4 ms·

Under GDPR guidance, IP addresses are considered personal data because they can be used to identify an individual in a moment in time. Personal data consists of

Under GDPR guidance, IP addresses are considered personal data because they can be used to identify an individual in a moment in time. Personal data consists of things that identify individuals, but also things that can be used in conjunction with other information to identify individuals. You might not like that, but the regulators are pretty clear on this point.

geocar 8y ago
The ICO does not consider IP addresses personal data since more than one person could use a computer in a household.
- evfanknitram 8y ago
  That seems like a weak argument though. Two humans can also have same name and zipcode. They can also have same personal number and bank account number if they are in different countries. Without tracking and correlation, most information on its own is useless.
  - geocar 8y ago
    Yes. That's The ICO's position: https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/personal_information_online_cop.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/pe...
  - bostik 8y ago
    This reads like you are intentionally trying to misunderstand. GDPR has two categories of user information: direct identifiers and indirect identifiers. Direct identifiers are pieces of data that allow to target a person, or a very small group of persons from a single data point. Indirect identifiers are anything that you could use to build a marketing cohort. Combining a few indirect identifiers allows to target very specific groups of people. Or, using the very examples you quoted: - The tuple (bank account number, country) is enough to target an individual. - The tuple (full name, zip code) is enough to target a very small group of individuals. By adding just one more element you can identify individuals.[ß] Each one of the four data points counts as user information under GDPR. Doesn't matter whether they are direct or indirect. Disclosure: I wear the DPO hat at Smarkets. As a gambling company we are legally required to know quite a lot about our customers. ß: For the nitpicking armchair lawyers: unless you happen to have a gated community for John Smiths.
    - evfanknitram 8y ago
      I have no idea what you mean. I was not talking about GDPR.
- switch007 8y ago
  Currently, or in relation to GDPR? What's your source? https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/data-protection-reform/overview-of-the-gdpr-1-13.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/data-protection-r... (20th Oct 2017): > Like the DPA, the GDPR applies to ‘personal data’. However, the GDPR’s definition is more detailed and makes it clear that information such as an online identifier – eg an IP address – can be personal data
  - geocar 8y ago
    > What's your source? The ICO. I've called them up, and they've confirmed their 2011 interpretation of personal data: https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/personal_information_online_cop.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/pe... An IP address is "personal data" in the same way that "lifestyle information" or a "location" is. That someone can combine an IP address with other information to personally identify someone is important, but it doesn't prevent me from logging personal data.
- DanBC 8y ago
  That's their position at the moment. GDPR makes it a bit more explicit: if you can combine the IP address with other information to identify a natural person it becomes personal data.
  - geocar 8y ago
    Sure, but by itself, an IP address isn't personal data.
- ealexhudson 8y ago
  That's not true; I can only assume you're reading the 2011-era DPA guidance. Under GDPR, an IP address must explicitly be considered as personal data, and any processing of them must be written in the documentation of the data processing activities: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/documentation/how-do-we-document-our-processing-activities/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-da... As another commenter has mentioned, this is included in the legislation. There isn't much interpretation to apply here.
  - geocar 8y ago
    Yes it's absolutely true, insofar as I do not have to obtain someone's consent to have logs of their IP address (which is what we're talking about[1]) [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17060280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17060280 The GDPR requires informing of use, transmitting preference, and protecting rights, of things that can potentially identify an individual, but this is easy to accommodate by simply not being an asshole. You're not under any requirement to actually identify an individual with your IP log.
    - ealexhudson 8y ago
      Jurisprudence in this area disagrees with you: "online media services provider may collect and use personal data relating to a user of those services, without his consent, only in so far as that [..] that data are necessary to facilitate and charge for the specific use of those services by that user" http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=186346&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=53422 http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&doc... This is related to the DPA; but the GDPR doesn't change anything here, only strengthens it (i.e. making IP addresses explicitly personal data). So if you're arguing collecting IP addresses is absolutely necessary for you to facilitate the service, no, you don't need consent. But I would not want to have to defend that, since disabling collection is as simple as a webserver reconfig. I have not read any legal opinion that agrees with yours. I have also been to ICO events where they have stated they expect to treat it as personal data. That's reflected in their site (I gave you a specific example). I understand that's not the outcome you're looking for.
jasonlotito 8y ago
> Under GDPR guidance, IP addresses are considered personal data because they can be used to identify an individual in a moment in time. That's actually the most frightening thing I've heard in a long time. Does the GDPR actually make that connection? If so, it literally links people to an IP address, rather than simply a connection. If that line is accurate, I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned before, associating an IP address to an specific person. I have to believe you are wrong, otherwise the legal implications are scary. For those that don't understand: my concern is that in the US, for a long time, in copyright claims by the RIAA or MPAA, for example, was to go after someone because of an IP address, a common defense was basically: An IP Address is not a person. The above commenter made the claim that an IP address alone can be associate a specific person. So, I'm wondering if 1) that's accurate and 2) what are the ramifications of an IP address being a person in the world of law enforcement?
- ealexhudson 8y ago
  Yes, it explicitly mentions it, because it's actually very often true. Of course there are plenty of examples where it would be extremely difficult to link to an individual, but there are tonnes of examples where it's extremely easy. GDPR says that because it's sometimes easy, you have to consider it personal data. Again, it's not always saying an IP address is a personal identify. It just is often enough.
  - jasonlotito 8y ago
    > Again, it's not always saying an IP address is a personal identify. It just is often enough. Well, that's not what you said or implied. I'm just thinking of all the cases in the US were the defense is you can't assume that an IP address ties to a specific person. Anyone could use the computer, or someone could attach to an open wifi. Basically, if the legal argument is the IP address can be associated with a person, that raises legal concerns.
    - ealexhudson 8y ago
      I said they can be used to identify an individual in a moment in time. That's correct. Can it always identify an individual? No. Is the standard of identification good enough for a criminal case? Certainly not. But why are you comparing these? The GDPR is a standard about privacy and data protection; a UK postcode (like a zip code in the US) is considered personal data for exactly the same reason.

geocar 8y ago

The ICO does not consider IP addresses personal data since more than one person could use a computer in a household.

evfanknitram 8y ago
That seems like a weak argument though. Two humans can also have same name and zipcode. They can also have same personal number and bank account number if they are in different countries. Without tracking and correlation, most information on its own is useless.
- geocar 8y ago
  Yes. That's The ICO's position: https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/personal_information_online_cop.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/pe...
- bostik 8y ago
  This reads like you are intentionally trying to misunderstand. GDPR has two categories of user information: direct identifiers and indirect identifiers. Direct identifiers are pieces of data that allow to target a person, or a very small group of persons from a single data point. Indirect identifiers are anything that you could use to build a marketing cohort. Combining a few indirect identifiers allows to target very specific groups of people. Or, using the very examples you quoted: - The tuple (bank account number, country) is enough to target an individual. - The tuple (full name, zip code) is enough to target a very small group of individuals. By adding just one more element you can identify individuals.[ß] Each one of the four data points counts as user information under GDPR. Doesn't matter whether they are direct or indirect. Disclosure: I wear the DPO hat at Smarkets. As a gambling company we are legally required to know quite a lot about our customers. ß: For the nitpicking armchair lawyers: unless you happen to have a gated community for John Smiths.
  - evfanknitram 8y ago
    I have no idea what you mean. I was not talking about GDPR.
switch007 8y ago
Currently, or in relation to GDPR? What's your source? https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/data-protection-reform/overview-of-the-gdpr-1-13.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/data-protection-r... (20th Oct 2017): > Like the DPA, the GDPR applies to ‘personal data’. However, the GDPR’s definition is more detailed and makes it clear that information such as an online identifier – eg an IP address – can be personal data
- geocar 8y ago
  > What's your source? The ICO. I've called them up, and they've confirmed their 2011 interpretation of personal data: https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/personal_information_online_cop.pdf https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1591/pe... An IP address is "personal data" in the same way that "lifestyle information" or a "location" is. That someone can combine an IP address with other information to personally identify someone is important, but it doesn't prevent me from logging personal data.
DanBC 8y ago
That's their position at the moment. GDPR makes it a bit more explicit: if you can combine the IP address with other information to identify a natural person it becomes personal data.
- geocar 8y ago
  Sure, but by itself, an IP address isn't personal data.
ealexhudson 8y ago
That's not true; I can only assume you're reading the 2011-era DPA guidance. Under GDPR, an IP address must explicitly be considered as personal data, and any processing of them must be written in the documentation of the data processing activities: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/documentation/how-do-we-document-our-processing-activities/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-da... As another commenter has mentioned, this is included in the legislation. There isn't much interpretation to apply here.
- geocar 8y ago
  Yes it's absolutely true, insofar as I do not have to obtain someone's consent to have logs of their IP address (which is what we're talking about[1]) [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17060280 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17060280 The GDPR requires informing of use, transmitting preference, and protecting rights, of things that can potentially identify an individual, but this is easy to accommodate by simply not being an asshole. You're not under any requirement to actually identify an individual with your IP log.
  - ealexhudson 8y ago
    Jurisprudence in this area disagrees with you: "online media services provider may collect and use personal data relating to a user of those services, without his consent, only in so far as that [..] that data are necessary to facilitate and charge for the specific use of those services by that user" http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=186346&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=53422 http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&doc... This is related to the DPA; but the GDPR doesn't change anything here, only strengthens it (i.e. making IP addresses explicitly personal data). So if you're arguing collecting IP addresses is absolutely necessary for you to facilitate the service, no, you don't need consent. But I would not want to have to defend that, since disabling collection is as simple as a webserver reconfig. I have not read any legal opinion that agrees with yours. I have also been to ICO events where they have stated they expect to treat it as personal data. That's reflected in their site (I gave you a specific example). I understand that's not the outcome you're looking for.

jasonlotito 8y ago

> Under GDPR guidance, IP addresses are considered personal data because they can be used to identify an individual in a moment in time. That's actually the most frightening thing I've heard in a long time. Does the GDPR actually make that connection? If so, it literally links people to an IP address, rather than simply a connection. If that line is accurate, I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned before, associating an IP address to an specific person. I have to believe you are wrong, otherwise the legal implications are scary. For those that don't understand: my concern is that in the US, for a long time, in copyright claims by the RIAA or MPAA, for example, was to go after someone because of an IP address, a common defense was basically: An IP Address is not a person. The above commenter made the claim that an IP address alone can be associate a specific person. So, I'm wondering if 1) that's accurate and 2) what are the ramifications of an IP address being a person in the world of law enforcement?

ealexhudson 8y ago
Yes, it explicitly mentions it, because it's actually very often true. Of course there are plenty of examples where it would be extremely difficult to link to an individual, but there are tonnes of examples where it's extremely easy. GDPR says that because it's sometimes easy, you have to consider it personal data. Again, it's not always saying an IP address is a personal identify. It just is often enough.
- jasonlotito 8y ago
  > Again, it's not always saying an IP address is a personal identify. It just is often enough. Well, that's not what you said or implied. I'm just thinking of all the cases in the US were the defense is you can't assume that an IP address ties to a specific person. Anyone could use the computer, or someone could attach to an open wifi. Basically, if the legal argument is the IP address can be associated with a person, that raises legal concerns.
  - ealexhudson 8y ago
    I said they can be used to identify an individual in a moment in time. That's correct. Can it always identify an individual? No. Is the standard of identification good enough for a criminal case? Certainly not. But why are you comparing these? The GDPR is a standard about privacy and data protection; a UK postcode (like a zip code in the US) is considered personal data for exactly the same reason.