The Times yesterday had a double page inside spread purporting to give background details about the breach of security (see earlier post). Credited to 4 journalists - Sean O'Neill, Francis Elliott, Rajeev Syal & Rhys Blakely
The first 11/2 columns were clearly based on sources within NAO, not Revenue & Customs. Then came details of phone calls between the Chancellor & the Prime Minister, which presumably came from political sources
When did all this briefing take place? Before the Chancellor made his statement to Parliament?
And how come the NAO gets off so lightly? They had already, on an entirely separate occasion, received a copy of the full database. Why did they not say We cant do this, we must find another way?
Why would the Revenues IT consultants charge so much for stripping out the sensitive details? If this is a genuine technical difficulty, why did NAO not go to the North East to draw their sample in secure conditions?
Even worse, the Times opening paragraph feels free to speculate that the lowly official who made the copy was distracted by the major sporting events taking place that week. I assume they know the official is a he. That seems to have the fingerprints of Labour spin doctors all over it. One might hope they & the press had learned a lesson about not hanging civil servants out to dry like that
Well we can all be distracted or absent minded sometimes. Some people can even be malign. So why are there not procedures which protect such an important database from accidental or malicious copying?
And what, pray, has happened to the 2 copies of the complete database which were in the possession of NAO?
Some of my questions answered by Computer Weekly
See also: Identity is a link
