3 ms·

Companies should be fined for keeping electronic records of personal data instead of paper. Enough is enough, keeping sensitive data on computers is a failed e

Companies should be fined for keeping electronic records of personal data instead of paper. Enough is enough, keeping sensitive data on computers is a failed experiment and the sooner we collectively admit that, the better.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> keeping sensitive data on computers is a failed experiment and the sooner we collectively admit that, the better In this experiment, what were the measured outcomes? They obviously don’t include lookup or storage costs; transparency; auditability or scalability.
- passwordoops 2y ago
  I'll give you storage costs and scalability. But digital does not equate to transparency. A culture of transparency equates to transparency. Also, paper is very auditable. The term "paper trail" is not an accident and in many circumstances can be more secure and reliable than digital
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > digital does not equate to transparency. A culture of transparency equates to transparency Doesn’t equate to, yes. Enables far more by default, absolutely. The substantial plot of Erin Brockovich is essentially resolved, today, in a few minutes of searching.
  - toast0 2y ago
    I mean, there's a lot of transparency with digital records. Sometimes too much transparency.
r00fus 2y ago
I think you can just omit the "instead of on paper". The more companies that don't store personal data, the better. What's their rationale?
jfengel 2y ago
These weren't personal data. They were business records. They didn't specify but it might be things like who was accessing what and when.
- hiatus 2y ago
  They gave at least one example of the type of records they failed to maintain: > For example, Moody’s Ratings Employees – including at the senior level – were communicating about credit ratings activities via text messages and WhatsApp on their personal devices, according to an SEC order. That included an associate managing director making off-channel comments about credit rating clients.
  - Cruncharoo 2y ago
    This is part of the larger SEC crackdown on personal device communications. They've already collected billions from banks and other firms: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-what...
hiatus 2y ago
What does this have to do with the OP?
NoPicklez 2y ago
[flagged]

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> keeping sensitive data on computers is a failed experiment and the sooner we collectively admit that, the better In this experiment, what were the measured outcomes? They obviously don’t include lookup or storage costs; transparency; auditability or scalability.

passwordoops 2y ago
I'll give you storage costs and scalability. But digital does not equate to transparency. A culture of transparency equates to transparency. Also, paper is very auditable. The term "paper trail" is not an accident and in many circumstances can be more secure and reliable than digital
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > digital does not equate to transparency. A culture of transparency equates to transparency Doesn’t equate to, yes. Enables far more by default, absolutely. The substantial plot of Erin Brockovich is essentially resolved, today, in a few minutes of searching.
- toast0 2y ago
  I mean, there's a lot of transparency with digital records. Sometimes too much transparency.

r00fus 2y ago

I think you can just omit the "instead of on paper". The more companies that don't store personal data, the better. What's their rationale?

jfengel 2y ago

These weren't personal data. They were business records. They didn't specify but it might be things like who was accessing what and when.

hiatus 2y ago
They gave at least one example of the type of records they failed to maintain: > For example, Moody’s Ratings Employees – including at the senior level – were communicating about credit ratings activities via text messages and WhatsApp on their personal devices, according to an SEC order. That included an associate managing director making off-channel comments about credit rating clients.
- Cruncharoo 2y ago
  This is part of the larger SEC crackdown on personal device communications. They've already collected billions from banks and other firms: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-whatsapp-records.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/08/business/banks-fines-what...

hiatus 2y ago

What does this have to do with the OP?

NoPicklez 2y ago

[flagged]