The global market for Education Data Security Tools is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing concerns about data breaches and the rising adoption of digital learning platforms. The expanding use of cloud-based services and the proliferation of sensitive student data, including personal information, academic records, and financial details, necessitate robust security measures. This has led educational institutions of all levels—from K-12 schools to universities—to invest heavily in sophisticated security solutions. The market is segmented by various tool types, including endpoint protection, data loss prevention (DLP), identity and access management (IAM), and security information and event management (SIEM) solutions. Major players like Cisco, Citrix, McAfee, and others are actively developing and marketing tailored solutions to meet the unique security needs of the education sector. The market’s growth is further fueled by government regulations aimed at protecting student data privacy, such as FERPA in the United States and GDPR in Europe. However, budget constraints in some educational institutions and the complexity of implementing and managing these solutions pose challenges to widespread adoption. The forecast period (2025-2033) anticipates continued expansion, driven by technological advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) that enhance threat detection and response capabilities within education data security tools. The competitive landscape is characterized by both established cybersecurity vendors and niche players focusing on the education sector. Strategic partnerships and mergers and acquisitions are expected to shape the market dynamics. The increasing adoption of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies in educational settings is also influencing the market, creating the need for solutions that can effectively secure devices from diverse vendors and operating systems. The market is geographically diverse, with North America and Europe currently holding significant market shares, but the Asia-Pacific region is projected to witness faster growth due to increasing digital literacy and government initiatives promoting digital education. Overall, the Education Data Security Tools market presents a substantial opportunity for vendors who can offer comprehensive, user-friendly, and cost-effective solutions that address the specific challenges faced by educational institutions.

Activity tracking records for the Office of Privacy and Data Protection

Abstract

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) stands as one of the most significant legal frameworks for data protection and privacy in recent years. Enforced by the European Union (EU) since May 2018, the GDPR has garnered global attention due to its wide-reaching impact on businesses, organizations, and individuals, transcending geographical boundaries. While initially conceived to safeguard the data rights of EU citizens, its influence extends far beyond EU member states… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/AndreaSimeri/GDPR.

Education Data Security Tools Market Outlook

The global market size for education data security tools was valued at approximately USD 2.5 billion in 2023 and is expected to reach around USD 7.3 billion by 2032, exhibiting a robust CAGR of 12.5% over the forecast period. The growing adoption of digital technologies in educational institutions is a significant growth factor driving the market.

One of the primary growth factors for the education data security tools market is the increasing prevalence of cyber threats targeting educational institutions. Cybercrimes, such as data breaches and ransomware attacks, have seen a notable increase, compelling schools and universities to invest heavily in robust security solutions. The need for safeguarding sensitive student and faculty information, as well as proprietary academic research, has become paramount. This has led to a marked rise in demand for advanced data security tools that can provide comprehensive protection against sophisticated cyber threats.

Additionally, the shift towards online and remote learning environments has further accelerated the demand for education data security tools. The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed the adoption of virtual learning platforms, which require secure channels for data transmission and storage. As educational institutions increasingly rely on digital platforms for teaching and administrative functions, the risk of data breaches amplifies, necessitating the deployment of sophisticated security measures. This ongoing digital transformation within the education sector is expected to sustain the growth momentum of the market over the coming years.

Moreover, regulatory frameworks and compliance requirements are becoming increasingly stringent, propelling institutions to prioritize data security. Governments worldwide are enforcing regulations that mandate the protection of student data, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in the United States. Compliance with these regulations necessitates the implementation of advanced security tools, thereby driving market growth. Educational institutions are also increasingly aware of the reputational damage and financial losses associated with data breaches, further highlighting the importance of robust data security measures.

Regionally, North America is expected to dominate the education data security tools market, primarily due to the high adoption rate of advanced technologies and stringent regulatory frameworks. The region's strong focus on cybersecurity in educational institutions, coupled with significant investments in digital infrastructure, is likely to sustain its market leadership. Europe also shows promising growth, driven by stringent data protection regulations and a proactive approach towards cybersecurity in education. Meanwhile, the Asia Pacific region is expected to witness substantial growth, fueled by the expanding digital education sector and increasing awareness regarding data security in emerging economies.

Component Analysis

The education data security tools market can be segmented by component into software, hardware, and services. The software segment holds a significant share of the market due to the extensive range of cybersecurity solutions available, including encryption software, identity and access management tools, and data loss prevention systems. Software solutions are preferred for their adaptability and ease of integration with existing IT infrastructures. Additionally, the continuous advancement in cybersecurity technologies, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning, enhances software solutions' capabilities in threat detection and response, further propelling the segment's growth.

On the other hand, the hardware segment, though smaller in comparison, plays a crucial role in the overall data security ecosystem. Hardware solutions, such as secure servers, firewalls, and intrusion detection systems, provide a foundational layer of security. Institutions with on-premises data centers particularly benefit from robust hardware security measures. The increasing trend towards hybrid IT environments, combining on-premises and cloud-based solutions, further fuels the demand for hardware security tools, ensuring a comprehensive security strategy.

The services segment is also projected to experience significant growth, driven by the need for expert consultation and tailored security solutions. Educational institutions often lack the in-house expertise required to manage

The goal of this study was to measure the attitudes towards data sharing and data-collecting organizations before and after the introduction of the EU General Data Protection regulations (GDPR) among people in Germany. The data come from a three-wave split-panel web survey among people 18 years and older in Germany who were recruited from a German nonprobability online panel. In April 2018 (before the GDPR came into effect), 2,095 participants completed the Wave 1 questionnaire on device ownership, social media use, trust in different data collecting organizations, willingness to share data, general trust, awareness of and knowledge about the GDPR, and privacy concerns. In July and in October 2018 (after the GDPR came into effect), respondents from the earlier waves were invited to participate in a second and a third web survey that repeated most of the questions from the first wave. In addition to participants from the earlier waves, fresh respondents were also invited to Waves 2 and 3. A total of 2,046 (Wave 2) and 2,117 (Wave 3) respondents completed the questionnaire in the subsequent waves. 1,269 participated in all three waves.

Topics:

Wave 1

Possession of smartphone, mobile phone, PC, tablet and/or e-book reader; social media use: account with user name and password at selected providers (Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Xing); trust in institutions (Google, Facebook, Bundesamt für Statistik, Universitätsforscher) with regard to the protection of personal data and reasons for this assessment; probability scale with regard to the protection of personal data at the above-mentioned institutions and reasons for this assessment; agreement with the import of personal data of the social insurance institutions to the survey data; general personal trust; awareness of the EU General Data Protection regulations (GDPR) ; knowledge test: goals of the GDPR (open); feeling of invaded privacy by the following institutions: Google, Facebook, government agencies, university researchers; general privacy concerns.

Wave 2

Possession of smartphone, mobile phone, PC, tablet and/or e-book reader; social media use: account with user name and password with selected providers (Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Xing); trust in institutions (Google, Facebook, Federal Statistical Office, university researchers) with regard to the protection of personal data; general personal trust; awareness of the EU General Data Protection regulations (GDPR); knowledge test: goals of the GDPR (open); consent to the storage of various personal data by Facebook or Google (name, e-mail address, home address, date of birth, telephone number, income, marital status, number of children, current location, Internet browser history, account names from other social media and data received from third parties); feeling of invasion of privacy by the following institutions: Google, Facebook, government agencies, university researchers; general privacy concerns.

Wave 3

Possession of smartphone, mobile phone, PC, tablet and/or e-book reader; social media use: account with user name and password at selected providers (Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Xing); trust in institutions (Google, Facebook, Federal Statistical Office, university researchers) with regard to the protection of personal data; general personal trust; awareness of the EU General Data Protection regulations (GDPR); knowledge test: goals of the GDPR (open); concerns about privacy in general; comprehensibility of excerpts of the contents of the EU General Data Protection regulations (GDPR) (resp. on passenger rights in the event of denied boarding and flight delays); estimated popularity of smartphones (proportion of smartphone owners per 100 adult Germans); repetition of the question on trust data collecting organisations (Google, Facebook) with regard to the protection of personal data and general personal trust; readiness for data exchange by Google (or Facebook or the Federal Statistical Office) for research purposes (or for commercial purposes).

Demography: sex; age (year of birth); federal state; school education; professional qualification.

Additionally coded was: running number; respondent ID; experimental groups GDPR Info; duration (reaction time in seconds); used device type to complete the questionnaire.

The questionnaire also included two experiments, one on the effect of GDPR-related information on trust in data collecting organisations and one on the comfort of data shar...

Education Data Security Market Outlook

The education data security market size is anticipated to grow from USD 2.3 billion in 2023 to USD 5.9 billion by 2032, exhibiting a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.1%. This growth is primarily driven by the increasing adoption of digital technologies in educational institutions and the rising concerns over data privacy and protection. As the education sector continues to embrace digital learning platforms, the risk of data breaches and unauthorized access to sensitive information has significantly increased, necessitating robust security measures. Consequently, the demand for advanced data security solutions in educational settings is on the rise, propelling the market forward.

One of the primary growth factors for the education data security market is the increasing digitization in the education sector. With the advent of e-learning platforms, online exams, and digital classrooms, large volumes of sensitive data, such as student records and academic results, are being generated and stored. This surge in digital data has made educational institutions prime targets for cyberattacks. As a result, these institutions are investing heavily in advanced security solutions to protect their data from potential breaches and ensure compliance with data protection regulations. The growing awareness about the importance of data security in safeguarding personal information is also encouraging educational institutions to allocate a significant portion of their budgets to data security solutions.

Additionally, regulatory compliance is a significant driver for the growth of the education data security market. Governments worldwide are implementing stringent data protection regulations to safeguard citizens' personal information. For instance, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in the United States mandate strict compliance with data security norms for educational institutions. These regulations require institutions to implement comprehensive data security measures to avoid penalties and reputational damage. Consequently, educational institutions are increasingly adopting advanced data security solutions to ensure compliance with these regulations, thus boosting the market's growth.

The increasing frequency and sophistication of cyberattacks targeting educational institutions are further propelling the demand for data security solutions. Cybercriminals are continually developing new methods to exploit vulnerabilities in educational networks, leading to a growing number of data breach incidents. These incidents not only compromise sensitive information but also disrupt academic activities, causing significant financial and reputational damage to institutions. To mitigate these risks, educational institutions are prioritizing the implementation of robust data security solutions, including firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and encryption technologies. This proactive approach to cybersecurity is driving the growth of the education data security market.

Regionally, North America is expected to lead the education data security market, driven by the high adoption rates of digital learning technologies and stringent data protection regulations. The presence of several key market players and advanced IT infrastructure further supports the dominance of this region. Meanwhile, the Asia Pacific region is anticipated to witness the highest growth rate during the forecast period, owing to the increasing digitization of educational institutions and government initiatives to improve cybersecurity measures. Countries like China and India are investing significantly in upgrading their educational infrastructure, which includes implementing robust data security solutions, thereby contributing to the market's expansion in this region.

Component Analysis

The education data security market is segmented by component into solutions and services. The solutions segment includes a wide range of security technologies such as encryption, data loss prevention, identity and access management, and firewalls. These solutions are specifically designed to protect educational institutions from data breaches and ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of sensitive information. With the increasing volume of data being generated by educational institutions, the demand for comprehensive and integrated security solutions has surged. Institutions are keen on investing in advanced solutions that offer end-to-end protection of their digital assets, thus driving the growth of the solutions segment.</p

The dataset contains the text of the documents that are sources of evidence used in [1] and [2] to distill our reference scenarios according to the methodology suggested by Yin in [3].

The dataset is composed of 95 unique document texts spanning the period 2005-2022. This dataset makes available a corpus of documentary sources useful for outlining case studies related to scenarios in which the DPO finds himself operating in the performance of his daily activities.

The language used in the corpus is mainly Italian, but some documents are in English and French. For the reader's benefit, we provide an English translation of the title of each document.

The documentary sources are of many types (for example, court decisions, supervisory authorities' decisions, job advertisements, and newspaper articles), provided by different bodies (such as supervisor authorities, data controllers, European Union institutions, private companies, courts, public authorities, research organizations, newspapers, and public administrations), and redacted from distinct professional roles (for example, data protection officers, general managers, university rectors, collegiate bodies, judges, and journalists).

The documentary sources were collected from 31 different bodies. Most of the documents in the corpus (a total of 83 documents) have been transformed into Rich Text Format (RTF), while the other documents (a total of 12) are in PDF format. All the documents have been manually read and verified. The dataset is helpful as a starting point for a case studies analysis on the daily issues a data protection officer face. Details on the methodology can be found in the accompanying papers.

The available files are as follows:

documents-texts.zip --> contain a directory of .rtf files (in some cases .pdf files) with the text of documents used as sources for the case studies. Each file has been renamed with its SHA1 hash so that it can be easily recognized.

documents-metadata.csv --> Contains a CSV file with the metadata for each document used as a source for the case studies.

This dataset is the original one used in the publication [1] and the preprint containing the additional material [2].

[1] F. Ciclosi and F. Massacci, "The Data Protection Officer: A Ubiquitous Role That No One Really Knows" in IEEE Security & Privacy, vol. 21, no. 01, pp. 66-77, 2023, doi: 10.1109/MSEC.2022.3222115, url: https://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MSEC.2022.3222115.

[2] F. Ciclosi and F. Massacci, "The Data Protection Officer, an ubiquitous role nobody really knows." arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.07712, 2022.

[3] R. K. Yin, Case study research and applications. Sage, 2018.

Sensitive Regulated Data: Permitted and Restricted UsesPurposeScope and AuthorityStandardViolation of the Standard - Misuse of InformationDefinitionsReferencesAppendix A: Personally Identifiable Information (PII)Appendix B: Security of Personally Owned Devices that Access or Maintain Sensitive Restricted DataAppendix C: Sensitive Security Information (SSI)

Background: In the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) plays a central role in the complex health research legal framework. It aims to protect the fundamental right to the protection of individuals’ personal data, while allowing the free movement of such data. However, it has been criticized for challenging the conduct of research. Existing scholarship has paid little attention to the experiences and views of the patient community. The aim of the study was to investigate 1) the awareness and knowledge of patients, carers, and members of patient organizations about the General Data Protection Regulation, 2) their experience with exercising data subject rights, and 3) their understanding of the notion of “data control” and preferences towards various data control tools.Methods: An online survey was disseminated between December 2022 and March 2023. Quantitative data was analyzed descriptively and inferentially. Answers to open-ended questions were analyzed using the thematic analysis method.Results: In total, 220 individuals from 28 European countries participated. The majority were patients (77%). Most participants had previously heard about the GDPR (90%) but had not exercised any of their data subject rights. Individual data control tools appeared to be marginally more important than collective tools. The willingness of participants to share personal data with data altruism organizations increased if patient representatives would be involved in the decision-making processes of such organizations.Conclusion: The results highlighted the importance of providing in-depth education about data protection. Although participants showed a slight preference towards individual control tools, the reflection based on existing scholarship identified that individual control holds risks that could be mitigated through carefully operationalized collective tools. The discussion of results was used to provide a critical view into the proposed European Health Data Space, which has yet to find a productive balance between individual control and allowing the reuse of personal data for research.

This dataset is about books. It has 8 rows and is filtered where the book subjects is Data protection-Law and legislation-Ireland. It features 9 columns including author, publication date, language, and book publisher.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) undertook a data protection audit of the Department for Education (DfE) in February and March 2020.

DfE extended the scope of the audit to include the sharing of data contained within the Learning Records Service (LRS) database, following a breach of the system. This was to allow the department to take action against ICO recommendations early.

ICO issued a https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/4022280/dfe-reprimand-20221102.pdf" class="govuk-link">formal reprimand of DfE in November 2022.

DfE published a response to the audit and the formal reprimand in October 2023. This is an update to the ICO audit closure summary.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic brought global disruption to health, society and economy, including to the conduct of clinical research. In the European Union (EU), the legal and ethical framework for research is complex and divergent. Many challenges exist in relation to the interplay of the various applicable rules, particularly with respect to compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This study aimed to gain insights into the experience of key clinical research stakeholders [investigators, ethics committees (ECs), and data protection officers (DPOs)/legal experts working with clinical research sponsors] across the EU and the UK on the main challenges related to data protection in clinical research before and during the pandemic.Materials and methodsThe study consisted of an online survey and follow-up semi-structured interviews. Data collection occurred between April and December 2021. Survey data was analyzed descriptively, and the interviews underwent a framework analysis.Results and conclusionIn total, 191 respondents filled in the survey, of whom fourteen participated in the follow-up interviews. Out of the targeted 28 countries (EU and UK), 25 were represented in the survey. The majority of stakeholders were based in Western Europe. This study empirically elucidated numerous key legal and ethical issues related to GDPR compliance in the context of (cross-border) clinical research. It showed that the lack of legal harmonization remains the biggest challenge in the field, and that it is present not only at the level of the interplay of key EU legislative acts and national implementation of the GDPR, but also when it comes to interpretation at local, regional and institutional levels. Moreover, the role of ECs in data protection was further explored and possible ways forward for its normative delineation were discussed. According to the participants, the pandemic did not bring additional legal challenges. Although practical challenges (for instance, mainly related to the provision of information to patients) were high due to the globally enacted crisis measures, the key problematic issues on (cross-border) health research, interpretations of the legal texts and compliance strategies remained largely the same.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic brought global disruption to health, society and economy, including to the conduct of clinical research. In the European Union (EU), the legal and ethical framework for research is complex and divergent. Many challenges exist in relation to the interplay of the various applicable rules, particularly with respect to compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This study aimed to gain insights into the experience of key clinical research stakeholders [investigators, ethics committees (ECs), and data protection officers (DPOs)/legal experts working with clinical research sponsors] across the EU and the UK on the main challenges related to data protection in clinical research before and during the pandemic.Materials and methodsThe study consisted of an online survey and follow-up semi-structured interviews. Data collection occurred between April and December 2021. Survey data was analyzed descriptively, and the interviews underwent a framework analysis.Results and conclusionIn total, 191 respondents filled in the survey, of whom fourteen participated in the follow-up interviews. Out of the targeted 28 countries (EU and UK), 25 were represented in the survey. The majority of stakeholders were based in Western Europe. This study empirically elucidated numerous key legal and ethical issues related to GDPR compliance in the context of (cross-border) clinical research. It showed that the lack of legal harmonization remains the biggest challenge in the field, and that it is present not only at the level of the interplay of key EU legislative acts and national implementation of the GDPR, but also when it comes to interpretation at local, regional and institutional levels. Moreover, the role of ECs in data protection was further explored and possible ways forward for its normative delineation were discussed. According to the participants, the pandemic did not bring additional legal challenges. Although practical challenges (for instance, mainly related to the provision of information to patients) were high due to the globally enacted crisis measures, the key problematic issues on (cross-border) health research, interpretations of the legal texts and compliance strategies remained largely the same.

Interested parties can now request extracts of data from the NPD using an improved application process accessed through the following website; GOV.UK The first version of the NPD, including information from the first pupil level School Census matched to attainment information, was produced in 2002. The NPD is one of the richest education datasets in the world holding a wide range of information about pupils and students and has provided invaluable evidence on educational performance to inform independent research, as well as analysis carried out or commissioned by the department. There are a range of data sources in the NPD providing information about children’s education at different phases. The data includes detailed information about pupils’ test and exam results, prior attainment and progression at each key stage for all state schools in England. The department also holds attainment data for pupils and students in non-maintained special schools, sixth form and further education colleges and (where available) independent schools. The NPD also includes information about the characteristics of pupils in the state sector and non-maintained special schools such as their gender, ethnicity, first language, eligibility for free school meals, awarding of bursary funding for 16-19 year olds, information about special educational needs and detailed information about any absences and exclusions. Extracts of the data from NPD can be shared (under strict terms and conditions) with named bodies and third parties who, for the purpose of promoting the education or well-being of children in England, are:- • Conducting research or analysis • Producing statistics; or • Providing information, advice or guidance. The department wants to encourage more third parties to use the data for these purposes and produce secondary analysis of the data. All applications go through a robust approval process and those granted access are subject to strict terms and conditions on the security, handling and use of the data, including compliance with the Data Protection Act. Anyone requesting access to the most sensitive data will also be required to submit a business case. More information on the application process including the User Guide, Application Form, Security Questionnaire and a full list of data items available can be found from the NPD web page at:- https://www.gov.uk/national-pupil-database-apply-for-a-data-extract

This dataset comprises semi-structured interviews conducted with domain experts in data protection and privacy regulations from various jurisdictions. All interviewee have formal legal education or are recognized as experts in the domain (ex: data protection authority, known authors/speakers). The purpose of the interviews is to identify common and divergent data protection regulatory requirements that impact transborder personal data flows and compliance in multiple systems.

The database includes transcripts of expert interviews that have been made publicly available, upon informed and explicit consent from the participants. By default, all interviews are anonymized to protect the identity of the participants and to reduce potential bias during analysis. Other interviews may be available upon request, and other are kept confidential depending on the participants consent.

The files have been named in the following manner: [COUNTRY OF EXPERTISE]-[Random letters]. This way, when referring to the specific subject, we can identify them this way.

Transcripts were done with AI models upon the consent of the subject. The section in bold represent the interviewer, and normal font is the interviewee. For more details on the transcription purpose, you can check here [unavailable for reviewing reasons]

In addition we have included a detailed codebook used to support qualitative analysis. The codebook provides definitions for each code used. When new codes emerged, these were added to the codebook with appropriate annotation (ex: labelled as new), including a definition and possibly verbatims.

The guiding semi-structured interview and blinded consent form are included.

For more information, please refer to [unavailable for reviewing reasons]

The survey contains three topic complexes: 1. Political attitudes and questions on the European Election. 2. Attitudes to data protection. 3. Attitudes to technical progress. Topics: 1. Political attitudes and questions on the European Election: behavior at the polls in the last Federal Parliament election; party preference (Sunday question); satisfaction with the policies of party voted for; perception of the election campaign for the European Election; judgement on the party election campaign; points of criticism of the party last elected in selected political areas; effects of developments in SPD-policies on one´s own attitude to the SPD. 2. Attitudes to data protection: general attitude to data protection; knowledge of data deserving protection; importance of a data protection law; assumed motives for the federal data protection law of 1977; personal knowledge of data misuse; adequate data protection regulations; recommendations for an improvement of the law; perceived disturbance from storage of personal data by authorities and companies; situations in which the statement of personal conditions was particularly unpleasant; extent of need for information on citizens by the government as well as private enterprise; knowledge about areas in which the data protection law applies; statement of areas in which registration of personal information is considered harmless. 3. Attitudes to technical progress: interest in questions of technical change; expected advantages or disadvantages from technical changes in personal life; manner of expected changes of life from technology; particularly interesting technology areas; attitudes to technology, progress, computers, automation, government surveillance (scale); assessment of the advantageousness of modern technology in selected areas; attitude to various technical projects and plans, such as e.g. minitel, gene technology, automation, computerization in the office and at home. Demography: age; sex; marital status; number of children; ages of children (classified); school education; occupation; occupational position; employment; household income; size of household; respondent is head of household; characteristics of head of household; housing situation. Die Befragung enthält drei Themenkomplexe: 1.)Politische Einstellungen und Fragen zur Europawahl. 2.)Einstellungen zum Datenschutz. 3.)Einstellungen zum technischen Fortschritt. Themen: 1.)Politische Einstellungen und Fragen zur Europawahl: Wahlverhalten bei der letzten Bundestagswahl; Parteipräferenz (Sonntagsfrage); Zufriedenheit mit der Politik der gewählten Partei; Wahrnehmung des Wahlkampfes zur Europawahl; Beurteilung des Parteienwahlkampfes; Kritikpunkte an der zuletzt gewählten Partei in ausgewählten politischen Bereichen; Effekte von Entwicklungen in der SPD-Politik auf die eigene Einstellung zur SPD. 2.)Einstellungen zum Datenschutz: Allgemeine Einstellung zum Datenschutz; Kenntnis schützenswürdiger Daten; Wichtigkeit eines Datenschutzgesetzes; vermutete Motive für das Bundes-Datenschutzgesetz 1977; eigene Kenntnisse von Datenmißbrauch; ausreichende Datenschutzbestimmungen; Vorschläge für eine Verbesserung des Gesetzes; empfundene Störung durch das Abspeichern persönlicher Daten bei Behörden und Firmen; Situationen, in denen die Angabe persönlicher Verhältnisse besonders unangenehm war; Umfang des Informationsbedarfs des Staates sowie von Privatunternehmen über die Bürger; Kenntnisse über den Geltungsbereich des Datenschutzgesetzes; Angabe von Bereichen, in denen eine Registrierung von persönlichen Informationen für unbedenklich gehalten wird. 3.)Einstellungen zum technischen Fortschritt: Interesse an Fragen des technischen Wandels; erwartete Vor- oder Nachteile durch technische Änderungen im persönlichen Leben; Art der erwarteten Veränderungen des Lebens durch die Technik; besonders interessierende Technologiebereiche; Einstellungen zur Technik, zum Fortschritt, zu Computern, zur Automatisierung, zum Überwachungsstaat (Skala); Einschätzung der Vorteilhaftigkeit moderner Technik in ausgewählten Bereichen; Einstellung zu verschiedenen technischen Projekten und Vorhaben, wie z.B. BTX, Gentechnologie, Automatisierung, Computerisierung im Büro und zu Hause. Demographie: Alter; Geschlecht; Familienstand; Kinderzahl; Alter der Kinder (klassiert); Schulbildung; Beruf; berufliche Position; Berufstätigkeit; Haushaltseinkommen; Haushaltsgröße; Befragter ist Haushaltsvorstand; Charakteristika des Haushaltsvorstands; Wohnsituation.

The Identity and Access Management (IAM) software market for the education sector is experiencing robust growth, projected to reach a market size of $6,564.7 million in 2025 and exhibiting a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 11.8% from 2025 to 2033. This significant expansion is driven by several key factors. The increasing adoption of cloud-based learning platforms and the growing need to secure sensitive student and institutional data are primary contributors. Furthermore, the rising prevalence of cyber threats targeting educational institutions necessitates robust IAM solutions for effective access control and data protection. The diverse deployment models—cloud-based, on-premises, and hybrid—cater to the varied IT infrastructure of schools and educational institutions, further fueling market growth. The segment encompassing schools and educational institutions dominates the application-based market share, reflecting the high demand for secure access management within these settings. Key players such as OneLogin, Okta, and Microsoft (through Azure Active Directory) are actively shaping the market landscape through continuous innovation and strategic partnerships. The market's growth is expected to be further influenced by government initiatives promoting digital education and increasing investments in cybersecurity infrastructure. The geographical distribution of the market reveals strong presence in North America and Europe, driven by high technological adoption and stringent data privacy regulations. However, the Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness substantial growth in the coming years, driven by rising internet penetration, increased government investment in education technology, and the adoption of digital learning strategies. While the market faces certain restraints, such as the initial investment costs associated with implementing IAM solutions and the need for ongoing training and support, the overall positive trajectory is largely determined by the paramount importance of data security and user access management within the increasingly digitalized educational ecosystem. This continued growth necessitates a proactive approach from educational institutions to secure their digital assets and ensure a safe and productive learning environment for students and staff.

We will conduct personal data protection law advocacy seminar related materials

This opinion poll has been carried out at the request of the Directorate-General Internal Market, Unit E4 - Media and data protection, managed and organised by the Directorate-General Press and Communication ("Public Opinion Analysis" Sector). It was carried out between September 1 and September 30 2003, in all European Union countries, on behalf of the European Opinion Research Group (EORG: a consortium of market research and public opinion agencies, made out of INRA in Belgium - I.C.O. and GfK Ad Hoc Worldwide). This report firstly assesses EU citizens’ views on the general issue of personal data privacy and examines the level of concern they feel on this subject. Respondents were then surveyed as to the level of trust they had in the acceptable use of personal data held by organisations such as banks, police, doctors, etc. Views were then gathered as to attitude towards specific aspects of data collection and data management covering such areas as confidence in the efficacity of the legal framework on data protection, security of information on the Internet, etc. Individuals’ knowledge of legislation, complaints procedures, sanctions on law-breakers and rights to restrict the use of personal information, etc. were then analysed.

The results by volumes are distributed as follows:

• Volume A: Countries
• Volume AA: Groups of countries
• Volume A' (AP): Trends
• Volume AA' (AAP): Trends of groups of countries
• Volume B: EU/socio-demographics
• Volume B' (BP) : Trends of EU/ socio-demographics
• Volume C: Country/socio-demographics ---- Researchers may also contact GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences: https://www.gesis.org/eurobarometer

This dataset is about book subjects. It has 3 rows and is filtered where the books is Data protection for photographers : a guide to storing and protecting your valuable digital assets. It features 10 columns including number of authors, number of books, earliest publication date, and latest publication date.