4 ms·
> datePublished":"2025-11-27T04:39:29.000Z Considering they were aware of this on the 8th (who knows how long that was after it actually happened) it's a littl
by autoexec 11mo ago
> datePublished":"2025-11-27T04:39:29.000Z
Considering they were aware of this on the 8th (who knows how long that was after it actually happened) it's a little disappointing that they'd wait until the day before such a major holiday to post about it. Unsurprising sure, but still disappointing.
- bflesch 11mo agoThis is in breach of the 72hr GDPR notification window
- fmajid 11mo agoChina’s is even more stringent at 4 hours, down to 1 hour for high-severity incidents: https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/16/china_1hour_cyber_reporting/ https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/16/china_1hour_cyber_rep... https://privacymatters.dlapiper.com/2025/09/china-new-stricter-and-4-hour-data-breach-reporting-requirements-for-certain-incidents/ https://privacymatters.dlapiper.com/2025/09/china-new-strict...
- paulddraper 11mo agoI am very impressed by those who can assess the scope and consequences within 4 hours, let alone 1 hour.
- gcbirzan 11mo agoOnly the supervisory authorities are required to be informed in 72 hour, and even there, it's not a hard rule, you can have excuses.
- skeeter2020 11mo agothis is for the regulator or governing body, not public. Most big clients will have an explicit reporting window in their contract though
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]