DD
MM
YYYY

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog Page 4054

Navigating Cross-Border Data Transfer and Cloud Data Security under the New Nigerian Data Protection Act

0

In an increasingly interconnected world, the issue of data protection has gained significant importance. With the rise of cloud-based technologies and the globalization of data storage, it has become crucial for tech entrepreneurs to understand the provisions of the law concerning cross-border data transfer and cloud data security. As several data protection laws changes across the world, tech enterprises cannot claim ignorance as an excuse for manhandling data and transferring data contrary to the law.

On the 12th of June 2023, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu signed into law the Nigerian Data Protection Act (NDPA), marking a significant milestone in the country’s journey to strike a balance between fostering technological innovation and safeguarding the privacy rights of individuals. The NDPA introduces a comprehensive framework that outlines the responsibilities and obligations of organizations in handling personal data in a transparent, secure, and lawful manner.

One area of particular importance for tech entrepreneurs operating in Nigeria is the provision concerning cross-border data transfer and cloud data security. With many local tech companies relying on foreign cloud-based technologies and storing data with service providers whose data centres are located outside of Africa, it is essential to understand how the NDPA affects these practices.

In this article, we will explore the key aspects of the Act that pertain to these areas, taking into consideration the challenges faced by local tech companies that utilize foreign cloud-based technologies and store data with service providers located outside of Africa.

Cross-Border Transfers Of Personal Data

The Nigerian Data Protection Act places certain restrictions on the transfer of personal data from Nigeria to other countries. According to Section 41 of the Act, data controllers or processors can only transfer personal data if the recipient country ensures an adequate level of data protection. This adequacy can be demonstrated through various means, such as laws, binding corporate rules, contractual clauses, codes of conduct, or certification mechanisms.

To comply with the Act, data controllers and processors must maintain records of the basis for transferring personal data and the adequacy of protection. The Act empowers the Commission to establish rules that require organizations to notify the Commission about the measures they have in place to ensure data security and explain their adequacy. Additionally, the Commission has the authority to identify specific categories of personal data that have additional restrictions on cross-border transfers, considering the nature of the data and the risks to data subjects.

Adequacy of Protection

The Act defines an adequate level of protection as one that upholds principles similar to those outlined in the Data Protection Act. In assessing adequacy, factors such as enforceable data subject rights, access to administrative or judicial redress, the existence of data protection laws, competent supervisory authorities, and international commitments are taken into account. The Commission plays a crucial role in determining whether a country, region, sector, or contractual provisions meet the requirements of adequacy and is responsible for issuing guidelines in this regard.

Other Bases for The Transfer of Personal Data Outside Nigeria:

In situations where adequate protection is not ensured, the Act provides alternative bases for transferring personal data outside Nigeria. These include obtaining and maintaining the consent of the data subject, transfers necessary for contractual performance or initiation, transfers in the data subject’s interest, transfers for public interest reasons, transfers for legal claims, and transfers to protect vital interests when the data subject is unable to provide consent.

Registration of Data Controllers and Processors of Major Importance

The Nigerian Data Protection Act (NDPA) does not explicitly define the criteria for determining what constitutes “major importance” or which companies fall into this category. However, it mandates that data controllers and processors of major importance must register with the Nigerian Data Protection Commission. This registration requirement applies within six months of the Act’s commencement or upon becoming a data controller or processor of major importance.

During the registration process, companies are required to provide relevant information about their operations, including details about the controller or processor, a description of the personal data being processed, the purposes of the processing, the recipients of the data, the security measures in place, and any other necessary information. It is essential for companies to accurately disclose this information to the Commission. Additionally, if there are any changes to the submitted information, companies must notify the Commission within sixty days to ensure ongoing compliance with the Act’s requirements.

The Commission maintains a register of registered data controllers and processors of major importance on its website. The Commission also has the authority to grant exemptions from registration for certain classes of controllers or processors, and it may remove any controller or processor that is no longer considered of major importance.

Impact on Cloud Infrastructure Choices:

Tech entrepreneurs in Nigeria must carefully consider the jurisdiction of the cloud service provider’s data centres. If the cloud provider’s data centres are located outside Nigeria, additional scrutiny is required to assess the adequacy of protection. Entrepreneurs may need to evaluate the data protection laws and regulations of the country where the data centres are located, along with the provider’s compliance track record, security measures, and commitment to data subject rights. They should also review the provider’s data transfer mechanisms, such as the use of standard contractual clauses or other safeguards, to ensure compliance with the Act.

Registration and Compliance Obligations:

Under the Act, data controllers and processors of major importance are required to register with the Nigerian Data Protection Commission. This registration process involves providing detailed information about the personal data being processed and the security measures in place. For entrepreneurs using cloud service providers with data centres outside Africa, it is crucial to accurately disclose the use of such providers and any cross-border data transfers during the registration process. Compliance with the Act’s registration and notification obligations is essential to avoid penalties and maintain transparency with the Commission.

Overcoming Challenges in Cross-Border Data Transfer and Cloud Security for Nigerian Tech Companies

Local tech companies in Nigeria face various challenges when utilizing foreign cloud-based technologies and storing data with service providers located outside of Africa. These challenges may now include ensuring compliance with the Nigerian Data Protection Act (NDPA) and international best practices, maintaining data security and privacy, and managing potential jurisdictional conflicts. To overcome these challenges, tech companies must adopt proactive measures and implement robust strategies:

  1. Data Localization and Jurisdiction: One of the challenges that may be faced by local tech companies is the potential conflict between the requirement to store personal data within Nigeria (data localization) and utilizing foreign cloud service providers with data centres located outside Africa. To solve this challenge, companies can explore hybrid cloud solutions that combine local data centres with foreign cloud providers. This approach allows for the storage of sensitive personal data within Nigeria while leveraging the scalability and efficiency of global cloud infrastructure. By carefully selecting cloud service providers that have a strong commitment to data privacy and security, companies can ensure compliance with the NDPA and international best practices.
  1. Data Transfer Mechanisms and Adequate Protection: As stated above, the NDPA requires data controllers and processors to ensure that personal data transferred outside Nigeria receives an adequate level of protection. Local tech companies must assess the data protection measures implemented by their foreign cloud service providers and ensure compliance with international standards. Implementing measures such as robust encryption, access controls, regular security audits, and contractual agreements with service providers can enhance data security and privacy. It is important to conduct due diligence when selecting cloud service providers, considering factors such as their data protection policies, certifications, and adherence to global data protection frameworks like the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

By adopting a proactive approach to data security and compliance, local tech companies can overcome the challenges of utilizing foreign cloud-based technologies and storing data with service providers located outside of Africa. They can establish strong data protection frameworks, conduct regular risk assessments, and implement comprehensive data transfer mechanisms. Collaborating with legal experts and data protection compliance officers can provide valuable guidance on navigating the complexities of international data transfers while ensuring compliance with the NDPA and international best practices. Ultimately, prioritizing data privacy and security not only enables companies to meet legal requirements but also builds trust with users and stakeholders, fostering sustainable growth and success in the digital ecosystem.

In conclusion, the provisions of the Nigerian Data Protection Act on cross-border data transfers have a significant impact on the use of cloud service providers with data centres located outside Africa. Entrepreneurs must carefully assess the adequacy of the protection offered by such providers, maintain records of transfer bases and protection measures, and comply with additional restrictions on specific categories of data. By ensuring compliance and prioritizing data protection, tech entrepreneurs can navigate the use of cloud services while safeguarding the privacy rights of Nigerian data subjects.

Is Blur Platform Tanking the NFT Market

0

The nft market has been booming in the past year, with record-breaking sales and unprecedented popularity. However, not all nft platforms are created equal, and some may pose a threat to the sustainability and integrity of the nft ecosystem. One of such platforms is Blur, a decentralized nft marketplace that claims to offer low fees, high security, and unlimited creativity. But is Blur really as good as it sounds, or is it actually tanking the nft market?

Blur is a platform that allows anyone to create and sell nfts without any intermediaries or gatekeepers. Users can upload any digital file, such as images, videos, music, or even tweets, and turn them into nfts that can be traded on the platform. Blur also claims to have a low fee structure, charging only 1% commission on sales and 0.1% on transfers.

Moreover, Blur boasts of having a high level of security and privacy, using encryption and blockchain technology to protect the data and identity of its users. However, despite these seemingly attractive features, Blur has also raised some serious concerns among the nft community. Some of the issues that have been pointed out by critics include:

Lack of quality control: Blur does not have any curation or verification process for the nfts that are created and sold on its platform. This means that anyone can upload anything, regardless of its originality, quality, or legality. This could lead to a flood of low-quality, plagiarized, or even illegal nfts that could damage the reputation and value of the nft market as a whole.

Lack of environmental responsibility: Blur does not take into account the environmental impact of its platform, which relies on a proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism that consumes a lot of energy and generates a lot of carbon emissions. According to some estimates, each nft transaction on Blur could use as much electricity as an average household in a month. This could contribute to the global climate crisis and undermine the social responsibility of the nft industry.

Lack of social impact: Blur does not have any social mission or vision for its platform, unlike some other nft platforms that aim to support artists, creators, or causes that are aligned with their values. Blur seems to be driven by profit and speculation, rather than by creativity and innovation. This could result in a loss of meaning and purpose for the nft market, which could ultimately affect its growth and potential.

So, is Blur tanking the nft market? It is hard to say for sure, as there are many other factors that influence the demand and supply of nfts, such as market cycles, trends, regulations, innovations, and competition. However, it is clear that Blur has damaged its own reputation and value by failing to deliver on its promises and by facing serious allegations of plagiarism and fraud.

Blur may also have harmed the perception and trust of some potential buyers and sellers of nfts, who may be more cautious or skeptical about the quality and authenticity of nfts in general. On the other hand, Blur may also have served as a wake-up call and a learning opportunity for the nft community, who may be more vigilant and discerning about the projects they support and invest in. Ultimately, the fate of Blur and the nft market depends on how they respond to the challenges and opportunities ahead.

However, many critics have questioned the legitimacy and value of Blur, arguing that images uploaded on the platform are not truly original, but rather copied or modified from existing sources. Some have even alleged that Blur is a deliberate attempt to sabotage the nft market by flooding it with worthless and unoriginal nfts that undermine the credibility and trust of the industry.

For example, a Twitter user named Nftdetective posted a thread in July 2023 exposing several instances of Blur images that were identical or very similar to images found on Google, Shutterstock, or other websites. The user also claimed that some Blur images were simply inverted or rotated versions of other Blur images, suggesting that the algorithm was not as sophisticated or random as the developer claimed. The thread went viral and sparked a backlash against Blur, with many calling for a boycott or a refund of the project.

Blur is a platform that may seem appealing at first glance, but it could also pose a serious risk to the nft market in the long run. By ignoring the quality, environmental, and social aspects of the nft industry, Blur could undermine the trust, value, and impact of the nft ecosystem. Therefore, it is important for nft enthusiasts to be aware of the pros and cons of different platforms and choose wisely where to create and trade their nfts.

Innoson Withdraws 3 Million Naira Scholarship on Mmesoma After Report Falsifies Her 362 UTME Score

0

The management of Innoson Automobile Company has said it has found it expedient to withdraw the N3 million scholarship it had earlier awarded to Miss Mmesoma Ejikeme after the confirmation of her manipulation of her UTME score by an independent Panel of inquiry set up by the Anambra State Government to clear the smoke of controversies her result had generated.

The reversal of the scholarship was made known in a statement by Mr Cornel Osigwe Head of Corporate Communications at Innoson Group on Saturday.

The statement reads in part: “It was reported initially that Miss Joy scored exceptionally high on the exam, a feat that led to her being awarded a scholarship by our company.

“However, subsequent reports of discrepancies in her UTME score led us to seek clarification from the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) and to allow her to voice her stance, we engaged in direct dialogue with Miss Joy.

“Further to this, a committee set up by Gov. Charles Soludo, carried out a thorough independent investigation into this matter,” it said.

The statement further indicated that the findings of the report were rather disappointing and regrettable as Ejikeme’s actions stood in direct contrasts to the values the company hold in high esteem.

“In line with these principles and response to the confirmed findings, we have made the difficult decision to withdraw the scholarship awarded to Miss Joy Mmesoma Ejikeme.
“This action is a testament to our unyielding commitment to honesty, integrity, and merit-based recognition.” it said.

The statement also recalls the disappointment the revelation must have caused among those who had stood by Miss Mmesoma including her school principal and other well-meaning supporters.

“However, it is crucial to maintain the integrity of our scholarship program and the values it represents,” the statement noted.

Mr Osigwe reiterates the commitment of Innonson to continue to support deserving students, drive investment in the education sector and promote the culture of excellence while upholding ethical standards .

Personal Economy: Ndubuisi Ekekwe 45-20-20-15 Investment Strategy

0

Many questions from the community on how to invest, when to invest, how to invest, etc? Here, I share a case study from Ndubuisi Ekekwe 45-20-20-15 personal strategy which I deployed weeks after I began work in a Lagos bank. I call this managing my personal economy and the decisions over those three years could fairly retire me comfortably in the village.

I share this to help young people including sharing the dividend alerts. Your teacher is a wealthy man to get into the typical social media “sharing” for kids. But I am doing it to give you confidence that I did it, and that it is possible. (My formula has changed because my positioning has evolved. At the moment, I invest in startups. So, what I did within 3 years of university graduation has expired.)

You do not invest because you have so much money; you invest because you want to pay yourself and build your Personal Economy at the end of the month. Just like when nations fail to invest, they fade. The same happens to companies. Consider the same for individuals. Of course, investing also includes training, learning, etc besides monetary investments. Good luck.

I coordinate an investing syndicate which people in Nigeria, Africa and around the world can take advantage of to deepen their investment systems.

Tekedia Capital offers a specialty investment vehicle (or investment syndicate) which makes it possible for citizens, groups and organizations to co-invest in innovative startups and young companies in Africa and around the world. Capital from these investing entities are pooled together and then invested in a specific company or companies.

 

Panel Confirms Mmesoma Manipulated Her UTME Score, Gives Recommendations

0

The panel of inquiry set up by the Anambra State Government to investigate Mss. Mmesoma Ejikeme’s Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination, UTME, result has confirmed the young lady actually scored 249 as against a score of 362 she had earlier paraded.

Mmesoma who sat for the UTME in May became the center of attention after claiming to have the highest score of 362, which the Joint Admission Matriculation Board, JAMB, administrative body of the UTME, later revealed was manipulated.

The controversy between JAMB and Mmesoma led to the birth of the eight-man panel on Wednessday to thoroughly investigate the matter and come up with facts.

In its eight-page report entitled “Report of the committee on Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma’s JAMB score controversy” which was released on Friday by the state commissioner for information, Paul Nwosu, the panel said it conducted interviews with relevant parties, including Mmesoma, JAMB officials and other individual(s) involved in the process as well as the principal of Mmesom’s school, the Anglican Girls Secondary School, Nnewi, Anambra State.

The outcome of the investigation showed Mmesoma acclaimed score of 362 was manipulated and her actual score was 249 as earlier stated by JAMB.

The panel stated Mmesoma admitted that she manipulated the fake results herself, using her phone. It was revealed she had sent a request to JAMB with a different registration number showing a UTME result of an aggregate score of 362, with Eng: 98, Phy: 89, Bio: 94, and Che: 81 which differed substantially from the standard JAMB format where she got an appropriate rebuttal stating her real score of 249.

The Principal, Anglican Girls’ Secondary School — Mrs Edu Uche and the Education Secretary, Diocese of Nnewi (Anglican Communion) were reported to have expressed dismay at the conduct of Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma.

The report which was addressed to the Anambra state governor, Prof. Charles Soludo, reads as thus:

“Recall Mr Governor that with the recent release of scores of candidates who applied for admission by the JAMB and subsequent announcement of Nkechiyere Umeh as the candidate with the highest score of 360, Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma, a 19-year-old student of Anglican Girls’ Secondary School, Uruagu Nnewi, from Enugu State, protested to the state government that she scored 362 and ought to have been so recognised.

“This has elicited interest and generated serious controversy and misgivings among the general public that the state government in its wisdom decided to constitute a committee of inquiry to look into the under-listed terms of reference; review Ejikeme Joy Mmesomna JAMB result and associated documents.

“Conduct interviews with relevant parties, including Mmesoma, JAMB officials and any other individual(s) involved in the process. Provide recommendations based on the findings of the investigation.

“The committee invited Mmesoma, the Principal of Anglican Girls’ Secondary School, and officials of JAMB for an interactive session with the Committee.

“JAMB officials led by Dr Fabian Benjamin, the Head of Public Affairs presented the detailed processes and procedures involved in JAMB admissions, the policy changes that have occurred in the release of UTME scores since 2021 and what specifically transpired between the candidate Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma with registration number: 20230639047FF in her quest to obtain her JAMB score.

“JAMB revealed the different times that Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma made several requests to the JAMB portal asking for her results at different hours, and each of these times (four in number), she received in her phone, same results from JAMB indicating candidate’s UTME Results to Wit: Eng: 64, Phy:54, Bio: 74, Che: 57 with a total aggregate score of 249.

“JAMB disclosed that the candidate was well informed of her correct score. Mmesoma had sent a request to JAMB with a different registration number showing a UTME result of an aggregate score of 362, with Eng: 98, Phy: 89, Bio: 94, and Che: 81. The results she sent differed substantially from the standard JAMB format where she got an appropriate rebuttal stating her real score of 249

“It was also evident that even the centre name ‘Nkemefuna Foundation (Thomas Chidoka Centre for Human Development as it was known before now) used for the examination was also manipulated where the candidate used the old name of the centre (Thomas Chidoka Centre for Human Development) in her own manipulated result sheet.

“In Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma’s submission, she owned up in the presence of her principal, and the Education Secretary that the narration by the JAMB officials was a true and correct description of what transpired.

“She also admitted to having given a manipulated result by herself unaided, using the same phone Airtel Number.

“According to her, she proceeded to the cybercafé (Prisca Global Computers, Uruagu, Nnewi) where she printed the results she had manipulated.

“The Committee tried to find out the motive behind her action, but Ejikeme Joy Mmesoma said nothing.

“In their own submissions, the Principal Anglican Girls’ Secondary School, Uruagu, Nnewi, and the Education Secretary — Diocese of Nnewi (Anglican Communion) expressed shock at what transpired where in their presence, Mmesoma admitted to have manipulated her UTME results, deceiving the school, her immediate family and the state government.”

“We hope that this unearthing of the truth as we have discovered will go a long way in correcting the sentiments, misconceptions and deceptions that have been in the public domain.”

The panel recommended that Mmesoma immediately tender an unreserved written apology to the Joint Admission and Matriculation Board, the school (Anglican Girls’ Secondary School, Uruagu Nnewi), and the state government and should undergo psychological counselling and therapy.