This
page
is
part
of
the
FHIR
Specification
(v1.8.0:
STU
3
Draft).
The
current
version
which
supercedes
this
version
is
5.0.0
.
For
a
full
list
of
available
versions,
see
the
Directory
of
published
versions
.
Page
versions:
R5
R4B
R4
R3
R2
FHIR
Infrastructure
Work
Group
|
Maturity Level : N/A | Ballot Status : STU 3 |
A security label is a concept attached to a resource or bundle that provides specific security metadata about the information it is fixed to. The Access Control decision engine uses the security label together with any provenance resources associated with the resource and other metadata (e.g. the resource type, resource contents, etc.) to
Security Labels enable more data to flow as they enable policy fragments to accompany the resource data.
The intent of a security label is that the recipient of resources or bundles with security-tags is obligated to enforce the handling caveats of the tags and carry the security labels forward as appropriate.
Security labels are only a device to connect specific resources, bundles, or operations to a wider security framework; a full set of policy and consent statements and their consequent obligations is needed to give the labels meaning. As a consequence of this, security labels are most effective in fully trusted environments - that is, where all trading partners have agreed to abide by them in a Mutual Trust Framework. Note also that security labels support policy, and specific tagging of individual resources is not always required to implement policy correctly.
In the absence of this kind of pre-agreement, Security Labels may still be used by individual parties to assist with security role checking, but they may not all be recognized and enforced, which in turn limits what information is allowed to flow.
Local agreements and implementation profiles for the use security labels should describe how the security labels connect to the relevant consent and policy statements, and in particular:
This specification defines a basic set of labels for the most common use cases trading partners, and also a wider array of security labels that allow much finer grained management of the information.
A security label is represented as a Coding , with the following important properties:
| system | The coding scheme from which label is taken (see code system URI , and below) |
| code | a code from the coding scheme that identifies the security label and code is an value from the code system |
| display | The display form for the code (mostly for use when a system doesn't recognize the code) |
An XML patient resource with a "celebrity" tag associated with it, as represented in an HTTP response:
<Patient xmlns="http://hl7.org/fhir">
<meta>
<security>
<system value="http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/ActCode"/>
<code value="CEL"/>
<display value="Celebrity"/>
</security>
</meta>
... [snip] ...
</Patient>
A JSON search result that includes a resource that the receiving application must delete all copies of the resource after using it:
{
"resourceType" : "Bundle",
"type" : "searchset",
... other headers etc.....
"entry" : [
... other entries ....
{
"resource": {
"id" : "1",
"meta" : {
"security" : [{
"system" : "http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/ActCode",
"code" : "DELAU",
"display" : "delete after use"
}]
}
... other content etc.....
}
},
... other entries ....
]
}
Note: the actual terms used in these examples are described below.
The basic framework for security labels is described by the HL7 Healthcare Classification System (HCS; ref todo). This specification identifies how security labels are defined and provides a relatively comprehensive list of labels. All of the HCS defined labels (see below for the lists) can be used as security labels on FHIR resources and bundles (e.g. requests and responses).
In addition, other security labels not defined here or in the HCS can be defined by jurisdictions, vendors and/or projects and used as appropriate. However, note that:
Note: The use of security labels and the expression of common shared security policies is a matter of ongoing discussion and development in several communities at this time.
This specification defines a set of core security labels for all FHIR systems. All conformant FHIR Applications SHOULD use these labels where appropriate. For all of these labels, how they are operationalised - their use and interpretation - is subject to the applicable Mutual Trust Framework agreement as described above. These codes all come from one of two code systems: http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/Confidentiality, and http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/ActCode,
| Name/ Tag | Description |
| Context of Use | |
| Confidentiality codes |
These
confidentiality
class
(system
=
http://hl7.org/fhir/v3/Confidentiality)
can
be
applied
to
any
resource
or
bundle.
They
are
generally
assigned
by
the
author
of
the
resource,
but
can
be
modified
subsequently
as
a
matter
of
operational
management.
The
Confidentiality
classifications
describe
the
sensitivity
of
the
information
in
a
resource
with
regard
to
whether
it
should
made
available
or
disclosed
to
unauthorized
individuals,
entities,
or
processes.
Notes:
|
| Celebrity / VIP: ActCode. CEL |
Use
on
any
resource
to
indicate
that
the
subject/patient
is
a
celebrity
or
well
known
to
the
staff
in
the
institution.
Notes:
|
| Staff: ActCode. EMP |
Use
on
a
Patient
resource
and
resources
with
a
subject
of
that
patient
to
indicate
that
the
patient
is
a
staff
member
of
the
institution.
This
is
a
variation
on
being
a
celebrity.
Notes:
|
| Keep information from patient: ActCode. TBOO |
Used
on
any
resource
to
indicate
that
information
is
not
to
be
made
available
to
the
patient
or
their
relatives/carers,
except
by
the
personal
decision
of
a
physician
assigned
to
the
patient.
Notes:
|
| Contact/Employment Details Confidential: ActCode. DEMO | Used on a Patient resource to indicate that the patient's address and contact details (phone numbers, email addresses) - including employment information - are sensitive and shouldn't be shared with the patient's family or others without specific authorization |
| Diagnosis-related confidentiality: ActCode. DIA |
Used
on
any
resource
to
indicate
that
the
resource
relates
to
a
diagnosis
(or
potential
diagnosis)
which
is
generally
associated
with
confidentiality
requirements
-
or
is
for
this
particular
patient.
This
may
be
associated
for
diagnoses
including
STDs,
psychiatric
conditions,
adolescent
related
issues,
drug
abuse,
genetics
conditions
and
others.
Notes:
|
| Author Consent needed: ActCode. ORCON | The author's consent is needed for disclosure. Typically, this is used by a treating practitioner to label portions of their own record confidential. Any such resource is only shared with the author or with other parties as arranged. |
| Control of Flow | |
| Delete After Use: ActCode. DELAU |
An
application
receiving
a
resource
with
this
label
must
delete
all
copies
after
the
immediate
use
for
which
the
resource/feed
was
exchanged
is
complete.
Notes:
|
| Do Not Re-use: ActCode. NOREUSE |
An
application
receiving
a
resource
with
this
label
may
only
use
it
for
the
immediate
purpose
of
use.
In
particular,
the
application
is
not
authorized
to
re-distribute
(i.e.
exchange
this
resource
with
any
other
application).
Notes:
|
There
is
a
special
security
label
to
support
the
commonly
encountered
"break-the-glass"
protocol,
where
a
clinician
(usually
in
an
emergency
context)
requests
emergency
unauthorized
access
to
the
patient's
record.
This
specification
does
not
make
any
policy
recommendations
or
rules
about
the
operation,
merely
provides
support
for
it.
See
this
paper
for
discussion
of
the
issues
involved
in
break-the-glass
operations.
When the operation occurs, it is represented as a security label on the request, rather than on a resource, and so is represented differently. The break the glass tag needs to be used as part of an agreed policy and protocol. FHIR does not attempt to define this policy or protocol, it must be agreed on an implementation by implementation basis. For example as a URL:
| Break The Glass | http://hl7.org/fhir/security-label#break-the-glass | The requester is asking for emergency access for patient treatment. Typically, this means that the patient is unconscious and not able to provide relevant information or consent. |
The
URL
is
represented
in
the
request
as
a
web
category
:
HTTP/1.1 GET fhir/Patient/482735/condition Content-Type: text/xml Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * Last-Modified: Thu, 19 Nov 2013 07:07:32 +1100 ETag: 24 Category: http://hl7.org/fhir/security-label#break-the-glass; scheme="http://hl7.org/fhir/tag/security"; label="Break The Glass"
The security labels described above are a subset of the full set of security labels defined by the HL7 Healthcare Privacy and Security Classification System (HCS; ref todo). The HCS defines 5 categories of security labels that may be applied to a resource:
| Security Label | Card. | Values | Description |
| Confidentiality Classification | 0..1 | ConfidentialityClassification |
Security
label
metadata
classifying
an
IT
resource
(clinical
fact,
data,
information
object,
service,
or
system
capability)
according
to
its
level
of
sensitivity,
which
is
based
on
an
analysis
of
applicable
privacy
policies
and
the
risk
of
financial,
reputational,
or
other
harm
to
an
individual
or
entity
that
could
result
if
made
available
or
disclosed
to
unauthorized
individuals,
entities,
or
processes.
Example Uses: Unrestricted, Normal, Very restricted |
| Sensitivity Category | 0..* | InformationSensitivityPolicy |
Security
label
metadata
that
"segments"
an
IT
resource
by
categorizing
the
value,
importance,
and
vulnerability
of
an
IT
resource
perceived
as
undesirable
to
share.
Example Uses: STDs, Psychiatric care, Celebrity status |
| Compartment Category | 0..* | Compartment |
Security
label
metadata
that
"segments"
an
IT
resource
by
indicating
that
access
and
use
is
restricted
to
members
of
a
defined
community
or
project
Note: this is a different use of "Compartment" to the Patient Compartment use. Example Uses: Research, HR records |
| Integrity Category | 0..* | SecurityIntegrityObservationValue |
Security
label
metadata
that
"segments"
an
IT
resource
by
conveying
the
completeness,
veracity,
reliability,
trustworthiness,
and
provenance
of
an
IT
resource
Example Uses: Anonymized, signed, patient reported |
| Handling Caveat | 0..* | SecurityControlObservationValue |
Security
label
metadata
conveying
dissemination
controls
and
information
handling
instructions
such
as
obligations
and
retention
policies
to
which
an
IT
resource
custodian
or
receiver
must
comply.
This type of handling caveat SHALL be assigned to a clinical fact if required by jurisdictional or organizational policy, which may be triggered by a patient consent directive Example Uses: do not disclose, various restrictions on use, and policy marks |
Each of these security labels identifies a ValueSet that lists a set of possible codes for the security label.
The HL7 Healthcare Classification System also allows for Realm-specific privacy law or policy category codes for use in security labels in particular domains. These domains are included with this specification:
| Security Label | Card. | Values | Description |
| US Privacy Law | 0..* | ActUSPrivacyLaw | Security label metadata that "segments" an IT resource by indicating the legal provisions to which the assignment of a Confidentiality Classification complies in the US. |