Amazon is launching a pilot scheme which will enable 100 small online businesses to get the opportunity to sell their goods in 10 Amazon pop-up stores in UK high streets.

Clicks And Mortar

The pop-up stores will be branded as ‘Clicks and Mortar’ and will enable small online businesses selling homeware, health and beauty, food and drink and electronics to get their first taste of selling from a physical store in a UK high street. The stores may also offer customers the chance to discover new brands on their local high streets.

Amazon had already tested the pop-up store idea in the UK, albeit briefly and on a small scale, when last October it opened a fashion store in Baker Street in London to gauge customer opinions. The online shopping giant has also opened a “Home of Black Friday” store as part of the annual retail event in London over the last two years.

Following eBay

Last month, as part of its own month-long retail experiment, eBay opened a “concept” store in Wolverhampton’s i10 building, in which 40 businesses have been able to offer interactive experiences to buyers, such as workshops and tutorials. eBay reportedly launched the store as part of a partnership between itself and Wolverhampton Council after its own research showed that showed a quarter of small UK retailers did not have an online presence. The store was designed to show how stores of the future could combine technology with a human connection.

Tough Times On The High Street

The UK high street and many of its famous brand occupants have been going tough times, much of which has been blamed on a move to online shopping and competition from online brands and stores, high business rates, and a further reduction in footfall as more high street stores become empty and less attractive to shoppers.

For example, the latest BRC research shows that one in 10 shops in UK town centres is lying empty and that the vacancy rate has risen over the last four quarters and is now the highest reading since April 2015.

Many big chains have announced widescale branch closures e.g. Debenham’s having to close 22 stores, the Topshop group of stores facing problems, Boots possibly closing 200 branches, and Marks & Spencer now planning to close 72 big high street stores in addition to the 48 already closed.

Criticism

Amazon has faced criticism from some business and retail commentators for the working conditions in its warehouses, and over the relatively small amount of tax that pays in the UK.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For a limited number of small online retailers, the pop-up stores offer a great opportunity to have a low-risk, well-supported bricks and mortar retail experience and a chance to gain visibility for their brands.  For the high street, Amazon pop-ups may offer a brief boost in variety, footfall, and interest. For Amazon, one of the big online retailers that some would say have contributed (with other online retailers and high business rates) to the decline of the high street, the pilot offers them a chance to boost their brand and good publicity at a time when the many vacant stores gives them the opportunity to choose some great high street locations in major UK towns and cities. It will also offer Amazon, as it did with eBay, a legitimate opportunity to see how retailing could look in the future and a way to assess opportunities, perhaps, for its own brand and services in high streets.

A group of 47 technology companies, rights groups and security policy experts have released an open letter stating their objections to the idea of eavesdropping on encrypted messages on behalf of GCHQ.

“Ghost” User

The objections are being made to the (as yet) hypothetical idea floated by the UK National Cyber Security Centre’s technical director Ian Levy and GCHQ’s chief codebreaker Crispin Robinson for allowing a “ghost” user / third party i.e. a person at GCHQ, to see the text of an encrypted conversation (call, chat, or group chat) without notifying the participants.

According to Levy and Robinson, they would only seek exceptional access to data where there was a legitimate need, where there that kind of access was the least intrusive way of proceeding, and where there was also appropriate legal authorisation.

Challenge

The Challenge for government security agencies in recent times has been society’s move away from conventional telecommunications channels which could lawfully and relatively easily be ‘tapped’, to digital and encrypted communications channels e.g. WhatsApp, which are essentially invisible to government eyes.  For example, back in September last year, this led to the ‘Five Eyes’ governments threatening legislative or other measures to be allowed access to end-to-end encrypted apps such as WhatsApp.  In the UK back in 2017, then Home Secretary Amber Rudd had also been pushing for ‘back doors’ to be built into encrypted services and had attracted criticism from tech companies that as well as compromising privacy, this would open secure encrypted services to the threat of hacks.

Investigatory Powers Act

The Investigatory Powers Act which became law in November 2016 in the UK included the option of ‘hacking’ warrants by the government, but the full force of the powers of the law was curtailed somewhat by legal challenges.  For example, back in December 2018, Human rights group Liberty won the right for a judicial review into part 4 of the Investigatory Powers Act.  This is the part that was supposed to give many government agencies powers to collect electronic communications and records of internet use, in bulk, without reason for suspicion.

The Open Letter

The open letter to GCHQ in Cheltenham and Adrian Fulford, the UK’s investigatory powers commissioner was signed by tech companies including Google, Apple, WhatsApp and Microsoft, 23 civil society organisations, including Big Brother Watch, Human Rights Watch, and 17 security and policy experts.  The letter called for the abandonment of the “ghost” proposal on the grounds that it could threaten cyber security and fundamental human rights, including privacy and free expression.  The coalition of signatories also urged GCHQ to avoid alternate approaches that would also threaten digital security and human rights, and said that most Web users “rely on their confidence in reputable providers to perform authentication functions and verify that the participants in a conversation are the people they think they are and only those people”. As such, the letter pointed out that the trust relationship and the authentication process would be undermined by the knowledge that a government “ghost” could be allowed to sit-in and scrutinise what may be perfectly innocent conversations.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

With digital communications in the hands of private companies, and often encrypted, governments realise that (legal) surveillance has been made increasingly difficult for them.  This has resulted in legislation (The Investigatory Powers Act) with built-in elements to force tech companies to co-operate in allowing government access to private conversations and user data. This has, however, been met with frustration in the form of legal challenges, and other attempts by the UK government to stop end-to-end encryption have, so far, also been met with resistance, criticism, and counter-arguments by tech companies and rights groups. This latest “ghost” proposal represents the government’s next step in an ongoing dialogue around the same issue. The tech companies would clearly like to avoid more legislation and other measures (which look increasingly likely) that would undermine the trust between them and their customers, which is why the signatories have stated that they would welcome a continuing dialogue on the issues.  The government is clearly going to persist in its efforts to gain some kind of surveillance access to tech company communications services, albeit for national security (counter-terrorism) reasons for the most part, but is also keen to be seen to do so in a way that is not overtly like ‘big brother’, and in a way that allows them to navigate successfully through the existing rights legislation.

New rules from the US State Department will mean that US visa applicants will have to submit social media names and five years’ worth of email addresses and phone numbers.

Extended To All

Under the new rules, first proposed by the Trump administration back in February 2017, whereas previously the only visa applicants who had needed such vetting were those from parts of the world known to be controlled by terrorist groups, all applicants travelling to the US to work or to study will now be required to give those details to the immigration authorities. The only exemptions will be for some diplomatic and official visa applicants.

Delivering on Election Immigration Message

The new stringent rules follow on from the proposed crackdown on immigration that was an important part of now US President Donald Trump’s message during the 2016 election campaign.

Back in July 2016, the Federal Register of the U.S. government published a proposed change to travel and entry forms which indicated that the studying of social media accounts of those travelling to the U.S. would be added to the vetting process for entry to the country. It was suggested that the proposed change would apply to the I-94 travel form, and to the Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA) visa. The reason(s) given at the time was that the “social identifiers” would be: “used for vetting purposes, as well as applicant contact information. Collecting social media data will enhance the existing investigative process and provide DHS greater clarity and visibility to possible nefarious activity and connections by providing an additional toolset which analysts and investigators may use to better analyse and investigate the case.”

There had already been reports that some U.S. border officials had actually been asking travellers to voluntarily surrender social media information since December 2016.

2017

In February 2017, the Trump administration indicated that it was about to introduce an immigration policy that would require foreign travellers to the U.S. to divulge their social media profiles, contacts and browsing history and that visitors could be denied entry if they refused to comply. At that time, the administration had already barred citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the US.

Criticism

Critics of the idea that social media details should be obtained from entrants to the US include civil rights group the American Civil Liberties Union which pointed out that there is no evidence it would be effective and that it could lead to self-censorship online.  Also, back in 2017, Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group was quoted online media as describing the proposed as “excessive and insulting”.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Although they may sound a little extreme, these rules have now become a reality and need to be considered by those needing a US visa.  Given the opposition to President Trump and his some of his thoughts and policies and the resulting large volume of Trump-related content that is shared and reacted to by many people, these new rules could be a real source of concern for those needing to work or to study in the US.  It is really unknown what content, and what social media activity could cause problems at immigration for travellers, and what the full consequences could be.

People may also be very uncomfortable being asked to give such personal and private details as social media names and a massive five years’ worth of email addresses and phone numbers, and about how those personal details will be stored and safeguarded (and how long for), and by whom they will be scrutinised and even shared.  The measure may, along with other reported policies and announcements from the Trump administration even discourage some people from travelling to, let alone working or studying in the US at this time. This could have a knock-on negative effect on the economy of the US, and for those companies wanting to get into the US marketplace with products or services.

The Salesforce cloud-based CRM platform is adding a low code, blockchain-powered service that will allow users to share data with third parties in a secure, transparent, and auditable way.

Blockchain

Blockchain, the technology that was famously behind the bitcoin cryptocurrency, has been described by its Co-Founder Nic Carey as being like “a big spreadsheet in the cloud that anyone can use, but no one can erase or modify”.  Blockchain is an open-source, free technology that acts as an incorruptible peer-to-peer network / a kind of ledger that allows multiple parties to transfer value in a secure and transparent way.

Salesforce Blockchain Platform

Salesforce is positioning its Blockchain platform as a low-code system that has been customised to fit with Salesforce’s flagship Lightning CRM product.  The Blockchain platform has been built on the open source technology developed by Hyperledger Sawtooth. Salesforce Blockchain is currently only available to select design partners but will have its general release in 2020.

Why Blockchain?

Many businesses and organisations are now finding that they need to harness and share large amounts of data with a growing network of partners and third parties.  This sharing needs to be accomplished, however, in a way that is secure and incorruptible, and transparent and with a clear audit trail.  There is, of course, also the need to save costs, reduce inefficiencies, and make the process of sharing data as fast and easy as possible.

Also, in terms of the broader function of a CRM system, companies and organisations need the most up-to-date and effective way to verify and maintain contracts, send transactions, and essentially “automate trust”. Blockchain offers all these benefits.

Blockchain-as-a-Service

Salesforce is one of a growing number of tech brands getting in the rapidly growing BaaS market which offers enterprises the chance to deploy distributed ledgers without the cost or risk of deploying it in-house, and without needing to find in-house developers.

Tech commentators have noted, for example, that Microsoft and many other big tech companies, including Amazon and Oracle, are now looking to make the most of the growing blockchain as a service (BaaS) market. Microsoft was one of the first software vendors to offer BaaS on its Azure cloud platform as far back as 2015, but the predictions are that from the end of this year onwards, the market (estimated to be worth $7billion) will start to grow rapidly.

Real World Examples

Salesforce is already reporting ways that its new Blockchain platform is making a positive difference, such as at S&P Global Ratings which is using the service to reduce the time it takes to review and approve new business bank accounts.

There are now plenty of other examples of how Blockchain technology is being used (and is about to be used) in the real business world to add value, increase efficiencies, create opportunities and provide innovative ways of meeting old business challenges.  These include:

• Using the data on a blockchain ledger to record the temperature of sensitive medicines being transported from manufacturer to hospital in hot climates. The ‘incorruptible’ aspect of the blockchain data gives a clear record of care and responsibility along the whole supply chain.
• Using an IBM-based blockchain ledger to record data about wine certification, ownership and storage history. This has helped to combat fraud in the industry and has provided provenance and re-assurance to buyers.
• Shipping Company Maersk using a blockchain-based system for tracking consignments thereby offering visibility and efficiency i.e. digitising a formerly paper-based process that involved multiple interactions.
• Start-up company ‘Electron’ building a blockchain-based system for sharing information between those involved in supplying energy which could speed up and simplify the supplier switching process. It may also be used for smart grid processes, such as local load-balancing of supply and demand.
• Data storage solutions company Seagate Technology (Seagate), and IBM working together and using Blockchain and advanced cryptographic product identification technology to reduce disk-drive product counterfeiting.
• Facebook is reported to be developing its own blockchain-based cryptocurrency that will enable its users to have a PayPal-like experience when purchasing advertised products, as well as providing authentication and an audit trail.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For Salesforce customers, particularly the smaller customers, having Blockchain-as-a-Service as part of their CRM should enable them to solve some of their biggest data-sharing challenges (security, trust, and transparency) in a way that doesn’t require lots of code, and in a way that doesn’t require the considerable cost or risk of trying to develop and deploy it in-house.

The benefits of blockchain technology are just starting to be realised and exploited by many different companies around the world, and the BaaS market looks set to grow rapidly with the big tech companies and brands all looking to compete by offering different Blockchain-based services to businesses and organisations of all sizes.

Blockchain has already proven itself to be a technology that can save time and costs, provide fast and secure traceability, visibility and efficiency, and provide a real competitive advantage for companies that are willing to investigate how it could be used to add value to their particular business.

Even governments and cities around the world have realised the benefits and are committing considerable resources to Blockchain. For example, Dubai has committed to putting all of its documents on blockchain in the next few years and has founded a public-private initiative called the Global Blockchain Council to foster the development and use of blockchain technology in and between local government teams, local businesses and international start-ups.

Research by law firm Squire Patton Boggs has revealed (one year on from the introduction of GDPR ) that companies are facing cost pressures from a large number of subject access requests (SARs) coming from their own employees.

SARs

A Subject Access Requests (SAR), which is a legal right for everyone in the UK, is where an individual can ask a company or organisation, verbally or in writing, to confirm whether they are processing their personal data and, if so, can ask the company or organisation for a copy of that data e.g. paper copy or spreadsheet.  With a SAR, individuals have the legal right to know the specific purpose of any processing of their data, what type of data being processed and who the recipients of that processed data are, how long that data stored, how the data was obtained from them in the first place, and for information about how that processed and stored data is being safeguarded.

Under the old 1998 Data Protection Act, companies and organisations could charge £10 for each SAR, but under GDPR individuals can make requests for free, although companies and organisations can charge “reasonable fees” if requests are unfounded, excessive (in scope), or where additional copies of data are requested to the original request.

Big Rise In SARs From Own Employees = Rise In Costs

The Squire Patton Boggs research shows that 71% of organisations have seen an increase in the number of their own employees making official requests for personal information held, and 67% of those organisations have reported an increase in their level of expenditure in trying to fulfil those requests.

The reason for the increased costs of handling the SARs can be illustrated by the 20% of companies surveyed who said they had to adopt new software to cope with the requests, the 27% of companies who said they had hired staff specifically to deal with the higher volume of SARs, and the 83% of organisation that have been forced to implement new guidelines and procedures to help manage the situation.

Why More Requests From Employees?

It is thought that much of the rise in the volume of SARs from employees may be connected to situations where there are workplace disputes and grievances, and where employees involved feel that they need to use the mechanisms and regulations in place to help themselves or hurt the company.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

This story is another reminder of how the changes made to data protection in the UK with the introduction of GDPR, the shift in responsibility towards companies, and the widespread knowledge about GDPR can impact upon the costs and workload of a company with SARs.  It is a reminder also, that companies need to have a system and clear policies and procedures in place that enables them to respond quickly and in a compliant way to such requests, whoever they are from.

The research has highlighted an interesting and perhaps surprising and unexpected reason for the rise in the volume of SARs, and that there may be a need now for more guidance from the ICO about employee SARs.