zlacker

[return to "GDPR: Don't Panic"]
1. Stream+Y[view] [source] 2018-05-18 08:14:03
>>grabeh+(OP)
Exactly. People try to explain to me how it is impossible to comply and usually it turns out that it would be easy. I think the problem most of time that people misunderstanding the requirements or not reading GDPR (not even TLDR versions).
◧◩
2. merino+m1[view] [source] 2018-05-18 08:18:37
>>Stream+Y
It is easy if they believe particular person's interpretation. But that doesn't mean they are right. People have huge problems with interpreting written word if it is not written without a room for interpretation and if you add to the mix bureaucrats that have targets to meet you'll see it will not be easy at all.
◧◩◪
3. willva+E1[view] [source] 2018-05-18 08:21:48
>>merino+m1
Am in EU, am involved in some compliance stuff and have talked to plenty others at other companies, and it really does seem to be a nothing-to-see-here for all companies except the sleezy ones.
◧◩◪◨
4. hvidga+u2[view] [source] 2018-05-18 08:30:42
>>willva+E1
In all of my research, talking to lawyers, and seminars on GDPR, it is about:

1. Ask permission for collecting data

2. Keep sensitive data safe

3. Restrict access to said data

4. Keep a log of what happens with the data

5. Delete it upon request

6. Have all of the above documented and adhere to the protocol.

It's such a none issue unless you're relying on the very thing GDPR is designed to combat. If you not collecting and selling peoples data, and you don't do the above already, see this as a good opportunity to do what you should have been doing all along. There is such an awareness now, that it's the easiest it has ever been to know how to handle sensitive data properly.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. willva+R2[view] [source] 2018-05-18 08:33:42
>>hvidga+u2
Completely agree with everything you list, and would add that 6. you can't force a user to give up privacy in order to get some other benefit, e.g. you can't offer to unlock some feature in return for more tracking
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. merino+y6[view] [source] 2018-05-18 09:17:02
>>willva+R2
Example: How do you ask user for a permission to log access logs (which contain IP address) in the server, so that you can detect spam, ddos and other attacks? How do you store that consent information and what do you do if user doesn't consent? What do you do if user connecting from given IP address wants you to send him data you have collected about him. If people share IP addresses how do you know which log data is about which person?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. willva+m7[view] [source] 2018-05-18 09:27:02
>>merino+y6
Some entity runs a webserver. This entity has a legitimate business purpose in retaining access logs for e.g. 3 months for e.g. spam and security reasons. This entity just has to document that.

This entity can allow a 3rd party service to access these logs so that 3rd party can do whatever needs to be done if it is within the reasons the entity gave for having the data.

What neither can do is go use that data for anything other than the said purposes.

And if the given reasons are gratuitous and somehow the regulators notice, expect to get a nastygram and have to comply or face fines.

Basically what you can't do is collect data for longer than you have a legitimate need for, or cash-in and sell data you've collected. Basically, all said and done, just don't be sleezy and you'll be ok.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. merino+CP[view] [source] 2018-05-18 16:24:57
>>willva+m7
Who defines what is a legitimate business purpose? Let's say I comply with all that, but someone makes a complaint and particularly bitter civil servant judges that the collection is not legitimate, because he doesn't like the content of the website?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. acdha+xS[view] [source] 2018-05-18 16:43:35
>>merino+CP
That’s like arguing that we shouldn’t have laws in case a cop is having a bad day and follows you around writing tickets. This is a legal process like anything else: your standard should be what you’re comfortable defending in court. Being able to show a good faith decision process, compliance with common industry practice, etc. are going to help the case that any lapse was unintentional.

If your angry ex is hired by a regulator you’d appeal it but there’s no reason to think that’s a common problem.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. merino+4o1[view] [source] 2018-05-18 20:47:37
>>acdha+xS
But appeal might take forever and by the time it is resolved you file for bankruptcy because the fine ruined the cash flow. I've seen in it many times in the EU, for example in Poland. Civil servants are immune from taking responsibility and if you manage to get any compensation you'll find yourself spending years in courts.
[go to top]