Timeline for Is displaying email addresses in an application log file allowed under GDPR?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 29, 2019 at 16:21 | comment | added | Agent_L | @MasonWheeler Every information worth keeping is factual. And keeping it longer than necessary is abuse, that's the point. Eg ebay banned me personally for life because apparently few years of having account without buying is "suspicious activity". They don't have a record of what part of my activity was suspicious, all they have is the factual information that I was banned. That's exactly the kind of abuse GDPR seeks to eradicate. Nothing but remembering factual information here. Let's delete our political rants here, because they don't serve the question. | |
| Jan 29, 2019 at 12:36 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | @schroeder That's good to hear. Thanks for the clarification. | |
| Jan 29, 2019 at 12:36 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | @Agent_L Sure, but remembering factual information is not abuse, and this insane "right" is already being heavily abused by sleazy politicians, criminals, and corporate actors to cover up past misdeeds, as everyone with half a brain predicted it would be from day 1. | |
| Jan 29, 2019 at 9:39 | comment | added | schroeder♦ | @MasonWheeler no, that's not what the requirement states. You do not need to dig into your tape backups. What you need to do is to ensure that if you apply your backups, that the data in question is not restored. While this is potentially a new functionality for some, it is not as crazy as it sounds in practice. | |
| Jan 29, 2019 at 8:25 | history | edited | Pete | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 87 characters in body
|
| Jan 29, 2019 at 8:19 | comment | added | Pete | @MasonWheeler When a data subject exercises his right to be forgotten, the Controller has a certain time within to comply, 90 days if I remember correctly. So if you immediately remove the information from your production system, and keeps backups for 90 days - you're fine. Also remember that other legislation may overrule this right to be forgotten, so for example, if local legislation requires you to keep financial records for the last 5 years, then that "wins" over the right to be forgotten. | |
| Jan 29, 2019 at 8:05 | comment | added | Agent_L | @MasonWheeler I've merely showcased how your argument sounds for the other side and how bad it is to bring up politics unwelcome. No matter how bad you phrase it, in a "proper" or "improper" voice, the "right to force others to stop abusing you" is the cornerstone of most societies including ours. | |
| Jan 28, 2019 at 22:45 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | @Agent_L This is an example of why the passive voice is so insidious and we are supposed to avoid using it. Expressed in the proper active voice, it's a "right to force others to forget about you." Which is insane already; it sounds like something horribly dystopic, straight out of a Phillip K. Dick novel. I'm just pointing out yet another point where its requirements are nonsensical. | |
| Jan 28, 2019 at 22:35 | comment | added | Agent_L | @MasonWheeler Wait, what's the point of the right to be forgotten if all deleted data will be restored from backup on next crash? Do you have any idea how utterly insane that is? | |
| Jan 28, 2019 at 21:57 | comment | added | Mason Wheeler | Wait, a RTBF request can obligate a site to dig into and alter their backups?!? Does anyone at the EU legal system have any idea how utterly insane that is? | |
| Jan 28, 2019 at 17:10 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 28, 2019 at 18:14 | |||||
| Jan 28, 2019 at 17:08 | history | answered | Pete | CC BY-SA 4.0 |