DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Japan’s government to urge infrastructure data be kept on servers in Japan

Posted on January 2, 2019 by Dissent

I’m surprised that they have to ask and haven’t just required this by law already — and that applies not just to Japan but to all countries. It doesn’t have to be an alliance against China motivating the move to keep critical data on servers located within the country. Or am I missing something here and this is not as straightforward as I might think?

The Yomiuri Shimbun reports:

From April at the earliest, the government will ask operators of crucial infrastructure (see below) such as power and water suppliers to store their electronic data on servers located in Japan, as part of security measures against the threat of cyberwar.


The measure is aimed at protecting information indispensable for the security of people’s lives and for industrial competitiveness, with an eye on possible cyber-attacks by China and other countries.

Read more on The Japan News.

Category: Commentaries and AnalysesNon-U.S.

Post navigation

← AU: Data breach sees Victorian Government employees’ details stolen
Data leak shuts down Alaska’s PFD application website →

3 thoughts on “Japan’s government to urge infrastructure data be kept on servers in Japan”

  1. Captain Canuk says:
    January 2, 2019 at 10:54 am

    “Or am I missing something here and this is not as straightforward as I might think?”

    There is data residency (geolocation of the data) and data sovereignty issues.

    US law wise & NAFTA type agreements (From US side) sort of remove/dictate no data sovereignty. Which means, the use of servers/storage which a country cannot control due to laws of the foreign country even if the server(s)/data have residency within a countries own jurisdiction.

    US law trumps when an entity is US owned or even partially owned. That is, US law dictates American owners operating in foreign jurisdictions to operate/cooperate with US gov in any/all ways upon demand, which could included releasing info to US gov and or to allow access (cloud wise or if data/server resides in said country).

    China has the same laws, which is what the hype is about w/ Huawei equipment and the 5-eye bans of Huawei equipment.

    It’s really somewhat 2 faced & all spook stuff.

    So the article. to me, is focusing on “data residency” but is speaking very little (or ignores) “data sovereignty”. BUT, they do indeed mention Huawei & ZTE, so they are indeed also talking “data sovereignty” as well in a non-clear fashion.

    So bottom line:
    1. “Data residency” and “data sovereignty” issues. But they appear to be swinging at China only in terms “data sovereignty” & no one else…
    2. Data residency” is not the same as “data sovereignty. Can be resident and have no data sovereignty

    So the question remains, are they only singling out China? Appears so.

    Best guess on 1st coffee.

    1. Dissent says:
      January 2, 2019 at 11:07 am

      Thank you for taking the time to spell that all out for me. I need more coffee to understand it. Some of this is the Microsoft case kind of thing, I gather, but yes, this struck me as swinging at China and not necessarily other countries.

  2. Captain Canuk says:
    January 2, 2019 at 11:43 am

    Yes, MS hits some of this, the big talk of the past decade are the secret/sealed national security requests (or other) which a foreign (US or Chinese) owned (or partially owned) company cannot divulge or warn the resident country about. They have to comply, or face prison right.

    The article states they want data resident. Doesn’t say they want it stored on wholly owned Japanese servers/companies (sovereignty).

    So a few funny things with the article which comes across, to me anyhow, as singling out China only.

Comments are closed.

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • AMI Group – Travel & Tours notice of ransomware attack
  • Resource: Insider Threat reports
  • Za: Cyber extortionist sentenced to eight years in jail
  • ICE takes steps to deport the Australian hacker known as “DR32”
  • Hearing on the Federal Government and AI
  • Nigerian National Sentenced To More Than Five Years For Hacking, Fraud, And Identity Theft Scheme
  • Data breach of patient info ends in firing of Miami hospital employee
  • Texas DOT investigates breach of crash report records, sends notification letters
  • PowerSchool hacker pleads guilty, released on personal recognizance bond
  • Rewards for Justice offers $10M reward for info on RedLine developer or RedLine’s use by foreign governments

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • The Decision That Murdered Privacy
  • Hearing on the Federal Government and AI
  • California county accused of using drones to spy on residents
  • How the FBI Sought a Warrant to Search Instagram of Columbia Student Protesters
  • Germany fines Vodafone $51 million for privacy, security breaches
  • Malaysia enacts data sharing rules for public sector
  • U.S. Enacts Take It Down Act

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.