Also - The deal was only just signed, e.g. the transfer hasn't happened yet?
There's a lot of hearsay in all of this reporting...
Also - The deal was only just signed, e.g. the transfer hasn't happened yet?
There's a lot of hearsay in all of this reporting...
Google has entered into similar partnerships on a much smaller scale with clients such as the Colorado Center for Personalized Medicine. But in that case all the data handed over to the search giant was encrypted, with keys being held only on the medical side.
It sounds like they are migrating to Google Cloud for some of their infrastructure.. and someone (and the paper) are sure trying to raise a stink about it. its misleading in a few spots, but not quite lying, hard to tell if its intentional, or technical incompetence.
For example, all storage in google cloud is encrypted, and the keys are rotated every 24 hours by default. There is an audit log you can see, any time anyone at google touches your data. (very, very few people can actually access the keys)
https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/inside-google-cloud/our...
There are obvious concerns around data security here, but the article is very heavily distorting facts to drive outrage.
They have viewpoints which include a distrust of very powerful global corporations, and one you may or may not agree with - but it’s nowhere near ‘fake news’.
The real problem, though, is that this data was transferred without even notifying patients, let alone getting their consent.
Honesty it’s one of the areas where (in the right hands) I think the benefits of collecting large amounts of data for targeting services to people is justified.
Is Google ‘the right hands’? That’s probably worth debating.