Добро пожаловать, Гость. Пожалуйста авторизуйтесь здесь.
FGHIGate на GaNJa NeTWoRK ST@Ti0N - Просмотр сообщения в эхоконференции ENET.SYSOP
Введите FGHI ссылку:


Присутствуют сообщения из эхоконференции ENET.SYSOP с датами от 10 Jul 13 21:42:12 до 13 Sep 24 12:11:54, всего сообщений: 12549
Ответить на сообщение К списку сообщений Предыдущее сообщение Следующее сообщение
= Сообщение: 6341 из 12549 ====================================== ENET.SYSOP =
От   : Michiel van der Vlist            2:280/5555         03 May 18 15:32:00
Кому : Gerrit Kuehn                                        03 May 18 15:32:00
Тема : GDPR
FGHI : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:280/5555+5aeb111e
На   : area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:240/12+5aeab90f
= Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP850 ==================================
Ответ: area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:240/1661+5ae9a192
Ответ: area://ENET.SYSOP?msgid=2:240/12+5a80aa95
==============================================================================
Hello Gerrit,

On Thursday May 03 2018 07:32, you wrote to me:

MvdV>> Yes. But those aren't third party data. Those are the IP
MvdV>> numbers of nodes that have called my system and those that my
MvdV>> system has called. How is that different from the list of
MvdV>> numbers collected in my mobile phone?

GK> I think it is different because you use your phone in a more private
GK> way (usually only you communicate with it). Furthermore, there is
GK> probably technical and/or legal requirement to transfer the number of
GK> the mobile caller. However, in the end you may be required to prune
GK> your phone log on a regular basis, too.

Prunig Fidonet logs would not be a problem. I do not keep them forever anyway and writing a script to do it automatically is doable. My phone... My old dumb Samsung has no facility to automayticcally delete old information. Maybe manufaturrers will be forced to implement this in future, but that is not going to work on old phones.

GK> IMHO you definitely are required to delete your binkd log data after a
GK> few weeks.

If that keeps everyone happy, I will do that.

What comes to mind is "who will enforce this and how?". My logs are not accessible from the outside. To see them one needs physival access to the machine where they are stored. So the enforcer would need a search warrant. I do not see anyone issuing a serach warrant for such a minor issue.

MvdV>> I don't know, but I don't think anyone can be responsble for
MvdV>> what he/she does not control.

GK> I wouldn't buy into that too easily. We have a hierarchical structure
GK> that allows people in "higher up" positions to ask other further down
GK> the road to comply to certain rules. We do so for ages with stuff that
GK> is written in our policies.

Yes, we have a hierachical structure but the powers of the *Cs are very limited. A *C does not have the authority nor the means to demand that sysops give him/her access to their logs. So how can anyone other than the sysop be responsible for what is in those logs?

MvdV>> Lots of questions and very few answers.

GK> Indeed.

I guess we will just have to see how this evolves. No doubt there will be court rulings in the interpretation. Some parts of this new law may turn out to be unwokable. For both the executioners and the enforcers.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
* Origin: http://www.vlist.eu (2:280/5555)

К главной странице гейта
Powered by NoSFeRaTU`s FGHIGate
Открытие страницы: 0.081670 секунды