1. Federations, the Data Protection Directive and WP29 TF-EMC2 Mikael Linden, mikael.linden@csc.fi CSC, the Finnish IT Center for Science

2. Open questions  What is personal data? e.g. is eduPersonTargetedID Personal Data? (-> library services!)  Purpose of processing personal data? US: inCommon eAuthentication, is that possible in Europe?  Relevance of the attributes released? How to define/measure relevance of an attribute?  User consent for attribute release? opting-in for attribute release  How to make the consent informed? In Finland we provide end user the Privacy Policy of the SP in advance  How to tackle attribute release to third countries? countries ”without adequate level of data protection” for example, to the US

3. The short history of the topic  In TNC2005 my paper on how Haka federation interprets the Data Protection Directive http://www.terena.nl/events/tnc2005/programme/presentations/ show.php?pres_id=77 Haka’s interpretation is based on discussions with the Finnish Data Protection Ombudsman  Discussion in TF-EMC2/Barcelona and afterwards in the refeds mailing list How to find a European-wide interpretation of the directive?  in October, I asked the Finnish data protection ombudsman how to proceed  WP29 is the authorative body in EU  WP29 has a meeting in 1st of February

4. Article 29 Working Party (WP29)  defined in article 29 of the Data Protection Directive  objectives (excerpts) ”To promote the uniform application of the general principles of the Directives in all Member States” ”To make recommendations to the public at large, and in particular to Community institutions…”  consists of national supervisory authorities Chaired by Peter Schaar of Germany secretariat of two persons in Brussels  http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/wor kinggroup/index_en.htm http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/wor kinggroup/index_en.htm

5. WP29 and the Working Documents To communicate its views, WP29 uses to publish Working Documents For example  WP109: Working Programme 2005 http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2005/wp 109_en.pdfhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2005/wp 109_en.pdf read it to get an idea! (just 3 pages)  WP68: Working Document on on-line authentication services http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2003/wp 68_en.pdfhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/fsj/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2003/wp 68_en.pdf 1/2003 in essence, about MS Passport and early Liberty specs

6. Best practices/common guidelines for privacy in federations in Europe? 1.to make writing policies for national federations easier  no need to make things from scratch 2.to ease bridging national federations together  make national policies are comparable to some extent  eduGAIN 3.to ease things when going out of EU (e.g. the US) ”one EU instead of 25 EU member states” cross-atlantic confederations library content providers in the US

7. The role of TERENA? TERENA Mission and Objectives Statement  …  …TERENA represents the common interests and opinions of its member organisations in contacts with governments,…  …TERENA advises the European Commission, national governments and other authorities on policy and technical matters related to support for the development of research and education networking infrastructures, services and applications….