I think the GDPR approach (transparency rules, huge fines) is probably good enough to address this
While I trust that everyone tries their best, I am skeptical about the EU having a policy team at hand that can factually teach Facebook (one of the most attacked properties in the world) better cybersecurity processes and operational practices.
3
4
I’ve been talking GDPR for weeks and like, nobody knows how to comply. So many people have totally different thoughts.
2
2
I know, I’m not claiming it’s clear or easy to execute. I completely agree with its intention and the general model, though.
Anything specific that comes up in terms of compliance? Always interested in discussing how to go about it technically.
1
1
So for me the biggest confusion is around personally identifiable information. Loosely this could mean so many things and affect every single tier of the architecture including cold storage of logs.
1
1
Agreed. E.g. there are lots of things you shouldn’t log, or at least not keep, which of course complicates things. Keeping aggregated stats instead might work.
3
It’s my strong belief that every single system is in violation of the requirements. The requirements are so vague I can poke holes in almost any system described to me and consider it not compliant.
So if a law exists that nobody can effectively comply with, what use is it?
2
2
I see your point, and I wish it were clearer. But my expectation (and experience) is that judges don’t follow overly literate interpretations. Possibly a EU/US difference?
3
Uhhh so your argument is the law is vague and everyone is in violation but it’s okay because if you try to be somewhat compliant the EU won’t attack you.
Yeah, lawfully that’s not something a business can roll the dice with.
1
The current version of the law is unclear and full of holes. It’s like a beta, or possibly an MVP version. We can argue whether we’d be better off with or without it.
Oct 1, 2018 · 6:47 AM UTC
3