Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Analytics

6/25/2008
08:10 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Google, Microsoft Back Security & Privacy Framework for Online Health Data

The Common Framework for Networked Personal Health Information defines best practices for protecting patient data for online access

Most Americans want access to their personal health records online -- but nine of out 10 say whether they actually sign up for it depends on the privacy of that data. That’s one of the findings in a newly released survey of 1,580 adults in the U.S. by the Markle Foundation, which today also helped launch the industry’s first framework for securing and protecting healthcare records online.

Google, Intuit, Microsoft, WebMD, and major healthcare providers and insurers including Aetna, BlueCross BlueShield, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs all announced that they endorse the new Common Framework for Networked Personal Health Information. The framework defines a set of best practices for protecting and securing patient data online, as consumers are increasingly being offered options for keeping copies of their own health information and connecting to health services online.

Today, only about 2.7 percent of Americans use electronic personal health records (PHR), according the Markle’s study. The goal is to make the practice more secure and palatable to consumers so that this model can take off. Connecting for Health, the public-private organization under Markle heading up the framework, two years ago came up with a related framework for linking medical professionals from different institutions and clinics via the Internet. The new framework is focused on networks offered to consumers, who then can collect, store, and share their health data with anyone they want.

“The common framework is a set of technology practices and policy commitments,” says Zoe Baird, president of the Markle Foundation. “This focuses on the rules of all participants on the network.”

The framework does not, however, specify just what security technologies (think authentication methods, encryption) that participants must deploy. “It references a set of standards that should be adhered to,” says David Lansky, president and CEO of the Pacific Business Group on Health.

It encompasses authentication of users, audit trails, limiting the scope of identifying data to third parties, and securing the data in transit and at rest. It also includes policy enforcement mechanisms and other policy parameters.

Meanwhile, 46.5 percent of the Markle Foundation survey respondents say they would be interested in using an online PHR service, and among those who are not, 56.8 percent say it’s due to their concerns about privacy and confidentiality.

— Kelly Jackson Higgins, Senior Editor, Dark Reading

  • Google (Nasdaq: GOOG)
  • Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT) Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
    More Insights
  • Comments
    Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
    Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
    White Papers
    Video
    Cartoon Contest
    Current Issue
    6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
    This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
    Flash Poll
    State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
    State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
    Data breaches and regulations have forced organizations to pay closer attention to the security incident response function. However, security leaders may be overestimating their ability to detect and respond to security incidents. Read this report to find out more.
    Twitter Feed
    Dark Reading - Bug Report
    Bug Report
    Enterprise Vulnerabilities
    From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
    CVE-2020-11619
    PUBLISHED: 2020-04-07
    FasterXML jackson-databind 2.x before 2.9.10.4 mishandles the interaction between serialization gadgets and typing, related to org.springframework.aop.config.MethodLocatingFactoryBean (aka spring-aop).
    CVE-2020-11620
    PUBLISHED: 2020-04-07
    FasterXML jackson-databind 2.x before 2.9.10.4 mishandles the interaction between serialization gadgets and typing, related to org.apache.commons.jelly.impl.Embedded (aka commons-jelly).
    CVE-2020-11509
    PUBLISHED: 2020-04-07
    An XSS vulnerability in the WP Lead Plus X plugin through 0.98 for WordPress allows remote attackers to upload page templates containing arbitrary JavaScript via the c37_wpl_import_template admin-post action (which will execute in an administrator's browser if the template is used to create a page).
    CVE-2020-6647
    PUBLISHED: 2020-04-07
    An improper neutralization of input vulnerability in the dashboard of FortiADC may allow an authenticated attacker to perform a cross site scripting attack (XSS) via the name parameter.
    CVE-2020-9286
    PUBLISHED: 2020-04-07
    An improper authorization vulnerability in FortiADC may allow a remote authenticated user with low privileges to perform certain actions such as rebooting the system.