4 ms·

Still being litigated [1]. Last ruling was for Microsoft's position. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corporation_v._United_States_of_America

• onli 10y ago
  That's a good caveat. Still: Being litigated means the US is trying to achieve a state which is explicitly unsafe. Which for me means already that AWS-Frankfurt is not safe. Especially for something like medical data. The potential danger is way too big, especially since we know that the US-agencies will siphon the data anyway, regardless of what the court rules. Think business: Do you really want to face the media backlash when your competitor lances the story that the medical data you collect goes directly into the tiny little hands of Trump, and to the NSA?
  • Beltiras 10y ago
    If they are using extra-judicial means to get at the data I have no recourse anyways. I will have to store it somewhere and a dedicated attacker will always (eventually) find a vulnerability. The standards I have to implement do not state that I must keep the data out of the hands of attackers. They state principles and methods that make it less likely. When the regulators come knocking after an 'incident' their levying of fines will depend on standards and regulation compliance, not the leaked documents. You have an unreasonable expectation of what can be done.
    • onli 10y ago
      Not hosting private medical data on a server controlled by a country with no regard for privacy of those patients is not an unreasonable expectation. It is a basic requirement for this kind of business. There will come a crackdown on that kind of malpractice. I hope you reconsidered till then.