5 ms·

> If it's not allowed how can I ensure my site is protected as I need those logs to identify and ban hackers. Server logs are allowed as "technically necessary

• Dave3of5 5y ago
  Ok so what's the actual minimum you've said two weeks here but where is this actually defined ?
  • martin_a 5y ago
    There's no hard limit here provided by the law or otherwise. Some of the local data protection offices say that they find something of "up to 30 days" reasonable, so I guess that's a good starting point. Cutting that time in half will show good faith and you'll still be able to analyze logs, I think.
    • Dave3of5 5y ago
      Ok 30 days do you have a link for that?
      • martin_a 5y ago
        Well, you'll for example find the 30 days in this document of the data protection office of Bavaria: https://www.lda.bayern.de/media/muster_1_verein_verzeichnis.pdf https://www.lda.bayern.de/media/muster_1_verein_verzeichnis.... (It's a sample for sport clubs etc.) and it's also what our lawyer has recommended to our company as the upper limit.
  • M2Ys4U 5y ago
    It's not defined, because it depends on why you're processing the data. Different reasons would entail different retention times.
  • andrewaylett 5y ago
    With GDPR and personal data, if you can justify your use then it's legit. Working out which justifications are acceptable is left -- at least partly -- as an exercise for the reader ('s legal team). But we may observe that some practices are easy to justify, while others are more challenging. Some attempts at justification have been rejected, which means that trying to rely on them in the future is a bad plan. Also, intent matters. If you're trying to do the right thing, you're unlikely to get into real trouble. The most likely consequence is that you're told you should stop, and given a deadline. If you don't stop by the deadline then it's fairly obvious that you're now not trying to do the right thing.
    • drusepth 5y ago
      >Also, intent matters. If you're trying to do the right thing, you're unlikely to get into real trouble. The most likely consequence is that you're told you should stop, and given a deadline. If you don't stop by the deadline then it's fairly obvious that you're now not trying to do the right thing. The vague, uncodified "intent" is my biggest problem with GDPR and GDPR-like laws, especially when it comes to small businesses. Even with the best intent, I've seen startups in my community get into "real" trouble trying to comply with mixed results. Not every company can afford to allocate the time/money necessary to comply with sudden deadlines and/or new technical requirements. Not every company can afford to take the risk of "I think this PII is absolutely necessary, but... could I prove it in court? Can I even afford the lawyers to try?" If I didn't read HN, I doubt I'd even know laws like this new French one even existed; I can't afford to dedicate someone to monitor changing laws around the world. Saying "it's important for businesses to allocate sufficient resources toward researching evolving law in every country they might do business in, and it's okay if businesses fail if they can't afford to do so" is reasonable. Saying "if you're trying to do the right thing, you'll be fine" is, quite frankly, the complete opposite experience I've seen from most well-meaning companies in my sphere trying to accomodate GDPR rules with limited budgets. Of course, I am located in the US so maybe this is the intended result.
• jimmaswell 5y ago
  This whole set of laws is so absurd. I should have the right to retain my server logs as long as I want. I bet in the future in Europe people will have the right to have others' brains forcibly zapped to remove embarrassing memories.
  • martin_a 5y ago
    I should have a right that you should not save my personal information longer than needed. Now what?
    • jimmaswell 5y ago
      No, you shouldn't. If I make an observation, that's my observation, my data. I should have full rights to observations I made myself, regardless of if it involves you. Europe has this 100% backwards.
      • martin_a 5y ago
        What would you think if somebody told you this, after following you or your kids the entire day, while taking pictures and notes?
        • jimmaswell 5y ago
          It would be weird, but sure, no difference. This is what a private investigator already does legally.
          • martin_a 5y ago
            Do you think some laws might apply to private investigators and how they do that work?
            • jimmaswell 5y ago
              Not everywhere. It depends on the jurisdiction.
• antris 5y ago
  Depends on what the logs contain. If they contain no personal information at all, EU data protection laws do not apply.
  • martin_a 5y ago
    IP addresses are considered to be PII so you need to either truncate them before saving or have a deletion routine in place.
    • quicksilver03 5y ago
      IP addresses are PII when they can identify a person, and that's not always the case, e.g. a company network using NAT for outgoing connections so that dozens, if not hundreds of people appear from the same IP address.
      • martin_a 5y ago
        How are you supposed/able to make that decision on a log level?
        • quicksilver03 5y ago
          There's no way you can make that decision, which is why the simplest course of action, or the less risky one, is to treat any IP address as it actually conveyed PII, even 192.168.0.1.