Dr. Schmidt explains the world: “The digital recipe gives me the creeps”

Last week we talked about data security here. There are devices on which I don’t intentionally save anything – printers, copiers, scanners, the combination devices that can do all that, the good old fax… Do they just remember how often something went through there and how much, or do they save it also the content?

As a rule, the data stays there for a while. This depends, for example, on how many print jobs come in at the same time and how large they are. There is a buffer, but when the job is completed and a new one comes, the old one is overwritten. Large devices that are used by many people, sometimes at the same time, like ours in the nd editorial team, naturally need this kind of memory. With such large office devices, there is also the option of making confidential documents password-protected. They only print when you stand next to them and enter your password. With the small printer at home, the memory is much smaller. But if you have access to it and know what you’re doing, you could check what was last printed or copied.

Many people don’t have a printer at home, so they go to the library or copy shop to copy, scan or print. It’s also about very personal things – Versluggish, health records, doctor’s notes, accountexcerpts –which are no one else’s business.

Only someone who knows the type of printer in question, can connect a computer and read out the memory using a special program would have access to the data that is temporarily stored there. You can’t just come along and copy the data onto a USB stick.

Suspicious people sure couldTo be on the safe side, after the actual knockoutpierIf you copy something else, something harmless, then the data is gone.

That depends on the size of the cache.

It plays a role whether the Geadvises have Bluetooth access for wireless transmission?

At least office printers for professional use usually don’t have this. They often don’t use WiFi, but rather work via cable.

Transport Minister Wissing, who is also responsible for digital, recently said that data serves to create digital value. Data as an economic factor, so to speak. Seen in this way, data protection is an obstacle to the pursuit of profit, especially as more and more things are going digital.

You can have that impression. It is not without reason that there is constant trouble with the so-called social networks, whose European branches are mostly in Ireland. Because the authorities there apparently take a rather relaxed view of EU data protection law. Otherwise the companies wouldn’t go there – alongside tax benefits.

But exchanging user data – properly controlled – can also be useful for people.

Yes, there are areas where things are interesting. But also tricky. Patient health data, for example, could help determine how successful certain therapies are. And you could get clues about the role that genetic causes play in certain diseases.

Nevertheless, there are reasons to protect such data very well.

Yes, of course, otherwise in extreme cases it could result in someone with a genetic predisposition not getting health insurance. In capitalism you have to take everything into account. It also depends on whether the data management is organized privately – then there would be a risk that the company’s profit interests would become more important than the benefit for patients and their protection.

This type of digitalization has been going on for a long time – see health card or ID card.

The exciting question is how secure and manageable this will be organized. When I look at how things work with digital patient files and electronic prescriptions, with lousy controls and poorly regulated liability, I shudder. With the corresponding telematics infrastructure, the company that develops it is not liable for any errors in their system. The doctors who have been helped by the system are responsible for data protection. They are given a box that they don’t really understand. They are doctors and not computer scientists.

Do you think that the sensitivity to these questions will grow among future generations because they are confronted with them everywhere, or that carelessness will increase because they grow up with them as a matter of course?

Good question. I lean towards the latter. But there will always be critical minds who may have better ideas for dealing with it. On the other hand, of the many people who use a Siri, Google or Alexa voice assistant at home that is constantly switched on, probably very few people think about whether what is being said really stays in the room or goes somewhere else.