3 ms·
> In any realistic architecture, there are are a million exceptions to "this Irish user's data is stored in Ireland": offsite backups, cross-datacenter requests
by bonesss 9y ago
> In any realistic architecture, there are are a million exceptions to "this Irish user's data is stored in Ireland": offsite backups, cross-datacenter requests within backend systems, offline analytical stores, queries, derived tables, etc. ... Data having a geographical location is an incoherent concept in the context of the architectures of modern multinational tech companies. That much is obvious from simply reading their engineering blogs and whitepapers.
Italicized for emphasis, because that's the part where one discussion attempts to diverge into two.
It's true what you're saying, in exactly that one context: from the point of view of a multinational cloud provider there's a lot of different ingredients coming together to make "a" stew.
For what the OP was discussing though: what you're saying is completely wrong.
From the context of the Irish Government who is protecting sensitive personal data on Irish citizens and deciding how it, the Irish Government, and their related services should handle data, there is only one legally defensible position as of today: full control of the legal entities handling the data. The EU has very little legal sway outside the EU, there is no baked in legal reciprocity, and your suggestion for data handling laws fall woefully short of the real world issues (like... hate speech legislation, abortion politics, etc).
You're thinking about GMail. The legislation is looking at something like the entirety Irish health services and handling sensitive individual research data. From that context the idea of having no data governance and relying on inadequate legal agreements directly contradicts expert opinion and legal requirements.
Personal Identification Numbers do a lot to streamline public services, they also change the relative sensitivity of data at rest. Therefore the EU has decided that putting such data in an environment where something like Paxos would be relevant is a complete no-go. Data has a location until it is copied multiple places. The EU has decided they don't want any of those places to be outside their jurisdiction for the good of their citizens.
- closeparen 9y ago>You're thinking about GMail TFA is about GMail. >there is only one legally defensible position as of today: full control of the legal entities handling the data Absolutely! The GDPR does this, and it's perfectly coherent, in that it applies to all EU citizens' data, regardless of where the data is stored or processed. What's incoherent is the (former) US policy that data held by American companies is immune to search if and only if it's located outside the US. >Data has a location until it is copied multiple places Data are copied hundreds to thousands of times as they transit any network. Further, if data at rest are only stored in one place, the company storing it is dangerously irresponsible. HIPAA actually mandates backup and disaster recovery capabilities. The illegal thing would be having too few copies, or an architecture with a single point of failure. >The legislation is looking at something like the entirety Irish health services and handling sensitive individual research data Surely something this sensitive should not rely on the "one weird trick" that US companies are (sometimes? maybe?) not required to comply with court orders for data that they claim lives on EU soil.