law Enforcement Requests; ... We may disclose to parties outside Dropbox files stored in your Dropbox and information about you that we collect when we have a good faith belief that disclosure is reasonably necessary to (a) comply with a law, regulation or compulsory legal request; . . . If we provide your Dropbox files to a law enforcement agency as set forth above, we will remove Dropbox’s encryption from the files before providing them to law enforcement . . ."
No mention of warrants there! ... and no need as the US Patriot Act specifically allows any "Law Enforcement Agency" to obtain such information WITHOUT a warrant
Re: "Data de-duplication
Re: "Data de-duplication would not be possible if the files themselves were not stored in fairly clear form (or unless the same encryption key covers the whole of DB, ie it is not account specific) . "
..... or you use a collection encryption keys based on a hash of the content of the file being uploaded, so not using the same encryption key for all of drop box, nor even all files on one account. However two identical files on different accounts would be encrypted with the same key.
"you can upload a 100mb in seconds."
..... which I think demonstrates the motive behind dropbox managing the encryption rather than leaving to users is not them wanting to root around your files.
... and wuala say ...
Customer agrees that LaCie may transmit any data stored by Customer to a third party if LaCie believes in good faith that it is required to do so in order to: (a) comply with any law or order issued by any legal authority; (b) avoid infringement of the rights of a third party; or (c) protect the property of LaCie or the personal safety of its users and the public.
Difference is: ...
What Wuala don't have and cannot create are the keys to decrypt the files. All they can pass on is the a/c name, IP address, contact email address etc.
Very, very different to passing on the actual files.
wuala have your encrypted files
they have the encryption keys for decrypting those files stored all together in one file encrypted using your password.
all this they could hand over under the terms of the agreement.
What they don't have is your password, which is probably less than a dozen characters long.
Also - take a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831
Where exactly does wuala store your data ? In data centres in EEA but also redundant copies in the "wuala cloud" which is basically the computers of wuala customers. Could some of your data could be on a PC in Yemen and vice versa ? Hmmmm.
What HAS Mr Forbes against Wuala?
wuala have your encrypted files
they have the encryption keys for decrypting those files stored all together in one file encrypted using your password.
all this they could hand over under the terms of the agreement.
What they don't have is your password, which is probably less than a dozen characters long.
Also - take a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831
Where exactly does wuala store your data ? In data centres in EEA but also redundant copies in the "wuala cloud" which is basically the computers of wuala customers. Could some of your data could be on a PC in Yemen and vice versa ? Hmmmm.
Yes Wuala have ONLY the encrypted files, which are useless without the key (generated by one's password). To quote from them directly: -
http://www.wuala.com/en/support/faq/c/20
Every file you store in Wuala gets encrypted before it leaves your computer. This includes file metadata (e.g. name, description, tags). Every file is encrypted with a different key and the list of these keys is encrypted with your password and stored on our server. The password itself never leaves your computer so that not even we can access your data.
Wuala encrypts and decrypts all files locally. Your password never leaves your computer, hence, we do not know your password. This protects your privacy, but also means that apart from sending you password hint (specified when creating your account or check your account settings) we cannot help you recovering it. For a more indepth discussion see: http://wualablog.blogspot.com/2011/04/wualas-encryption-for-dummies.html from which the following extract is taken: - . . . This helps to guard a little against brute-force attacks because if it takes 10ms to calculate the key from a password, an attacker can try at most 100 passwords per second. Still, if you want an attack to take millions of years, you should choose a password with ten characters, better more. In fact my own password is more than double the length suggested by Mr Forbes AND the whole Wuala installation runs from an encrypted drive. (again a seriously long password). The link to the BBC news item is both disingenuous and slightly offensive ... the party 'jailed for 16 weeks for refusing to disclose his password' was suspected of having child [***] on his computer. Is Mr Forbes suggesting that a child [***] enquiry is relevant to this discussion and, if so, in what way? Yes, we all know that it is an offence not to disclose passwords under RIPA in the UK which is why I don't bring any data into the UK (or USA come to that). Even so, I would not disclose my passwords to any government agency anywhere - and take my chances. The danger to my clients is fishing expeditions rather than direct "assaults" upon their data, and government agency, anywhere, is going fishing in my data if I can help it. With regard to redundant data ... it is just that, pieces of encrypted files in the same way that Skype (and DB) drop bits of data all over the place. The point is though, it is encrypted and therefore useless without both the key & password.
Real data risks
I've always felt there are far greater risks to the data than a renegade Dropbox employee stealing my data (amongst 15 million other users) and trying to blackmail me with it, or the US Government taking an interest in any of my clients (I don't have an international client base or any high-profile clients).
What about employees / subcontractors stealing the data? Or the IT guy? Physical theft of the equipment containing the data is also a possibility, especially if held on a laptop. Even easier I've seen accounting practices that simply leave their backup tape history of cassettes next to the server being backed up. Unless encryption is used for e-mails then they can potentially be intercepted or read by the Internet Service Provider.
If I dealt with a high-profile politician / personality / businessman, billionaire, senior military figure, someone of major interest to the British or US Government etc. then I probably wouldn't use Dropbox for that data. But for the type of clients I have, the standard Dropbox encryption and security procedures appear sufficient for me.
@0103953
If I dealt with a high-profile politician / personality / businessman, billionaire, senior military figure, someone of major interest to the British or US Government etc. then I probably wouldn't use Dropbox for that data. But for the type of clients I have, the standard Dropbox encryption and security procedures appear sufficient for me.
... brilliantly put, and it's that reason that I will indeed be using Dropbox - have asked the majority of my clients what they use and Dropbox is the overwhelming favourite - no-one has mentioned using Wuala... that's not saying it's not any good, but Dropbox seems to be the favourite...
It seems the general feeling is that, as was said above, if you're storing documents relating to trade secrets or the tax return of an MP then yes, I would potentially worry about security (but I would worry on ANY storage solution, not just Dropbox) but for the accounts of a builder down the road or an analysis of a hairdresser's takings for the quarter, I really can't see the Dropbox employees falling over themselves to ger their hands on it...
Dropbox/Wuala and Security Requirements
If I dealt with a high-profile politician / personality / businessman, billionaire, senior military figure, someone of major interest to the British or US Government etc. then I probably wouldn't use Dropbox for that data. But for the type of clients I have, the standard Dropbox encryption and security procedures appear sufficient for me.
Yes, I suppose that is probably part of my reason for staying with Dropbox too. Having said that, if 50% of my clients moved to Wuala, I would probably follow them.
PI insurance ...
Interesting thread.
Of course a lot may depend upon how the insurance company carrying your PI views the situation (has anyone checked?). With insurance companies currently trying to avoid payouts on any pretext, giving them any 'wriggle room' at all may simply result in them refusing cover if there is any possible doubt about the security of client data and the policy holder chose to ignore the security aspect.
and if you don't tell them, well ... the 'catch all' clause about non-disclosure would probably cover it
If I were a client and found out that my accountant was prepared to use Dropbox on my information whilst at the same time using more secure means for '.. high-profile politician / personality / businessman, billionaire, senior military figure, someone of major interest to the British or US Government etc ..' I don't think that I would be impressed - definately litigation on the cards with this one
What do the various institutes say or have the ducked the issue?
Dropbox: what would you litigate for?
If I were a client and found out that my accountant was prepared to use Dropbox on my information whilst at the same time using more secure means for '.. high-profile politician / personality / businessman, billionaire, senior military figure, someone of major interest to the British or US Government etc ..' I don't think that I would be impressed - definately litigation on the cards with this one
What would you litigate for JC? I don't think you could sue unless you suffered some loss, and if you had suffered a loss then the aditional security used for other clients would be irrelevant; all that would matter would be if Dropbox had sufficient security.
Any breach would question .. sufficient security ..
The point is that if the accountant had both types of client and chose to treat their security in a different manner according to pre-defined criteria, then the accounting firm is by definition acknowledging that one means is more secure than another (high profile get better security - as mentioned earlier) and arguably putting one class of client at greater risk than another
Therefore the comment '.. all that would matter would be if Dropbox had sufficient security ..' is open to interpretation - clearly any loss of data would call this into question
The follow on would be questions as to why a firm was using a dual approach when they obviously recognised that one was better than another ... etc.
ICO view point
The ICO have certainly been thinking about "cloud" and the data protection act and specifically refer to dropbox in
http://www.ico.gov.uk/conference2012/~/media/documents/dpo_conference_2012/afternoon_workshop_a.ashx
... but appears not to give any answers.
Storing encrypted fragments of personal data outside the EEA and not in a "safe harbour" - does that break the DPA ? Technically yess. How small a fragment and how encrypted ? It is a bit of a nonsense. Here for example is an encrpyted fragment of my credit card number .... 7
@ hansa - the example was actually from a link wuala's website. I think RIPA would still apply if it were encrypted data in a say a tax evasion case. You say "it is just that, pieces of encrypted files in the same way that Skype (and DB) drop bits of data all over the place", I agree skype uses peer to peer storage (and processing power) but as far as I am aware there is no peer to peer storage in dropbox it is all within Amazon AWS data centres.
How Dropbox sacrifices user privacy for cost savings
The ICO have certainly been thinking about "cloud" and the data protection act and specifically refer to dropbox in
http://www.ico.gov.uk/conference2012/~/media/documents/dpo_conference_2012/afternoon_workshop_a.ashx
... but appears not to give any answers.
Storing encrypted fragments of personal data outside the EEA and not in a "safe harbour" - does that break the DPA ? Technically yess. How small a fragment and how encrypted ? It is a bit of a nonsense. Here for example is an encrpyted fragment of my credit card number .... 7
@ hansa - the example was actually from a link wuala's website. I think RIPA would still apply if it were encrypted data in a say a tax evasion case. You say "it is just that, pieces of encrypted files in the same way that Skype (and DB) drop bits of data all over the place", I agree skype uses peer to peer storage (and processing power) but as far as I am aware there is no peer to peer storage in dropbox it is all within Amazon AWS data centres.
Data Redundancy - I'm not at all sure Wuala does any more - you may be thinking of their launch scheme (ended Oct 2011) where uses could gain 'space' by allowing encrypted information to be saved. In any event, I am pretty sure the DP rules refer to 'personal' data which by it's very definition must be identifiable.
RIPA - yes, of course it applies to all electronic data but I've yet to hear of any professional person being prosecuted (let alone convicted) for refusing to hand over a password. I also have a feeling that RIPA applies to the computer itself, not remote services (but I've no desire to test that!). We are however digressing as it is the security (or otherwise) of Dropbox vs. the others which is the question. The link following might be of interest: -
http://paranoia.dubfire.net/2011/04/how-dropbox-sacrifices-user-privacy-for.html
In summary:
Dropbox can allow its staff to access your data, it allows data de-duplication, it can reset passwords thus it is NOT safe for confidential files
Wuala cannot NOT give staff access to your data as it is encrypted. It does not allow data de-duplication, it cannot reset passwords therefore it IS safe for confidential files.
@Hansa
Dropbox can allow its staff to access your data, it allows data de-duplication, it can reset passwords thus it is NOT safe for confidential files
... but as everyone keeps saying, why would Dropbox employees be interested in a set of accounts, or a bank reconciliation, or a builder's VAT control account - and do the Dropbox employees have time to look at EVERYONE's individual files?
@JC
JC, the question was "what would you litigate for?". Would you sue? If so, what for? You cannot just go to court because someone has been treated better than you.
Dropbox or use your own!!
I use DB with clients I dhae a lot of data with - we agree to share this way and all seem happy - we share an individual folder so if they choose to share further it's only their data they can share.
For others I have a secure area on my own website - I can provide clients with a log in to their own private directory and they can upload stuff for me - good for stuff like QuickBooks backups that dont email!! I can also leave stuff there for them. Works well with clients who havent got DB already as there is nothing for them to install and learn.
As for security - well local clients are happy to leave a bag of stuff in my recycling box if I'm out :P
M
secure area on own website :-)
. . . For others I have a secure area on my own website - I can provide clients with a log in to their own private directory and they can upload stuff for me.. .
This is the best solution of all for limited amounts of data. I've been planning to implement a "secure area" on my various sites for some time but not really sure where to start (and worse still, neither is my site designer!) ... Any tips or pointers would be most welcome :-)
For the rest, it all boils down to how confidential the data is ... In my field, the answer is "very" in almost all cases. I even delete emails from my phone daily!
IRIS OpenSpace - new (free!) cloud-based file sharing tool
Whilst this Any Answers post is quite old, I thought the respondents here would be interested to know that today we have launched IRIS OpenSpace, a cloud-based file sharing solution available free to all UK accountants, whether IRIS users or not. It’s designed specifically for accountants, and so makes it easy for you to collaborate and share documents with your clients. All the data centres it uses are based in the EU, so it also fully complies with data protection principles.
For more information or to try it out, all you need to do is head to http://www.iris.co.uk/openspace and register an account. If you’re not an IRIS, PTP or Drummohr customer, you’ll also need to complete the form on the Subscription tab of the product to activate your free space.
Simon Witkiss
Product Director
IRIS Software Group
[email protected]
More warning bells for Dropbox
Security issues with Dropbox are raised in a three page article in the April 2013 edition of PC Pro (goes on sale next week).