The pitfalls of offshore cloud
Summary: CIOs who send their data to an offshore or global cloud may be in for more legal and financial trouble than it's worth, according to a new whitepaper released yesterday.
CIOs who send their data to an offshore or global cloud may be in for more legal and financial trouble than it's worth, according to a new whitepaper released yesterday.
Whitepaper co-author, Connie Carnabuci, partner at law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (Credit: Luke Hopewell/ZDNet Australia)
The whitepaper, commissioned by Macquarie Telecom in partnership with law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and entitled "The Cloud and US Cross-Border Risks", aims to warn not just CIOs of the legal dangers of offshore cloud, but every level of a company considering a cloud move.
Matt Healy, head of Regulatory and Government for Macquarie Telecom, told the The Cloud and US Cross-Border Risks roundtable that as business moves to global cloud, traditional economic borders begin to break down, presenting new legal and financial risks.
Legal risks
Businesses looking to host their data in a US-based, offshore cloud environment open themselves up to a whole new world of legal strife, according to whitepaper co-author, Connie Carnabuci, partner at law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.
Data stored in a US-based cloud, for example, has a higher chance of being accessed by government agencies, making privacy assurances difficult.
US-based data faces exposure to the controversial Patriot Act and Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act, meaning that data stored in an offshore cloud environment may be accessed by US federal law enforcement agencies, regardless of who owns the data.
Australia has very strict regulations in terms of how private data can be handled, Carnabuci explained, a view which the US does not share. The US handles data privacy on a sector-by-sector basis, while several key pieces of legislation make it easy for law enforcement agencies to access data for any and all investigations.
"There's no doubt that the US Government has got much greater powers to access private data than the Australian Government has under corresponding laws," Carnabuci said, adding that agencies can view data with a lower probable cause than would normally be required.
"You don't, for example, need to be able to show probable cause that the target is engaged in criminal activity, so it is potentially the case that government may seek access to your private data stored in the US," she said.
Aussies hosting data in US clouds also can't claim protections under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unlawful search and seizure of property and information, due to the fact that data is held by a third-party cloud provider.
"The Fourth Amendment falls away and is not applicable where data has been provided to a third party," Carnabuci explained.
"The reasonable expectation of privacy is extinguished when you've provided data to that third party," she added.
Data privacy is eroded further by mutual treaties and agreements signed between countries, such as the European Convention on Cybercrime, meaning data stored in the US may end up in the hands of European law enforcement if required, without the knowledge of the customer.
The biggest risk, however, according to Carnabuci, is how customers will see your company if it hosts data offshore.
"If your company becomes the centre of an investigation, it's going to cost you time and it's going to involve money to deal with that investigation … [however] it's not about the penalties under the data privacy laws, it's about disruption to business and losing customers," she said.
Financial risks
The simple act of storing data can, in some circumstances, be classed as operating a business within the US, opening Aussie companies up to additional income tax obligations from the federal and state governments where the hosting is taking place.
"While mere storage of data typically should not amount to the conduct of business within the US for tax purposes, the activity can be treated as the conduct of business if the non-US person stores data for the account of others, or allows customers or other third parties access to the data," the whitepaper said.
"Anyone who's looking at a global cloud solution would do well to get advice because you need to look at all the circumstances. If there's a dedicated facility or if you take an equity stake in a hosting provider, for example," Carnabuci said.
Macquarie Telecom's Healy said that given the minefield surrounding global cloud hosting, businesses would do well to go with a local, mid-range cloud provider first in order to suss out the regulatory framework around global hosting.
"It may be more appropriate to take its first steps into cloud computing via an onshore provider where the controls and arrangements are perhaps more transparent," he said.
(Front page image credit: Steep Drop image by Mat Walker, CC BY-SA 2.0)
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
That is a very broad claim and this is not settled law. As recently as last month, US courts have stated that emails enjoy protection against warrantless searches:
http://www.inc.com/articles/2010/12/federal-court-protects-email-privacy.html
Choose your online software providers carefully. Not all of them like to adhere to local laws!
I'll endeavor to have the whitepaper available to view tomorrow.
Cheers,
Luke Hopewell
Journalist | ZDNet Australia
The argument put forward was that there was "no reasonable expectation of privacy", i.e. law enforcement do not require a warrant to search. Clearly there is *some* expectation of privacy, but it can be overruled by following the warrant process. The same process exists in Australia, so as far as risk goes it's pretty much the same whether it's onshore or offshore.
I don't know enough about the US / Australia judicial process to know how the warrant process compares, but I imagine there are a range of judges in both countries, with some being stricter than others.
Interesting take on it Gaz. Any evidence to back it up?
Luke: why is the US the only cloud country mentioned? Are there no Singapore or otherwise nearer clouds with less issues? Is there really no Aussie Cloud supplier?
Datacom experienced exactly the same thing last year.
This whole forth amendment, patriot act perspective really is clutching at straws I'm afraid.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/01/twitter/
U.S. government recently got a court order demanding that Twitter turn over information about a number of people connected to WikiLeaks, including founder Julian Assange, accused leaker Pfc. Bradley Manning, former WikiLeaks spokeswoman Birgitta Jonsdottir and WikiLeaks activist Jacob Appelbaum.
As promised, the whitepaper is now available for download from our Whitepapers section. You can follow the link to it here or at the top of the article:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/whitepaper/the-cloud-and-the-us_wp-9922529153.htm
Wheelyweb: The paper only deals with the possible legal implications of hosting data in a US-based cloud environment.
Thanks,
Luke Hopewell
Journalist | ZDNet Australia
I don't think anything being reported here is out of bounds or unrealistic. I do sense the sensationalism which you have caught onto fairly quickly. :)
Unfortunately some software vendors think these rules should not apply to them, especially since they earn brownie points to get into US markets.
One software vendor for online accounting software is lobbying the NZ government because they host their cloud using US servers which is against NZ policies.
Most people do not realize the severity of this issue, where your financial information becomes playground for US intelligence.
I am all for cloud. But we need to adhere to local financial security laws.
I know if one Australian made SaaS accounting provider which works closely with the regulators and government agencies to provide a superior product. Little things like calculating proper payroll taxes are done correctly which have been a huge problem with larger software vendors who "prefer to do it their way".
When it comes to accounting software - many people put a lot of faith in their software not realising that a lot of the time due to sheer ego, their software vendors do not do the right thing.
Speaking of which - how many software vendors have commercially available SBR enabled products ? Think about it.