5 ms·
> based on the assumption that Google actually are anonymising the data. If you want to disagree with that assumption then that’s a valid viewpoint too, but I s
by vog 9y ago
> based on the assumption that Google actually are anonymising the data. If you want to disagree with that assumption then that’s a valid viewpoint too, but I see no evidence for it.
This is exactly the wrong way around. For every sensitive area, such as privacy, it is upon the company to prove proper handling of data. But if that company is outside your legislation, without any legal means in their country, how could that ever be possible?
Taking just their word is like trusting the food industry with hygienics until their customers become undeniably sick.
A better strategy is not to create sensitive datasets in the first place. In Germany, this principle is called "Datensparsamkeit", which could be translated to "data frugality".
Moreover, every country should have something like the FDA for data hygienics. Unfortunately, even in Germany where we do have "Datenschutzbeauftragte" (designees for data protection), those can make a lot of noise but don't have much power. This is still better than not having those people, though.
- robin_reala 9y agoI’m not disagreeing with you outright, but your argument is on the ad infinitum scale. For instance, GOV.UK PaaS uses AWS as a host[1]. Is that worrying? Should we not be using Cisco gear because of US govt backdoors? Should we not be using Chinese manufactured chips? These considerations are ones the military has daily, but they hinder the ability to deliver. Analytics is arguable both ways (and I lean towards your argument at this point in time) but there are good reasons past and present for GA. [1] https://www.cloud.service.gov.uk https://www.cloud.service.gov.uk
- Symbiote 9y agoThose are all maybes. Google Analytics is a certainty, and reasonable alternatives are available. I think it shows a terrible attitude from the department responsible to use GA. Not everything should be done by the lowest bidder, regardless of the costs. Maybe I'll write to my MP...
- Nursie 9y agoThese aren't really equivalent to actively sending out data to overseas entities by anyone using your pages. You absolutely should be taking precautions to make sure that what you're doing on AWS is secure. And in fact erring on the side of using providers who host in European countries, preferably European organisations. (addendum - I spent a lot of the early part of this year working on AWS-based data processing systems for a large bank, they took massive precautions with the transport and storage of their data within the AWS system, including IPSec overlays, 14 day maximum node lifetimes and various other things. I realise that at some point you're trusting amazon, but there's a lot can be done to avoid having problems in the first place. "Not sending data to places you don't absolutely have to" seems pretty basic)