- “Cloud First”: To move federal agencies to the cloud, the government created a program known as FedRAMP, whose job was to ensure the security of new technology.
- Security Breakdown: ProPublica found that FedRAMP authorized a Microsoft product called GCC High to handle sensitive government data, despite years of concerns about its security.
- Potential Conflict of Interest: The government relies, in part, on third-party firms to vet cloud technology, but those firms are hired and paid by the company being assessed.
No I can’t cite something that doesn’t exist. I literally just said there isn’t one… so I am not sure what your point is.
What legal violation? Because the law says nothing about that.
what the law does allow, is data storage with a BAA.
What?!? The entire purpose of HIPAA is to put liability on misuse of data. At this point, I have no fucking clue what your point is.
Yes, but you talked about how cloud storage vs on prem is a violation.
Put up or shut up.
Also see my edit about a BAA
The answer to your question is in the article you posted… did you even read it?
Have a great day, I’m done talking in circles.
I’m not op, and I’ve Read the actual law.
Believe it or not I pay attention to usernames. I was talking about the link you just posted that mentions the liability assumed by the signers of the BAA.
Maybe read it again? My job requires me to be HIPAA and FERPA certified, I am confident in my interpretation of the situation.
I’m also required to be compliant.
But how can companies like google have products like
https://cloud.google.com/security/compliance/hipaa
if cloud storage is a violation?
That’s what he’s saying, they’re in violation. Your comment begs the question “is everything big companies do legal and compliant?”
Seriously, stop being a troll. I’m done with this conversation. Not one time have I used the word violation.
Fun fact, the law actually does not lay out a single technical “must do”.
But rather establish liabilities and defines miss use. Which is NOT the same as proper use.