Naavi.org

It has been pointed out in these columns that after the recent changes made in the account numbering system in Corporation Bank there have been many customer service issues. One issue that was pointed out was that though the account numbers were changed a few months back and the new cheque books carrying the new account numbers have been issued to the customers, the back end system is still not migrated to the new systems.

As a result, I had pointed out that any NEFT remittances sent to the new account number was not being accepted by the system and is being returned. It was pointed out that this amounted to a “Denial Of Service” to the customer which amounted to both “Deficiency of Service” under Consumer Protection Act and a cognizable offence under ITA 2008.

Today I observed two other issues. some of the customers who had linked their Gas Agency accounts to corporation bank account for the purpose of LPG subsidy are finding that the subsidy is not getting credited to their account. This means that the gas agency is sending the payment to the old or new account number which is getting rejected by the system. If this money goes back to the gas agency there is a possibility that it can never be recovered from the Indian Oil or HP.

I also observed that within the branch, the systems are still working under the old account system and the system is not able to recall the specimen signatures of the customers with the new numbers. The staff therefore has a problem to identify the old number and pick up the specimen signature before a cheque can be passed.

All this indicates that there is a serious flaw in the implementation of the new account numbering system. First of all it is not clear why the Bank had to change the account numbering system. They had already migrated from the old manual system to a 15 digit account numbering system which had the IFSC code, the account code and the old account number as part of the number. It was easier to remember and was already in use. The new account numbering system is a completely new set of numbers which does not identify the branch IFSC or the old account number. It appears that who ever provided the core banking system could not use the legacy account numbering system of the Bank and persuaded the bank to change its account numbering system to suit the deficient core banking system and this has led to all the problems.

There is an indication that a deficient system was thrust on the Bank without proper technical evaluation. Some body must be held accountable for this decision which is apparently does not indicate a good business decision.

I will be happy to know from the Bank if this inference is incorrect.

In the meantime, the status of the system gives rise to a possible information security risk which needs to be attended to. If the mapping of the old and new account numbers is not working, then it is quite possible that the linkng of mobile numbers of the customers to their accounts as well as their Debit and ATM cards may also get affected. This could result in problems for the customers and phishing opportunities for the fraudsters who may call the Bank customers with offers to change the ATM/Debit cards and ask for card details for committing frauds.

It is also possible that the accounts may be wrongly linked to other accounts. (Recently I found such a flaw in the NPCI when my HDFC Bank account was linked to an unknown mobile number which was subsequently corrected on my complaint). This could result in fraudulent encashments as well as denial of genuine service requests.

There is therefore a need for RBI to make an information security audit of Corporation Bank system pertaining to the new migration of accounts from the old system to the new system. Additionally the share holders of the Bank should demand that the management explain if the decision to change the systems was warranted by any business requirement or was a result of somebody puling the right strings.

Naavi

As a part of the Digital India program, the Government of India is encouraging hospitals in India to make use of the “Online Registration System (ORS) framework to link various hospitals across the country for providing some services such as booking appointments, collecting lab reports etc.

The framework will enable aadhar based eKYC process if patient’s mobile number is registered with UIDAI.

Presently about 53 hospitals have gone online under this framework . Some of the Hospitals that have gone onboard now include AIIMS at different places, PGIMER, and GMC at Chandigarh, NIMHANS and K.C.General hospital, Bengaluru, JIPMER, Puducherry, etc. There is no doubt that this is just a small sample of Government hospitals.

At present around 1000-1500 appointments per day are being booked under the system and since its launch on 1st July 2015, about 448700 appointments have been booked under the system.

There is no doubt that there is a long way to go before the scheme could be called successful.

For Privacy practitioners, it is necessary to realize that even before the HDPSA draft is available with the public, a major initiative to collect and link the hospitals in India on a common portal is underway. The Government has developed an “Online Boarding Manual” as a guideline for hospitals (Details available here).

At present the appointment registration will collect the Sensitive Personal Information of Aadhar along with the department contacted, the purpose of contact etc which are also considered health related information of an individual and hence can be classified as Sensitive Personal Information under Section 43A of ITA 2008 requiring “Reasonable Security Practices”.

It appears that the individual hospitals just link to the ORS portal and the information processing is done at the ORS portal. Hence the Privacy and Security obligations fall on the portal.

In order to understand how the system seems to be used, I checked the NIMHANS OPD website which is one of the users of this framework.

The Privacy policy disclosed and notified under the NIMHANS website just relates to the visitors of the website and not to people who seek appointment. When the link on appointment on the Nimhans website is clicked, it takes the registrant to the ors.gov.in website where there is no declared Privacy policy.

It is also not clear how the information collected for appointment at the ORS website is re-transmitted to NIMHANS or made accessible to them.

Obviously, the system must be considered as being under the pilot run and a lot more thought needs to be given.

When HDPSA kicks in, these hospitals suddenly realize that they have already put a huge chunk of Sensitive personal Information which ought to have been protected from a back date and they will be in default from day one.

I hope some responsible persons in the management of these hospitals would take some corrective steps in this regard.

Naavi

Cyber Issues have never dominated an election process as much as it now has the US Presidential elections of 2016. Whether Trump will win or Hillary will prevail depend on how the Cyber activities in US have affected the electoral minds.

The early use of “Information Technology” in election was in India in the form of the electronic voting machines (EVM). Naavi.org has discussed the issue of Cyber Law Compliance in EVMs in the past and also suggested methods of overcoming the compliance issues.  (Check Here).

There were PIL complaint filed in this regard and a demonstration of the hackability of the EVM for which one activist was even arrested. Even Mr Subramanya Swamy had undertaken some activity in discussing the legality of EVM usage. But nothing came out of these discussions and now this discussion is in the past.

Some improvements have been made and EVMs have been accepted in Indian electoral process with whatever manual checks and balances that have been built to prevent its misuse.

In more recent days, the point of discussion in India has been on the use of Social Media for election campaign. Mr Modi was the first to make effective use of “Social Media” to take his messages across and “Digital Campaigning” became an integral part of election campaigning in India. Out of the other parties, AAP also made good use of social media to carry its message across.

What we are now seeing in US elections is however a different type of discussion.

First the discussion was Ms Hillary Clinton’s inability to secure her official e-mails while she was the Secretary of State and her use of a private e-mail server. This was exposed with WikiLeaks hacking into the server and revealing the e-mail correspondence for public gaze. Obviously, this contained many e-mails in which US policies on international relations and other private correspondence which all revealed what her rivals called her duplicity and political maneuvering. This has become an issue of defining her character and her suitability for Presidency.

Ms Clinton’s team have accused the hands of Russian hackers in this hack indicating that the issue is more like a Cyber war to influence the results of the election in favour of Mr Donald Trump. No body is saying that the e-mails are not existing but they are only complaining that they have been revealed in a wrong manner.

However, what complicated the issue is that Ms Clinton after receiving a notice from FBI on handing over the e-mails for investigation proceeded to delete over 33000 e-mails. This directly amounted to tampering of evidence and became an independent offence in itself completely unrelated to the content of these e-mails. Some of the e-mails which have surfaced now also indicate that there was full knowledge that the e-mails contained incriminating evidence and were deliberately deleted.

It appears judicially infeasible to defend this action unless the Judiciary turns a blind eye for political reasons.

Additionally, in an unrelated investigation on “Child Pornography” in one of the laptops of a person whose wife was an aide of Ms Hillary Clinton, a set of e-mails (650,000 in number) related to Ms Clinton seems to have surfaced. The speculation is that these e-mails were kept as a back up to secure the person against any adverse action by Ms Clinton. (i.o.w. as a tool of self defense by blackmail).

The fact that FBI had reportedly closed the case of e-mals earlier and has now indicated reopening of the case indicates that there may be some substance in all the allegations. Also the FBI wanted to hedge itself for a possible Trump win which could make FBI complicit in a criminal offence for its earlier action of closing the case prematurely.

The developments indicate

a) negligence in securing e-communications of a Government official,

b) hacking by a foreign Government and hactivists, tampering of evidence,

c) child pornography etc., all different kinds of Cyber Crimes.

Besides there could be corruption issues revealed in the relationship between donations made to Clinton Foundation and the Quid Pro Quo if any.

If Mr Clinton wins then there will be further discussion on covering up by the Government or Impeachment of the President, both of which will occupy public discussion space for years to come.

We in India have heard of several serious allegations against the previous UPA Government of similar nature. But these have taken years now in investigation by CBI without reaching a conclusion. But possibly US justice could be faster.

But it is difficult to expect the US DOJ going against the elected president. If Mr Trump wins, whatever FBI or DOJ does will be dubbed as “Vindictiveness” as we frequently hear in India.

The next 7 days to the election, it is expected that WikiLeaks could be coming out with more revelations that could damage Hillary Clinton and hence the stock markets are already indicating the probable victory for Donald Trump.

Whatever may be the political outcome, the developments will be a watershed moment in national elections and every other country including India needs to take note that foreign Governments may use their Cyber War capabilities to change the electoral outcome in enemy countries.

India is exposed to similar risks from China which in supporting Pakistan would like Congress to come back to power at the center and Mr Modi to lose. Probably planning may already be in progress in Chinese Cyber War rooms and we may see a test run of it during the next January polls.

I therefore caution the Central Government to take necessary counter measures to ensure that China cannot interfere in the Indian Electoral process by hacking into either the Jandhan yojana, the NPCI or the GST system.

Do we have the Skill and the Will? ….or do we continue with “All is Well” and “Chalta Hai” attitude…?..only time will tell.

Naavi

Two incidents reported yesterday in two different hospitals highlight the risk in automation of health care processes and the criticality of information security.

In one of the incidents, a virus left three hospitals in disarray and cancellation of all routine operations and outpatient appointments. (Read the Story Here)

The Virus infection affected two hospitals namely the Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust (NLAG). Due to use of some shared services, a third hospital United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust (ULHT) also had to cancel operations.

Hopefully this is more like a “Denial of Medical Services” and unless some of the cancelled operations were time critical, the damage may be contained with some inconvenience.

But the incident highlights how a normal information security incident gets into “life Threatening” mode in a health care scenario making Information security that much more of a critical care issue.

There was another incident which is also of concern which indicates how some times human intervention should always be at standby when we use automation in health care.

This incident (See Report here) occured during a robotic surgery when a laser beam being used in surgery caught fire at Tokyo Medical University Hospital. The cause of the fire was unfortunately farting (passing of gas) by the woman during the surgery. The gas being inflammable was ignited by the laser beam and caused severe burns in the 30 year old women undergoing ovarian surgery.

This fire incident may not directly be called an “Information Security Incident” but it must be recognized that the robotic surgery was not equipped to stop the laser beam instantly when the surrounding environment changed due to an unforeseen incident.

The incident is similar to the automatic brake system of a Google car failing when a crash is imminent. It must be attributed to the failure of the safety system in the automation of the health care process.

This could eventually be considered as “Negligence” of the “System” and the company manufacturing the equipment and the user (hospital) may be held negligent as an “Intermediary” and have to bear the liabilities.

When HDPSA is drafted, it will incorporate certain aspects of the “Telemedicine Act” which was once contemplated in India and abandoned which had elaborate provisions for the medical equipment manufacturers to be registered and monitored.

Naavi

The Information Technology Act 2000 which was substantially amended in 2008 (ITA2008) and presently under another revision, was enacted as a “Special Act” that was applicable to “Electronic Documents”. In view of the international obligations, only the IPR regulations like the Copyright Act was kept as an overriding provision in case of any conflict. Otherwise wherever an “electronic Document” was a subject matter of law, ITA 2008 was considered as the final law to resolve conflicts if any.

ITA 2000/8 was generous to extend its provisions to every other law and did not negate any law since Section 4 simply stated that “Wherever any law requires a document to be in writing, it can be rendered in electronic form”. Similarly, Section 5 extended the validity of a “Signature” by stating that “Wherever any law requires a document to be signed, the requirement can be fulfilled in the form of digital signature as defined under section 3 (later extended to electronic signature defined under section 3A)”

The ITA 2008 made many provisions under “Data Protection” which indirectly provided protection to “Privacy” though  there was no other legislation providing privacy protection in India. There were civil and criminal remedies and the Adjudication proceedings to render justice. By defining “Health Information” as “Sensitive personal Information”, it was also prescribed that there had to be “Reasonable Security Practices”  to protect the Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability of such information when Body Corporates handled the same. Under the concept of “Due Diligence” under Section 79, all the known best principles of Privacy protection used in International practice were made part of ITA 2008.

Now therefore when HDPSA is enacted with the specific provisions that are meant to protect the privacy and security of health information there could be several overlapping provisions between HDPSA and ITA 2008.

Ensuring that the conflicts are avoided not only in the provisions but in enforcement would be one of the prime considerations of the new law makers who draft HDPSA.

For example, “Hospitals or Health Care Providers” under HDPSA may be considered as “Body Corporates under Section 43A of ITA 2008” if they are companies. But if they are “Trusts” or a medical practitioner who is not an “association of individuals”, there could be a debate on whether it falls under the explanation of Section 43A which states

“body corporate” means any company and includes a firm, sole proprietorship or other association of individuals engaged in commercial or professional activities”

On the other hand, whether any of the covered entities under HDPSA are considered “Intermediaries” would also be debated.

Another point of debate would be while ITA 2000/8 is restricted to electronic documents, will HDPSA be available for protecting privacy when data is breached in non electronic form?… Will the security cover physical security of privacy documents in paper or voice form?

There will also be a debate…When things go wrong, is there a remedy under HDPSA with its own adjudicator or is the remedy under ITA 2000/8 with the adjudicators appointed under Section 46 of ITA 2000/8?

It is therefore necessary to understand the possible areas of conflict and steer clear of collision possibilities at the drafting stage itself.

Hope the ministries will take necessary steps

Naavi

A small mistake by a “Bug Bounty” hunter who had perhaps no intention of committing a crime has landed him in a serious problem with the law enforcement in USA.

Mr Meetkumar Hiteshbhai Desai, obviously of Indian origin from a place called “Maricopa” in USA, (Arizona) is reported to have developed an exploit for showing a vulnerability in the ios system which could have earned him a reward under the bug bounty program.

See Report here

Unfortunately, when he wanted to share a benign version of the exploit with his friends which was meant to display a pop up in their phones, he actually shared a version which automatically dialled 911 number and hang up. This resulted in a DDOS attack on the 911 system which is the public service for emergencies (like 100).

Mr Desai has now been charged of an offence which is equivalent to a “Cyber Terrorism” though he can plead “No Malicious intention”. But his negligence and the problem he might have caused will probably result in some punishment which should be a lesson to many persons who dream to be “Ethical hackers” .

I sincerely hope that the US police would understand the situation and limit the punishment to some public service. Hopefully he will be careful from now on and not indulge in such irresponsible activities in future.

Naavi