Data privacy vs. data security | TeamMate

3264308 data privacy vs data security what internal auditors need to know c12b85841b

The strategic impact of data privacy vs. data security

The lines between data privacy and security are blurring, and today’s business environment isn’t making it any easier. Cloud migrations. Rapid digital transformation. The sudden integration of artificial intelligence (AI). Companies are collecting more data than ever before, and it is very hard to keep track of it all. To put this in perspective, Statista and IDC did research that showed the world created and consumed 181 zettabytes of data in 2025.

When a breach occurs, the strategic impact hits hard. Failure in data security leads to ransomware attacks, intellectual property theft, and operations grinding to a halt. On the flip side, failure in data privacy results in massive regulatory fines and a profound loss of customer trust. In the financial services sector, where consumer confidence is the currency that matters most, a privacy misstep can be just as fatal as a breached firewall.

Let’s look at this from the boardroom perspective. Ten years ago, the audit committee might have been satisfied with a simple check-the-box exercise stating that the firewalls were active and antivirus software was up to date. Today? The conversation has entirely changed. Board members are asking pointed questions about data lineage, third-party handlers, and the financial exposure associated with a potential privacy breach. They recognize that a fractured approach to data privacy vs. data security is a massive, unmitigated risk. In the financial services sector, where consumer confidence is the currency that matters most, a privacy misstep can be just as fatal as a breached firewall. Rebuilding a server takes days; rebuilding customer trust takes decades.

Stakeholders view data privacy vs. security not as back-office IT problems but as non-negotiable pillars of organizational health. In fact, The Institute of Internal Auditors’ (The IIA) Risk in Focus Report 2026 found that cybersecurity continues to hold the number one spot in global risk rankings and internal audit priorities. By evaluating the strategic impact of these elements, internal audit can step out of the reactive compliance checker role and become a proactive advisor on risk management.

Data privacy vs. data security: Definitions, differences, and audit implications

You can’t audit what you don’t understand. To effectively evaluate these domains, auditors need clear definitions. They are connected, but they need different controls, frameworks, and ways to evaluate them.

What is data privacy?

Data privacy dictates the rights, usage, and consent governing how data is collected, processed, shared, and destroyed. But for an internal audit, assessing privacy goes far beyond reviewing policy documents to see if the business says it respects consumer rights. As highlighted in ISACA’s 2025 Privacy in Practice analysis, consumer protection should not be based solely on jurisdiction; the ethical burden of privacy belongs to enterprises, not end users. A comprehensive audit requires testing the actual mechanisms enforcing those rights.

Privacy asks the challenging audit questions: Are the automated deletion scripts effectively purging data at the end of its retention lifecycle, or is the organization unnecessarily hoarding data simply because it can? Is sensitive information properly masked or tokenized when used in non-production testing environments? Are we tracking the flow of data through complicated API integrations to make sure that third-party vendors aren’t breaking our consent agreements? To do a full data privacy audit, we need to get our hands dirty and check the architectural level of data minimization and consent management workflows.

What is data security?

Data security is about the technical, physical, and administrative measures that are taken to keep data safe from being accessed or changed (without permission) or destroyed or stolen. Privacy sets the rules for how people can interact, while security puts up the walls.

For seasoned IT auditors, assessing security means moving past basic compliance checklists. Because of insider threats—whether malicious employees or well-meaning staff accidentally emailing unencrypted client data— account for a massive percentage of security incidents, modern audits must heavily scrutinize Zero Trust architectures.

The audit implications here involve deep technical control testing. Rather than just verifying that encryption exists, auditors need to evaluate cryptographic key management lifecycles. They should test the efficacy of Data Loss Prevention (DLP) rules in stopping unauthorized data egress, review Identify and Access Management (IAM) privilege creep, and challenge the rigor of the vulnerability management program. Are we merely running automated network scans, or are we actively testing incident response playbooks and the configurations of our Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools?

How data privacy and data security intersect—and why both matter for internal audit

Privacy and security are distinct, but you can’t have one without the other. It is impossible to guarantee privacy without the security infrastructure to protect the data. Conversely, you can have airtight security, including firewalls and zero-trust architecture, and still completely violate privacy laws if you sell a consumer’s data without their explicit consent.

Evaluating this intersection is crucial. A siloed audit approach leaves glaring blind spots. Auditors must assess the extent to which security controls facilitate compliance with privacy regulations, ensuring that data privacy and data security operate in concert to manage information ethically and protect it rigorously.

Key audit considerations for data privacy and security programs

As regulatory pressures mount, internal audit teams must look critically at whether managements’ data governance strategies actually work in practice, not just on paper.

Assessing risk across privacy and security domains

Everything starts with the risk assessment. When looking at data privacy and security, an internal audit must assess the specific threat landscape.

What types of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) does the organization hold? Where does it live? Who has access to it? Internal audit adds immense value by helping organizations establish formal data governance practices, and it’s important to provide a roadmap for scoping these assessments effectively.

Internal Audit also needs to consider organizational changes that suddenly shift the risk profile. Mergers and acquisitions are a great example. When two companies combine, they aren’t just merging bank accounts and office spaces; they are merging entirely different data ecosystems, often with conflicting security postures and privacy standards. Identifying these friction points early is where internal audit can earn its keep.

Can data privacy be achieved without data security?

This is a question that frequently surfaces in the boardroom, and the answer is a definitive no. Can data privacy be achieved without data security? It is impossible. If you lack the security architecture to keep unauthorized users out of your database, any privacy promises you made to your customers are worthless. Security is the foundational infrastructure upon which privacy is built.

Once you identify the risks, you must test the design and operating effectiveness of the controls.

For privacy controls, internal audit needs to evaluate the data retention policies, right-to-be-forgotten procedures, and vendor data agreements. Third parties often handle your most sensitive data. If you aren’t watching them, you are exposed. The role of internal audit in vendor and third-party risk management is critical to preventing downstream privacy violations.

For security controls, test the access management and incident response plans. Are security patches applied on time, or are they sitting in a backlog? Is data encrypted in transit and at rest?

Source link

Fact-checking the White House statement of facts about Canada

The White House issued a statement on Tuesday that lists “facts” about how Canada has abused its trading relationship with the United State “for decades.”

It was another move in the deepening trade war between the two countries. Talks over tariffs collapsed on Friday night when Prime Minister Mark Carney pulled out, saying the U.S. “asked too much and offered too little.”

Some of the claims the White House makes about Canada are true. Others are opinions that U.S. President Donald Trump has long held or claims that are open to debate. Here’s a look at what the White House said.

Are we alone with China in retaliating against U.S. tariffs?

The first point in the White House statement says: “Canada is joined only by the People’s Republic of China in choosing retaliation over negotiation.”

Although Canada has been negotiating with the U.S. for the past month, this statement appears to be true. Many trading partners have threatened to retaliate against Trump’s tariffs but have yet to do so.

With the trade war back in full swing, are you trying to buy Canadian again? We want to hear from you — email us at [email protected].

Mexico is in negotiations to reduce similar tariffs Canada faces on steel, aluminum and cars, but it has not threatened specific countermeasures.

Brazil is threatening action in response to U.S. duties. Both the U.K. and the European Union considered counter-tariffs after “Liberation Day” in 2025, but they decided to hold off.

Canada tariffs vehicles imported from the U.S.

The statement accuses Canada of imposing “discriminatory” tariffs of 25 per cent on imports of vehicles from the U.S. It characterizes the move as unfair, as it says the measures were “applied to no other country.”

This is strictly true — but the reason Canada imposed the tariff on April 9, 2025, is because the U.S. did the same days earlier. The tariff applies to non-CUSMA-compliant vehicles imported into Canada from the U.S., which is the equivalent of what the U.S. did to Canada.

The negotiations that fell apart on Friday were, in part, about eliminating or at least reducing that tariff.

Canada has banned most U.S. alcohol from shelves

One of the most high-profile actions Canadian provinces took after new tariffs were imposed by Trump in 2025 was to pull U.S. alcohol from the shelves of government liquor stores.

The White House statement says: “Canada banned American wine, beer, and spirits in nearly every province and territory — while other countries have faced no such restrictions. As a result, U.S. alcohol exports to Canada collapsed 81% in a single year.”

Bottles are lined up on a shelf in a brick building. — Bottles of Canadian liquor are shown at a B.C. Liquor store in Vancouver on Tuesday. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

It’s true that all provinces except Saskatchewan and Alberta have taken this step. Premiers have said in recent days that they would lift the bans only if Trump’s tariffs are substantially lowered or eliminated. Since trade talks collapsed, they say U.S. alcohol will not return to shelves any time soon.

In recent months, politicians in California have pleaded with Canada to lift the ban, saying it has hurt wineries in their state. In Kentucky, Gov. Andy Beshear acknowledged last week that the bourbon industry is hurting, as Canada is his state’s No. 1 trading partner.

Does Canada impose a 300% tariff on U.S. dairy?

Trump has repeatedly attacked Canada’s dairy industry, and the White House went there again.

“Canada locks out U.S. dairy with tariff-rate quotas far more restrictive than those given to Europe, plus over-quota tariffs of nearly 300% — rates so extreme they function as a near-total ban and rank among the highest agricultural tariffs in the developed world,” its statement claimed.

Canada has not locked out U.S. dairy. The rules are complex, but U.S. dairy producers can export to Canada tariff-free, up to a limit — which they have never reached. Beyond that limit, tariffs would be imposed that can reach 250 per cent. But that has never happened.

What particularly irritates the U.S. is that its retailers are not allowed to sell dairy directly in Canada. That’s why you can’t buy American milk in the grocery store.

But Canada’s agreement with the EU does allow some retail brands from there to sell their products here, particularly cheese. The U.S. says that’s unfair.

It should be noted that the current tariff rules on U.S. dairy entering Canada were negotiated and agreed to by Trump in his first term.

White jugs are lined up on a shelf. — American retailers are not allowed to sell dairy directly in Canada. That’s why you can’t buy milk from the U.S. in the grocery store. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

The U.S. trade deficit with Canada

Trump spends a lot of time focused on trade deficits, and he interprets them as a form of weakness.

The White House says, “Canada has extracted a persistent average annual goods trade deficit of roughly $50 billion from the U.S. over the last decade — while refusing reciprocal access.”

The overall number is correct (it was $48.5 billion in 2025, according to the U.S. Trade Representative). But as premiers and others have repeatedly noted, the only reason for that is because Canada exported 3.9 million barrels of oil per day to the U.S. last year.

States near Canada’s border need the oil, and it’s sold at below-market prices, a significant economic advantage for the U.S.

If that oil were removed from the calculation, the U.S. would have a goods surplus with Canada. In other words, excluding energy, it exports more stuff to Canada than Canada exports to the U.S.

WATCH | Feds announce ‘dollar-for-dollar’ counter-tariffs on billions in U.S. imports:

Feds announce ‘dollar-for-dollar’ counter-tariffs on billions in U.S. imports

Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne says Canada will match the latest round of U.S. tariffs in a ‘proportionate, targeted and strategic’ way. Champagne says the tariffs, which will impact more than $27 billion in U.S. goods, are ‘all about fairness.’

Some White House claims can’t be fact-checked

The statement includes a series of “facts” that are actually opinions or claims that are open to debate.

For example, it says: “Without the United States, Canada could not survive. Canada sends roughly three-quarters of all its goods exports to America.” The figure here is correct, and although no Canadian officials deny the importance of the U.S. market, Canada’s survivability without the U.S. is a hypothetical that no one is seriously contemplating.

“The statement also says: “Canada’s failed trade policies are driving its own manufacturers south. A recent survey found 42% of Canadian manufacturers have already moved or are planning to move production to the U.S.”

The survey, by KPMG, says companies are moving or planning to move “due to economic uncertainty and trade and tariff threats,” not because of “Canada’s failed trade policies.”

The White House statement ends with a claim that the U.S. “has the clear leverage” since its economy is far larger. Although no one disputes the size advantage, the debate over who has the upper hand in this trade war is not settled.

Do you support Canada’s new retaliatory tariffs on the U.S., set for Sept. 8? Click “Join the Conversation” below. On the app? Tap here.

Source link

Khadijah Haqq Files for Child and Spousal Support from Estranged Husband Bobby McCray, Claims She’s Had to Take Loans from Family

https3A2F2Fmedia.zenfs .com2Fen2Fpeople 2182F35ec475f895072e7006838692bac854e

NEED TO KNOW

Khadijah Haqq filed for spousal and child support from her estranged husband, Bobby McCray
She is requesting $2,033 monthly in spousal support and $100,000 for attorney fees from the former NFL player

The former couple shares three kids: Christina, Celine and Kapri

Khadijah Haqq is requesting child and spousal support from her estranged husband Bobby McCray.

According to court documents obtained by PEOPLE, The Girls star, 43, is seeking child and spousal support from McCray for their three kids — Christian, 15, Celine, 12, and Kapri, 5. She is asking for $2,033 monthly in spousal support and a one-time payment of $100,000 to cover her attorney fees. Haqq is also asking the court to determine how much the former Philadelphia Eagles defensive end, 45, should pay in child support.

Haqq claims that her family “primarily relied” on McCray’s income, although she earned “minimal residuals” and was occasionally paid for small projects because she worked in the entertainment industry.

Khadijah Haqq and her kids.Credit: Khadijah Haqq/Instagram — *Khadijah Haqq and her kids.*
*Credit: Khadijah Haqq/Instagram*

Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE’s free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.

Reps for both Haqq and McCray did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.

In the documents, the mom of three explains that their family had always lived in a single-family residence and grew up having two cars. They would take their kids on at least one domestic or international vacation per year, and would often go to restaurants for meals or order in. The former couple’s kids went to private school, and Haqq says they “paid significant amounts” for each kid to participate in extracurricular activities.

“We had minimal to no debt and did not need to live off of credit card, which I have to rely upon now to make ends meet,” writes Haqq. She explains that she now is “unable to earn enough money to maintain the marital standard of living.”

Haqq says she has been “primarily responsible” for the care of their kids and claimed that McCray is “neither consistently in California” — where they live — “nor does he have a set schedule to see the children.”

She claims in the filing that with “little to no help” from McCray, she’s been unable to dedicate time to finding work since she’s been working as a full-time parent. Haqq also says she’s had to take loans from friends and family to make ends meet.

“For example, my sister deposited approximately $8,000 into my bank account,” says Haqq, “in 2025 so that I could pay for our living expenses. I have also had to borrow monies [sic] from friends to pay for same. I am greatly [appreciative] for the support I have received in our time of need, and intend to repay these financial loans.”

Haqq adds in the filing that her ex is “more than capable” of both meeting his own monthly expenses while also contributing to her and the children’s monthly expenses. McCray, who receives “significant income” from the NFL every month due to his disability and annuity payments, also gets monthly SSA derivative payments “for the benefit of the children,” but Haqq has not received them for their youngest child. Haqq says that McCray has an “obligation to support his children” and that he has “failed to do so.”

McCray filed for divorce from Haqq in August 2024, nearly one year after the two first announced their split. The former couple, who tied the knot in 2010 and were married for 13 years.

Read the original article on People

Source link

Large apartment fire burns in Fort Worth, 1 firefighter injured

082526 sw calmont fire bell kdfweme002 06 27 02 mp 00.02.57.10

Firefighter hospitalized as Fort Worth apartment burns

FORT WORTH, Texas – Fort Worth firefighters battled a large fire at an apartment complex on the west side of the city on Tuesday morning. About 100 people were displaced.

What we know:

The fire broke out around 6 a.m. at a two-story apartment building in the 6700 block of Calmont Avenue, which is near Interstate 30 and Green Oaks Boulevard.

Images from nearby traffic cameras and FOX 4 crews at the scene showed the building fully engulfed in flames. Residents said the flames then jumped from one building to another.

Three alarms were sounded, meaning dozens of firefighters were called to the scene.

At least one firefighter was taken to the hospital for smoke inhalation, but he is already back on the job.

Four residents were also treated after breathing in the thick, black smoke. Two of them were taken to the hospital as a precaution.

What they’re saying:

Firefighters estimate that roughly 50 apartments were impacted, with more than 100 people out of their homes.

“A lot of pain. Our faith and hope has been destroyed today. Our only material things we have can be replaced,” said Billy Johnson, who lives at the complex.

s tisia fw calmont ave apt fire 8a 00.00.29.30

“It’s just crazy because everybody just lost everything,” added another resident. “And we just moved in two weeks ago so we just lost everything. We literally just put all of our eggs in this basket.”

Some residents expressed concerns about an electrical overload causing the fire due to too many people trying to stay cool during this summer’s intense heat.

“The units they gave us did not receive no kind of break because the units are so small to where they couldn’t really cool us off. We kept them going 24-7,” Johnson said.

Guadalupe Jamarillo, another resident displaced by the fires, says the apartment gave out portable air conditioning units.

“They kept saying, ‘it’s getting fixed, getting fixed’. But nothing,” Jamarillo said. “This weekend, Friday, you’d turn on the lights in the restroom, and you’d smell something like a short circuit.”

Trinity Metro buses will reportedly take the residents to a temporary shelter set up by the American Red Cross.

Large fire destroys Fort Worth apartments

An aggressive fire destroyed an apartment complex in west Fort Worth early Tuesday morning. The fire also displaced multiple families and sent at least one firefighter to the hospital.

What we don’t know:

It’s going to be quite a while before investigators can determine the cause of the fire. They are still focused on controlling the hot spots.

“Sometimes you’ll see that dark smoke come back a little bit. We’re trying to figure out in some of these areas if there may be a double roof. And so we’re still working on all of that right now,” said Craig Trojacek, a spokesman for the Fort Worth Fire Department.

Big picture view:

Thick black smoke was visible on Interstate 30 near Green Oaks Road. Traffic reporter Chip Waggoner said the smoke was leading to some backups and traffic delays.