Question 4 (20 marks) This question tests your understanding of Block 2 Part 4. • a.By the spring of 2023, US data analytics company Palantir Technologies Inc. were favourites to acquire

a £480 million, 5-year contract to create and run a 'federated data platform (FDP). Others in the bidding included Oracle, IBM, Microsoft, Amazon and a consortium of British companies which include Voror Health Technologies, Eclipse and Black Pear. The FDP will essentially become the information nervous system of the NHS - the core operating system for managing all patient data in England. Dr Nicola Byrne, National Data Guardian discussed the value and challenges of such at platform at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/in-pursuit-of-balance-unlocking-the-power- of-data-whilst-preserving-public-trust./nConsidering FDP and your study of privacy and security in Block 2 of TM353, outline four lessons or principles on how this kind of medical research and development should be handled, in a manner consistent with the public interest and respecting the privacy of the subjects of the research. You should write no more than 200 words for part (a). (5 Marks) • b.Describe Daniel Solove's privacy model. Use the model to explain three key challenges to privacy that could be considered in the proposed federated data platform (FDP) for the NHS. Do you agree that people who have nothing to hide need have no concerns about the FDP? Or is Solove convincing when suggesting that the 'nothing to hide' meme has nothing to say'. You should write no more than 400 words for part (b) and may include a diagram. (10 marks)/n• c.On the 25 May 2021, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights issued its judgment in the in Big Brother Watch v United Kingdom case. The Court declared some of the UK's Abulk interception' activities unlawful and a breach of citizens' rights to privacy and free expression. The decision was welcomed by Big Brother Watch and the other organisations who had been involved in pursuing the case. https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/2021/05/uk-mass-surveillance-found-unlawful-by- europes-highest-human-rights-court/ However, by a large majority, the judges approved mass surveillance (bulk interception regimes') in principle, provided it conforms to a particular set of safeguards outlined by the Court. Government lawyers had defended bulk surveillance practices and automated processing to sift through billions of intercepted calls, texts, emails and internet records as necessary for national security purposes. They admitted that the purpose of bulk surveillance is to gather data to decide who should be a target. The UK legalised bulk surveillance powers through the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. The Grand Chamber judges, with the sole exception of Judge Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, were persuaded that it is acceptable for sovereign states to decide whether to sacrifice privacy in the hope of improving security. Judge Pinto de Albuquerque concluded: 'For good or ill, and I believe for ill more than for good, with the present judgment the Strasbourg Court has just opened the gates for an electronic "Big Brother" in Europe. If this is the new normal that my learned colleagues in the majority want for Europe, I cannot join them, and this I say with a disenchanted heart/nExplain what is meant by the false privacy security dichotomy and how it might be relevant to the European Court of Human Rights Big Brother Watch judgement. You should write no more than 200 words for part (c).