7(1)(o)
FOIAData-processing/IT security information
Data-processing/IT security information
Read the full statute text on /statutes →
2 upheld (no violation found) · 0 rejected (violation found) · 2 partial violation · 1 closed / insufficient info / other, out of 5 documents.
Not legal advice, and not a per-exemption ruling — this reflects each document's overall disposition. See the FAQ disclaimer.
How the Public Access Counselor has treated 7(1)(o)
Section 7(1)(o) covers administrative and technical information associated with automated data processing operations. In these decisions, it was invoked for system user guides and manuals, such as an ALPR system user guide and an internal software manual, and for data embedded in proprietary assessment software. The PAC has described this material as per se exempt from disclosure when it falls within the exemption.
The PAC has generally sustained withholding where the record was shown to be that type of technical or software-embedded information. At the same time, it has treated related issues separately, including whether case reports were properly provided, whether other exemptions supported redactions to correspondence, and whether a request would require creating new records or answering questions rather than producing existing records.
At a glance: 5 documents from 2025(0 binding opinions, 5 determination letters). Most often cited alongside: 7(1)(b) (Private information) (2); 7(1)(a) (Federal/State-law confidentiality — or public defender case files, for documents issued under the other amendment version) (1); 7(1)(c) (Personal privacy) (1); 7(1)(f) (Preliminary drafts, notes, and deliberative materials) (1).
Recurring issues
- Whether law enforcement system user guides and internal software manuals are exempt as administrative and technical information associated with automated data processing. (ALPR system user guide for in-car use, Police case reports and an internal software manual)
- Whether a public body must produce a cost table or other data embedded in proprietary software used for assessments. (A proprietary cost table in assessment software)
- Whether redactions to correspondence properly relied on section 7(1)(o) alongside other exemptions for private information and privacy. (Athletic department correspondence with an NIL group)
- Whether a request for specific digital data requires a public body to create new records or answer questions. (Native digital files from Snap, Inc)
Practical points
- A public body relying on section 7(1)(o) should identify the record as administrative and technical information associated with automated data processing operations.
- A request for information embedded in exempt proprietary software may be found unfounded where the embedded material falls under sections 7(1)(o) and 7(1)(a).
- A public body is not required to create new records or answer questions in response to a request for specific digital data.
Summary drafted from the linked decisions and checked against them; read the decisions themselves before relying on it. Not legal advice.
All 5 documents citing 7(1)(o)
- ALPR system user guide for in-car useDetermination letterNo violation
No violation found
- Police case reports and an internal software manualDetermination letterPartial violation
Partial violation found
- Athletic department correspondence with an NIL groupDetermination letterPartial violation
Partial violation found
- A proprietary cost table in assessment softwareDetermination letterNo violation
No violation found
- Native digital files from Snap, IncDetermination letterClosed no further action
Closed, no further action