DataBreaches.Net

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

Why Healthcare is (or isn’t) Adopting Blockchain

Posted on August 7, 2020 by Dissent

Matt Jordan reports:

There’s a place for Blockchain in the Healthcare environment, whether individual providers are choosing to adopt it or not. With the current health crisis rocking our country, and even our world, sending patients to ICU or bed-ridden and unable to leave their homes to receive care and diagnoses from their medical professionals. No matter the situation, integrating blockchain-based strategies into healthcare operations can assist medical staff with combatting the overwhelming pandemic crisis, one step at a time.

Blockchain has many effective uses in a number of different vertical markets, but the Healthcare segment is definitely an area that can greatly benefit.  Security within health systems is more paramount than ever before.  Patient data is more valuable than credit card information and thus health systems are at risk on a daily basis.  Blockchain can provide a much-needed encrypted ledger to secure patient sensitive data across multiple health networks and make it even more difficult for hacking to occur.

Read more on DevPro Journal.

Not so fast, says EFF. Adam Schwartz explains:

An ill-conceived California bill endorses a blockchain-based system that would turn COVID-19 test results into permanent records that could be used to grant access to public places.

EFF and ACLU oppose California A.B. 2004. The newest version of this bill would create a pilot program for using “verifiable health credentials” to report COVID-19 and other medical test results. The bill defines such a credential as “a portable electronic patient record,” for which authenticity “can be independently verified cryptographically.” The bill’s fact sheet explains that these credentials “use blockchain technology” to create “a provable health record” for purpose of “travel, returning to employment, immunization status, and so on.” Three rounds of official bill analysis provide the same explanation.

That’s a huge privacy concern. No one should have to unlock their phone and expose their health information in order to gain entry to their office, school, or neighborhood market.

Medical test results are a poor fit for public ledgers. First, per the recommendations of California’s Blockchain Working Group, the “most critical question” when considering adopting blockchain technology is whether “a permanent record [is] warranted.” Here, it clearly is not. A person’s COVID-19 status may change from day to day, and tests are often hard to come by. This system could unfairly punish those who can’t afford to be tested nearly constantly. Second, while verifiable credentials might make sense for reporting a binary fact (such as whether or not a person is 21), medical tests come with strong caveats and significant margins of error. For example, some COVID-19 diagnostic tests have a false negative rate as high as 20 or 30%. The science behind testing for COVID-19 immunity is even less settled. According to the CDC, “we do not know how much protection [COVID-19] antibodies may provide or how long this protection may last.” This nuance is lost when a test result is turned into a credential. In short, this bill is a blockchain solution in search of a problem, and COVID-19 is a problem that will not be so easily solved.

Worse, the bill would take us a troubling step towards a national identification system. It would habituate people to present a digital token as a condition of entry to physical spaces, and habituate gatekeepers to demand such digital tokens. Such systems could be expanded to track every occasion that a person presented their digital token, or to prove other pieces of personal information like age, pregnancy, or HIV status. Further, such systems would create new information security problems when people hand their unlocked phones to gatekeepers, and create new social equity problems given the one-in-five people who don’t have a smartphone.

EFF and ACLU also opposed an earlier version of this bill. You can read here our lengthier explanation of this bill’s many problems. We urge the California legislature to reject A.B. 2004. It will do nothing to address the COVID-19 crisis, and much to invade our digital rights.

 

Related posts:

  • FBI Search Warrant That Fueled Massive Government Hacking Was Unconstitutional, EFF Tells Court
  • Heads Up Internet: Time to Kill Another Dangerous CFAA Bill
  • Proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty Negotiations Headed in Troubling Direction, Sidestepping Human Rights Protections and Threatening Free Expression, EFF and Allies Warn
  • How to Assess a Vendor’s Data Security
Category: Commentaries and AnalysesHealth Data

Post navigation

← Pepperstone Updates Clients on Data Breach Investigation
UK Dentists May Have Had Bank Details Stolen Following Data Breach →

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

  • Horizon Healthcare RCM discloses ransomware attack in December
  • Disgruntled IT Worker Jailed for Cyber Attack, Huddersfield
  • Hacker helped kill FBI sources, witnesses in El Chapo case, according to watchdog report
  • Texas Centers for Infectious Disease Associates Notifies Individuals of Data Breach in 2024
  • Battlefords Union Hospitals notifies patients of employee snooping in their records
  • Alert: Scattered Spider has added North American airline and transportation organizations to their target list
  • Northern Light Health patients affected by security incident at Compumedics; 10 healthcare entities affected
  • Privacy commissioner reviewing reported Ontario Health atHome data breach
  • CMS warns Medicare providers of fraud scheme
  • Ex-student charged with wave of cyber attacks on Sydney uni

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

  • Supreme Court Decision on Age Verification Tramples Free Speech and Undermines Privacy
  • New Jersey Issues Draft Privacy Regulations: The New
  • Hacker helped kill FBI sources, witnesses in El Chapo case, according to watchdog report
  • Germany Wants Apple, Google to Remove DeepSeek From Their App Stores
  • Supreme Court upholds Texas law requiring age verification on porn sites
  • Justices nix Medicaid ‘right’ to choose doctor, defunding Planned Parenthood in South Carolina
  • European Commission publishes its plan to enable more effective law enforcement access to data

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.