A council publishes a breach log that redacts names but leaves unique case IDs that readily re-identify individuals when combined with other public records. How should this disclosure be assessed?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Blacking out the name but leaving a unique case ID is like hiding the name tag and shouting the locker number. If people can still be picked out, you haven't really anonymised the story. Re-identification risk still matters for 'redacted' releases.
Full Explanation
Personal data includes information that relates to an identified or identifiable person. Publishing unique case identifiers that enable re-identification can constitute an unauthorised disclosure even if direct names are masked. Controllers must assess residual identifiability and apply stronger anonymisation or withhold identifying details when publishing incident information.