kenbaylor

18 ms·

1.
by kenbaylor 3y ago
Likely on this basis: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35038971.amp
2.
by kenbaylor 7y ago
If it's not exposed to the internet no problem. Not true unfortunately under the GDPR nor it's predecessor, if the notes are publicly available: Bodil Lindquist v Åklagarkammaren (2003) Mrs. Lindquist (whose purposes were mostly
3.
by kenbaylor 7y ago
Not true unfortunately under the GDPR nor it's predecessor, if the notes are publicly available: Bodil Lindquist v Åklagarkammaren (2003) Mrs. Lindquist (whose purposes were mostly charitable and religious) published on a private home
4.
Huawei has immediately lost access to Android and Google(androidauthority.com)
10 points by kenbaylor 7y ago|0 comments
5.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Major privacy honeypot...enter your number, have it PRINTED ON THE WEBPAGE for millions of other visitors to see, add to spam lists etc, they could at least mask the number....
6.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
It's been going on since 2010 in the Costeja case and they lost the case in 2014 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Spain_v_AEPD_and_Mario_... ), and 'interpreted it' as 'we'll just limit the
7.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
This may be the one you are looking for: Cybersecurity law: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/cn/pdf/en/2017/02/o...
8.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
San Francisco was one of the few places in the world to try to address that with it's 'ban the box ' initiative. Crimes must be relevant to disqualify a candidate. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/l
9.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
This is a big point of confusion. A background check will check the court records, where your convictions will still be listed (unless protected from disclosure e.g. California background checks generally don't show convictions > 7
10.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
You are correct, and they will likely change that or face heavy fines, now that they have lost this case.
11.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
GDPR will have a massive effect no matter where you are. The trickle-down affects are key. Many large companies do business with Europe. Many of them are implementing GDPR-like controls and/or adopting Privacy Shield. Other US companie
12.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
They have started to pass laws. The GDPR covers the processing of criminal convictions here: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-10-gdpr/ While mankind has not needed a right to be forgotten previously, it didn't have the om
13.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Some of the factors that come into this include the very nature of criminal sentencing: A judge looks at the facts of the case, aggravating factors, previous convictions and sentencing guidelines, and determines an appropriate sentence. The
14.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
This is a really good time for him to shut up and lawyer up. The duty of the prosecution is to prove their case in court. The fact that they have seized his computer(s) and carried out forensics already, means they are looking hard for a co
15.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Start with the basics: Personal data (PD). The GDPR applies to 'personal data' meaning any information relating to an identifiable person who can be directly or indirectly identified in particular by reference to an identifier. Ho
16.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Under GDPR, that would be a yes if the key is truly lost, and the personal data is not recoverable by anyone. If it is recoverable, then it falls into the ominous term: Pseudonymous : https://www.wsgrdataadvisor.com/2015&#x2
17.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
I wish they would give more clarity on what 'delete' means. Is it a) It's deleted from your timeline etc or b) It is really deleted from Facebook's servers If it's a) then that's either a 'hidden' t
18.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
There is a process to be followed. If you have the response from the DPO and a reasonable suspicion based on evidence, you can absolutely to to the DPA. If your evidence is strong, that may proceed on that. If not but there are many other s
19.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Most of the EU litigation has been against Facebook. They have spent many millions in EU GDPR projects (such as the ability to download all records, which is in the news cycle right now). Under the current legislation, they can be sued by e
20.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
This is a key reason why there are data protection officers under GDPR. They report to the highest level of management (mostly the board) and are independent. They are also called mini-regulators. They ensure the company is compliant. If th
21.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
For any company that is compliant with GDPR (after 25th May 2018), the answers your 4 questions (2 on data collection, other 2 on data subject rights) must already be in their privacy notice on their website, with instructions for how to co
22.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Something like this? "“With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types, but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the groups that the attack techniques were s
23.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Hopefully I addressed it in the section above. I believe that intelligence agencies are targeted all the time, and keeping machines clean is not that easy. Certain governments (like Singapore) adopted an air-gap approach, so the machines yo
24.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Great question: Apologies if I wasn't being clear. For example: the Chinese government has been waging war against the Free Tibet movement for years: https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=chinese+malware+free+tibe... Ther
25.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
Here you go....from my 2012 Blackhat presentation. It then shows the issues of attribution as everything comes from the infected machine...sorry it's dated but nothing has really changed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
26.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
It's called a watering hole attack. You infect many of the devices way ahead of time (that are interested in whatever subject area you targeted), and pick your victim when you need to. If you haven't prosecuted these cases, you&#x
27.
by kenbaylor 8y ago
It really is super easy. Even since 2007, malware like Zeus and SpyEye, and a million different Remote Access Tools (RATs) take over your machine and allow all activity to emanate from it. Very easy to plant a false flag or incriminating ev
28.
by kenbaylor 9y ago
Each country will have a Data Protection Authority (DPA) which is the regulator in the country. The ICO is the one in the UK. The last letter of the GDPR is Regulation. A regulation is very different than than a Directive (the pre-GDPR law
29.
by kenbaylor 9y ago
The reason why this is such a great letter is because it questions the competence of the recipient DPO. The data subject has a right to some of the information, but by no means all of it. If the DPO complies with all of it, they will brea
30.
by kenbaylor 9y ago
You can ask, but the recipient company does not have to comply. The tax authorities have a legal obligation to keep the data, and they will. Reference: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-da...

More ›