Eskenzi PR ad banner Eskenzi PR ad banner
  • About Us
Wednesday, 3 June, 2026
IT Security Guru
Eskenzi PR banner
  • Home
  • Features
  • Insight
  • Channel News
  • Events
    • Most Inspiring Women in Cyber 2026
  • Topics
    • Cloud Security
    • Cyber Crime
    • Cyber Warfare
    • Data Protection
    • DDoS
    • Hacking
    • Malware, Phishing and Ransomware
    • Mobile Security
    • Network Security
    • Regulation
    • Skills Gap
    • The Internet of Things
    • Threat Detection
    • AI and Machine Learning
    • Industrial Internet of Things
  • Multimedia
  • Product Reviews
  • About Us
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Features
  • Insight
  • Channel News
  • Events
    • Most Inspiring Women in Cyber 2026
  • Topics
    • Cloud Security
    • Cyber Crime
    • Cyber Warfare
    • Data Protection
    • DDoS
    • Hacking
    • Malware, Phishing and Ransomware
    • Mobile Security
    • Network Security
    • Regulation
    • Skills Gap
    • The Internet of Things
    • Threat Detection
    • AI and Machine Learning
    • Industrial Internet of Things
  • Multimedia
  • Product Reviews
  • About Us
No Result
View All Result
IT Security Guru
No Result
View All Result

Of 654 data protection prosecutions, only 3 were for serious offences

by The Gurus
October 14, 2020
in Editor's News
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Despite there being 654 prosecutions over six years for obtaining or disclosing data, there were only three prosecutions for serious offences.

According to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Cordery, the Crown Prosecution Service confirmed that they had prosecuted for three data protection offences: obtaining or disclosing personal data or the information contained in personal data; procuring the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data; and selling personal data.

However obtaining/disclosing data was by far the most enforced offence with a total of 654 prosecutions over six years, yet selling data has only been prosecuted twice over six years with 2010-2011 a peak year with a total of 200 prosecutions for obtaining/disclosing data and procuring the disclosure of data.

TK Keanini, CTO of Lancope, said he believed that the low number is representative of the maturity level of the legal process when it comes to information technology. “These are cases where not only are they visible enough to be caught but also enough of a case to reach prosecution,” he said.

Asked why he felt that there were only two prosecutions over six years, he said that while the internet is global, people who violate these laws don’t need to be operating in countries which have these laws nor would they want to. “Prosecution is has a national scope to a global problem of information on the internet,” he said.

The FOIA found that since 2010, there has been a marked drop in prosecutions (obtaining/disclosing data, and, procuring disclosure of data) to the lowest total figure of these years in 2013 of 96 prosecutions.

Keanini said: “When you look at how much private data is for sale on the black/dark markets, criminal activity is clearly on the rise yet prosecutions are not, and this is a bad sign for the good guy and an equally a good sign for the bad guys. Cyber crime is on the rise, yet there are fewer violators paying fines or going to jail and that is never a good sign for the community.

“We cannot look at the prosecution counts in isolation to understand what is taking place. These metrics need more context to other information technology trends and at a national level, put in context to other national trends as the internet makes the data problems everyone’s problem.”

Commenting, Jonathan Armstrong, partner at Cordery, said that 654 prosecutions over the last six years was many more than people would think. “I think most people think only the ICO do anything with data, but the figures suggest the police and CPS are pretty active too – even in a quiet year like last year, it is still around two prosecutions a week,” he said.

“I think most people would be surprised how much activity there is and they’d also be surprised how severe the consequences can be as our example shows. Of course we don’t know what a ‘typical’ offence or ‘typical’ sentence are but it reinforces the message that information security is to be taken seriously.”

Tags: ComplianceData ProtectionLegal
ShareTweet
Previous Post

The hackers take over Las Vegas

Next Post

Nine fixes from Microsoft, including critical patch for IE

Recent News

Nagomi Control Brings CTEM Into Action

IT Security Guru picks for Infosecurity Europe 2026

June 1, 2026
Nine in Ten Security Leaders Concerned About AI-Generated Code Risks as Salt Security Launches New Governance Tool

Nine in Ten Security Leaders Concerned About AI-Generated Code Risks as Salt Security Launches New Governance Tool

June 1, 2026
Acumen Cyber and AttackIQ Partner to Strengthen Cyber Defense Validation

Acumen Cyber and AttackIQ Partner to Strengthen Cyber Defense Validation

May 29, 2026
Check Point Launches AI Agents That Think Like Attackers as Autonomous Exploitation Reaches Critical Threat Level

Check Point Launches AI Agents That Think Like Attackers as Autonomous Exploitation Reaches Critical Threat Level

May 28, 2026

The IT Security Guru offers a daily news digest of all the best breaking IT security news stories first thing in the morning! Rather than you having to trawl through all the news feeds to find out what’s cooking, you can quickly get everything you need from this site!

Our Address: 10 London Mews, London, W2 1HY

Follow Us

© 2015 - 2024 IT Security Guru - Website Managed by Dessol

  • About Us
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}
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Features
  • Insight
  • Channel News
  • Events
    • Most Inspiring Women in Cyber 2026
  • Topics
    • Cloud Security
    • Cyber Crime
    • Cyber Warfare
    • Data Protection
    • DDoS
    • Hacking
    • Malware, Phishing and Ransomware
    • Mobile Security
    • Network Security
    • Regulation
    • Skills Gap
    • The Internet of Things
    • Threat Detection
    • AI and Machine Learning
    • Industrial Internet of Things
  • Multimedia
  • Product Reviews
  • About Us

© 2015 - 2024 IT Security Guru - Website Managed by Dessol