Adopted by government agencies in Australia, New Zealand and the UK as policy instrument or as embodied into legislation, the 'Five Safes' framework aims to manage risks of releasing data derived from personal information. Despite its popularity, the Five Safes has undergone little legal or technical critical analysis. We argue that the Fives Safes is fundamentally flawed: from being disconnected from existing legal protections and appropriation of notions of safety without providing any means to prefer strong technical measures, to viewing disclosure risk as static through time and not requiring repeat assessment. The Five Safes provides little confidence that resulting data sharing is performed using 'safety' best practice or for purposes in service of public interest.
翻译:由澳大利亚、新西兰和联合王国的政府机构作为政策工具或体现在立法中的“五安全”框架作为政策工具通过,旨在管理披露个人信息数据的风险。尽管五安全组织受到欢迎,但几乎没有经过任何法律或技术批评性分析。我们争辩说,五安全组织存在根本缺陷:它与现有的法律保护脱节,在不提供任何手段来选择强力技术措施的情况下盗用安全概念,将披露风险视为静态的,不要求重复评估。五安全组织几乎没有信心相信由此产生的数据共享是利用“安全”最佳做法进行的,或者是为了服务于公共利益。