新闻 · 约 44 分钟阅读

新加坡个人信息保护新规:机构索取身份证号码需征求同意

2025/02/04
直接阅读正文 ↓

To questions by Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, I should emphasise that NRIC numbers are personal data. This means that organisations collecting and using NRIC numbers must continue to exercise a duty of care. Subject to applicable law, they must notify and seek consent on use, and also ensure the data is sufficiently protected. Certainly, they should not disclose the NRIC numbers unless there is good reason to do so.

Members may also ask, if the NRIC number is not suitable as an authenticator, what about the physical NRIC card, our pink identity card? If we look at our physical NRIC card, we will see that it contains other identifying information, such as our photo and fingerprint. It allows others to check that the information on the card matches me, the person holding the card. In addition, the physical NRIC card is not easily faked. The physical NRIC card is, therefore, suitable as an authenticator, or proof of who I claim to be. But someone providing my NRIC number and claiming to be me, does not have these additional factors of proof.

Organisations must know that the physical NRIC card and NRIC number are different. The physical NRIC card can be an authenticator, but the NRIC number should not be used as an authenticator. Organisations should, therefore, not accept my NRIC number alone as proof that the person citing it is indeed me.

Besides organisations, individuals, too, have questions about what they should do. There are also two things. The first is to clarify their understanding of the NRIC number. Members like Ms Sylvia Lim asked about this.

We have said that our NRIC number is like our name. Even if it is not widely disclosed, it is not secret. In our daily lives, if someone we do not recognise calls out our name and starts to behave as though they know us well, we would be slightly suspicious. We might be polite but not too friendly. Certainly, we should not fully trust this person, just because they know our name.

This should also be how we treat anyone who tells us our NRIC number. We should not automatically assume that they know us well or are figures of authority or can be trusted. We should be cautious about revealing more about ourselves, or saying yes to their requests or following their instructions without checking further.

The second thing we can do as individuals is to review our passwords. If we have used our NRIC number as a password to access any information or service, we have mistakenly used it as an authenticator and should change the password immediately. Doing so will give us better protection against people who use our NRIC number to get access to information or services. It will also complement efforts by organisations to stop using the NRIC number as a factor of authentication.

To Ms Hany Soh's question, NRIC-related scams are not new. Most NRIC-related scams involve victims who think they are speaking to figures of authority and end up taking actions that harmed themselves, such as transferring money without further checks. Very few cases have involved scammers directly using NRIC numbers to unlock access to valuables.

Several Members have also asked how to mitigate the risks when NRIC numbers are disclosed. They include Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim, Mr Edward Chia, Mr Christopher de Souza, Mr Ong Hua Han, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Louis Chua, Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Yip Hon Weng.

As I have explained, the risks arise from the incorrect use of the NRIC numbers. If individuals stop using NRIC numbers as passwords and organisations stop using NRIC numbers as authenticators, this will go a long way to preventing harms from scams and identity theft. They will give us all better peace of mind to use the NRIC number whenever it is necessary, such as to get medical treatment or apply for jobs.

Sir, the Government appreciates that the incorrect uses of the NRIC number may not be well understood. Our public education efforts will raise awareness among organisations and individuals, and to guide them on what they should do. In doing so, we will focus on the points I highlighted above.

Mr Gerald Giam asked about alternatives to the current NRIC number system. In fact, the risks do not arise directly from the structure of the NRIC number. Rather, the risks arise when the NRIC number, which is meant to be a unique identifier, is incorrectly used as an authenticator or a password. Even if we were to create an alternative identifier, we would still have a problem if organisations used it as an authenticator and individuals used it as a password.

Sir, let me turn now to questions about ACRA's exemption from Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) requirements and the Government's data protection measures. These were raised by Ms Tin Pei Ling, Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Patrick Tay.

The Government has always taken seriously its responsibility to protect the data entrusted to the public sector. The Government's personal data protection standards are set collectively by the Public Sector (Governance) Act, or PSGA, and our own internal rules.

The PSGA is aligned with the PDPA and adapted to the Public Service context. Our internal rules are comprehensive and take reference from international and industry standards. We also continually strengthen our data governance practices.

ACRA is expected to comply with these rules and the PSGA, which are no less stringent than PDPA requirements. Regular, mandatory audits are conducted to ensure that public agencies, including ACRA, comply with the standards for data protection and the security of information and communications technology systems. The number of data incidents and their severity is published annually.

In the most recent whole-of-Government audit exercise on information technology-related data security controls, there were very few significant findings and all of them had been remediated by the agencies concerned. There has also been a reduction in data incidents of medium severity and above. Where necessary, we have also taken public servants to task, for example, in serious cases involving unauthorised disclosure or improper use of information.

Members can be reassured that we take these rules and controls very seriously. We will continue to regularly review the safeguards to ensure that they remain relevant.

及时获取本站更新:

设为 Google 偏好来源

继续阅读

社会

绝不姑息!黄循财总理表态:将彻查引发霾害的责任公司,必要时直接起诉!

新闻

“政府给的钱没了” 七旬叔遇诈骗 痛失多年积蓄

社会

新加坡雾霾预警升级!政府紧急开放350多处避难所,但现场情况却出人意料?

新闻

狮城中部PSI创新高 升至226点非常不健康水平

新闻

烟霾加剧政府派口罩 民众戴后赞舒适

社会

新加坡中医迎来重大变革!国家认证计划正式启动,首批5家诊所获批,未来或可开X光单?

社会

别再抢购N95口罩了!新加坡消费者协会紧急提醒:货源充足,千万警惕低价陷阱

新闻

AI诈骗防不胜防!新加坡再投3000万,加强网络安全!

新闻

全岛民众俱乐部已准备好发放口罩 开放避霾

新闻

狮城援引跨境烟霾污染法 通知7印尼运营公司 采行动扑灭林火

新闻

新加坡政府免费派口罩!每人2个,儿童、孕妇、老人都能领!

社会

中东局势升级!新加坡朝圣者陷入两难:是顶着风险前往沙特,还是忍痛取消行程?

社会

胆子太大了!新加坡这家换钱店竟敢出借牌照且欺骗金管局,结果被直接吊销执照!

新闻

拥车证A组B组拟合并 低价车或减1.5万新元 新加坡陆交局征询公众至11月2日

社会

新加坡出手了!7家印尼公司被点名,因引发霾害面临巨额罚款!

新闻

N95口罩需求激增 一些商家实施限购

社会

雾霾危机升级!新加坡议员强烈呼吁:每个教室都必须安装空调,不能拿孩子健康冒险!

新闻

新币兑人民币跌至5.2X!新加坡这家换汇公司又被吊销执照

新闻

新加坡空气污染爆表!时隔11年再启烟霾津贴,政府发口罩,家里有老人孩子的别硬扛

社会

卧室被装监控!新加坡女佣发帖求助:雇主这样做合法吗?网友怒批侵犯隐私!

社会

新加坡雾霾爆表!BIGBANG演唱会紧急发布预警,粉丝请务必做好防护!

社会

警方紧急寻人!一名曾住在勿洛的89岁老人不幸离世,现正寻找其家属

新闻

女友承认与男同事上床 男纠众打至鼻骨折