Hot answers tagged

4

GDPR is more restrictive than the US definition of PII, in which, non-PII that allow any inference to the identities is also under GDPR jurisdiction. I doubt given masking examples will withstand GDPR audit. Replace the email address with an obvious placeholder (e.g. redacted@redacted.invalid), that is what everyone is doing. Partial masking is weak in ...


2

It makes no sense to keep information secret if they are trivially and cheaply obtainable by others anyway. For everything else somebody has to put some non-trivial effort and/or costs into collecting and associating such information. Due to this it will only be done if the expected return at least matches the efforts and costs needed to obtain such ...


2

AWS Privatelink isn't going to provide you anything special (or prevent anything you were already doing) in the way of encryption. It is a way to directly connect VPCs without having the traffic leave Amazon's network. This won't prevent you from using TLS since that is negotiated at the endpoints (your partner's server and your client for instance). The ...


2

There is no official guidance because this is not a GDPR enforced requirement. GDPR does not regulate specific security measures beyond making recommendations about what you should consider. Since you consider doing something like that, you in theory should do a Data Protection Impact Assessment to identify levels of risk may be associated with your ...


2

This is not just an issue with 3rd parties - banks have strict regulations about what PII they can use in development environments if controls are not up to the same strictness as production environment. The usual route is anonymisation or pseudo-anonymisation. From https://gdpr.report/news/2017/11/07/data-masking-anonymisation-pseudonymisation/: With ...


1

If there is unauthorised access to data due to the way the process is designed, then that, by definition is "data leakage". There might be no impact by having the data leaked, depending on the type of data, or the designers might have classified the access type as effectively "authorised" because they deem it "public data", but that's a separate issue and ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible