4 ms·

Thanks for sharing. I believe this is entirely reasonable given the trend of data breaches, which occur everyday. LinkedIn suffered one of the largest breaches,

Thanks for sharing. I believe this is entirely reasonable given the trend of data breaches, which occur everyday. LinkedIn suffered one of the largest breaches, which compromised millions of users. Corporations think that they can disregard the laws of nations and act as independent entities. They use their financial power to influence legislation and steal freedom from individuals. Unbiased regulation is needed to stop expropriation. It's a shame that the article depicted this as censorship. Russia has been under heavy and unjust criticism for quite a while now.

mgbmtl 10y ago
It wasn't a physical data breach, so I don't think it would make much of a difference. Presumably, it's a way to force Linkedin (and others) to have a subsidiary in Russia (legal entity), which can then be sued if there are problems with regards to Russian law. On one hand, I fully understand your concern. I'm in Canada and the local governments pressure companies such as Netflix, Google and others to have registered legal entities here so that they can apply Canadian law (privacy, tax and language requirements). On the other hand, Russia does not have a good reputation with regards to neutral application of the state of law. Furthermore, Russia does not have good privacy laws. Linkedin probably doesn't have the same resources/expertise as they do in the US. (as a Canadian, I never host my client data in the US for this reason.. it's not that the US is so terrible (although it kind of is w.r.t. privacy/NSA-stuff), but if something happens, we don't have the resources to deal with it)
csharpminor 10y ago
This has nothing to do with security. If anything, maintaining data centers on a per-country basis would be harder to protect. In-country data requirements add a level of bureaucracy to the web that is just bad for users, as well as companies trying to innovate. This is a combination of both censorship and protectionism.

mgbmtl 10y ago

It wasn't a physical data breach, so I don't think it would make much of a difference. Presumably, it's a way to force Linkedin (and others) to have a subsidiary in Russia (legal entity), which can then be sued if there are problems with regards to Russian law. On one hand, I fully understand your concern. I'm in Canada and the local governments pressure companies such as Netflix, Google and others to have registered legal entities here so that they can apply Canadian law (privacy, tax and language requirements). On the other hand, Russia does not have a good reputation with regards to neutral application of the state of law. Furthermore, Russia does not have good privacy laws. Linkedin probably doesn't have the same resources/expertise as they do in the US. (as a Canadian, I never host my client data in the US for this reason.. it's not that the US is so terrible (although it kind of is w.r.t. privacy/NSA-stuff), but if something happens, we don't have the resources to deal with it)

csharpminor 10y ago

This has nothing to do with security. If anything, maintaining data centers on a per-country basis would be harder to protect. In-country data requirements add a level of bureaucracy to the web that is just bad for users, as well as companies trying to innovate. This is a combination of both censorship and protectionism.