3 ms·
I've heard C-suite literally say: "if there's no logging, there can be no evidence"...
by noinsight 2y ago
I've heard C-suite literally say: "if there's no logging, there can be no evidence"...
- wepple 2y agoWith recent govt mandates to report known incidents within XX hours, this approach will possibly become the gold strategy
- mulmen 2y agoA win for privacy?
- wepple 2y agoOh no no no. They’ll still collect data about people. Just not security logs that could indicate an incident. Double loss for privacy.
- Vegenoid 2y agoData will still be harvested. Logs that indicate when or how it was harvested, where it has been sent, or who has accessed it - those are the things that will be killed.
- imglorp 2y agoKeeping no evidence of misbehavior is already becoming standard practice to avoid regulators. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-26/doj-ftc-warn-companies-to-preserve-signal-and-slack-chats https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-26/doj-ftc-w... or https://archive.is/T5f3G https://archive.is/T5f3G
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- snapplebobapple 2y agoIts not as nefarious as you think, often its about avoiding a large legal bill for your lawyers to review all the crap before sending it in. I know when i had to deal with this a decade ago the bill for review came out to almost as much as the bs settlement offer we got from the government (which was less than half of just the projected cost of going to court to fight and almost certainly win). We settled because we couldnt afford to fight. This regulatory stuff is basically an extortion racket all around.