Skip to main content
Now You See It

I could almost imagine them tabling a vote of thanks at this week’s Cabinet meeting at No 10. There isn’t much in the way of good news around for Ministers this month but at least the preoccupation with Iraq has interrupted the regular leaking of memos which led to the resignations of Steven Byers and Estelle Morris.

This week’s hero isn’t Michael Portillo, it’s Microsoft and no, the company hasn’t decided to give its software away to government for free. It’s even better than that if you happen to be a senior civil servant or a Minister because Microsoft has announced a new digital rights management service for Windows Server 2003. (WS2003).



Why, you ask, is this a reason for Sir Humphrey Appleby to celebrate? Because WS2003 in conjunction with a ‘Lock Box’ – A policy appliance that is kept locked-away – places ‘persistent protection’ into any office document and Rights Management technology, according to Microsoft: “enables businesses to protect the information they most worry might leak”.

Just before Christmas, there was an embarrassing ‘leak ‘of a Foreign & Commonwealth Office document to the US-based Web site Cryptome.org. A Sunday newspaper, which makes a point of watching Cryptome for salacious gossip, picked-up a confidential memo which described the visit of Russia’s Defense Minister, Sergei Ivanov to London and what was discussed between our two governments over dinner. Of course, there was the normal polite chat about the price of Vodka and weapons of mass destruction but there was more interesting detail which I’m not at liberty to divulge. However Microsoft’s new digital Rights Management Server (RMS), sitting behind its Office products, could very soon make it virtually impossible for a document to ‘leak’ short of taking a photograph of the screen.

Documents can really become ‘Eyes Only’, depending on the policy hidden in the lock-box and controlled by the RMS Server. Documents can even expire after a given time period, so short of a discovery demand under the Freedom of Information Act or other legislation, embarrassing or sensitive information will, in future, have a ‘sell-by date’. This measure could of course prove ideal for the Inland Revenue which appears to be losing its laptops faster than it can buy them.



Focusing on the technical detail, Microsoft points out that the “Windows Rights Management Services can be used to control forwarding, copying and printing, as well as establishing time-based expiration rules. In addition, enterprises can enforce policy broadly and reliably by centrally delivering templates that automate the process - for example, making the policy around what constitutes "company confidential" uniform and easy to manage”.

So there you have it, the end of leaking as we know it and with it, a mix of both good and bad news for the rest of us. The good news is of course that ‘Confidential’ will mean just that and the bad news? Leaking is a necessary part of our political process, as there’s always a danger of being found-out; remember Matrix Churchill and Stephen Byers. Further down the line DRM will lead to a world where free and fair use of information, like photocopying, disappears altogether and is replaced either by blanket confidentiality or the arrival of a universal micropayment system, controlled by a mechanism that looks vaguely like Passport.

I’m in two minds about digital rights management. On the one hand, the arrival of the Internet threw confidentiality out of the Window but on the other hand, DRM is leading us in a direction which has information has a value, tightly controlled, directed and no longer free. In other words, in direct contradiction to the open principle of the Internet. So while Microsoft’s introduction of DRM to Office was inevitable and even sensible, I wonder where it will lead us next?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.


In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…