Manage My Health Security Breach: Expert Warns of Lax System
- Here's a breakdown of the key points from the provided text, presented as factual statements without reusing the source's language or structure:
- * The Digital Health Association advocated against the therapeutic Products Act, which proposed regulating health software and imposing penalties for non-compliance.
“This is the same pattern. They should have invested. They’ve had two years and these are the exact same areas that have caused them the issue.”
The company did not respond to him, he said.
Manage My Health has said it is indeed required to hold on to patients’ data – even if their GP switches provider – unless patients deregister themselves.
However, Chopra believes Manage My Health could have another reason for holding on to patient records.
Its own website proudly notes its database of “1.8 million Kiwis” and its ability to get its customers’ message to them “when they’re thinking about their health”.
“If this company did not have any commercial gains to make out of this data, then they would not be paying the extra storage costs for this data,” Chopra said.
Terms and conditions gave company an ‘out’
A Wellington IT worker caught up in the manage My Health data breach – whom RNZ has agreed not to name – also questioned the lack of regulatory checks and balances.
“Health services that have this information and these functions should be subject to the same scrutiny and compliance requirements and auditing as financial institutions.”If your banking app is down, it’s a huge deal and it gets lots of scrutiny.”
However, Manage My Health’s users could not say they were not warned, she said.
“The irony is that I actually read their terms and conditions, and they haven’t breached them as their entire terms of usage is they can’t guarantee their system is any good or that they’ll fix it, even if it’s foreseeable and they know about it.
“It’s essentially, ‘we can’t guarantee our product doesn’t suck, but here, give it a go’.”
Digital specialist Callum mcmenamin (who also alerted manage My Health to its security vulnerabilities six months ago) said the 300-page Health Information Security Framework contained many good things – but entirely relied on “hand-wavy” self-regulation.
“It’s all just a high-trust system where the Government sets the standards but then closes its eyes and doesn’t check if the standards are actually being met.”
Industry has opposed regulation – commentator
According to political analyst Bryce Edwards from The Democracy Project, the lack of regulatory oversight was “not an accident”.
The Digital Health Association – the industry body for health software vendors - had lobbied against what it called “overly burdensome privacy laws and regulation”, h
Here’s a breakdown of the key points from the provided text, presented as factual statements without reusing the source’s language or structure:
* The Digital Health Association advocated against the therapeutic Products Act, which proposed regulating health software and imposing penalties for non-compliance.
* A concern raised was that the proposed Act lacked clarity and could create overly broad definitions.
* The Digital Health Association stated its support for regulation aimed at ensuring patient safety and effective digital health service delivery.
* The association believes that simply increasing penalties isn’t sufficient for data protection; ongoing investment in security is also crucial.
* Health NZ holds Manage My Health accountable for data security.
* Health NZ has published a Health Information Security Framework (HISF) to guide the health sector on secure information management.
* Health NZ is exploring the possibility of requiring autonomous cybersecurity audits for third-party providers,including patient portals,in the future.