Search

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/11992277

> European Court of Human Rights declares backdoored encryption is illegal::Surprising third-act twist as Russian case means more freedom for all

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/8481789

> #poll

cross-posted from: https://links.hackliberty.org/post/435505

> A data controller responded to a #GDPR request under art.15 & 17 (thus, an access request coupled with erasure request). They responded with a refusal, demanding ID card. They probably demanded it be in color, but I responded with a black and white copy of my ID. They refused again, affirming that the ID card must be in color. So then I sent them a color copy, but I used black boxes to redact my facial image and all personal text except my name. They again refused to honor my request, saying “zonder vlekken en met een goede resolutie om te worden geaccepteerd”. That translates into “without spots or stains”, correct? I don’t think that means without redactions. > > Anyway, I would like a GDPR expert to confirm or deny whether the controller’s refusal and demands are lawful. > > The relevant GDPR text is: > > * https://gdpr-text.com/read/recital-64/ > * https://gdpr-text.com/read/article-12/#para_gdpr-a-12_6 > > My request (via post) included my residential address and also mentioned a unique email address that only that controller knows me by (though they would not necessarily know it’s unique). Shouldn’t that be sufficient?

UPDATE

This abstract covers some of my questions. Indeed redactions on the ID card are allowed when making requests.

Meta is one of the biggest privacy offenders,, not suprising that they already seem to break EU privacy law.

Some section sof the article:

>Upcoming data privacy regulations are preventing Meta's new microblogging app "Threads" from launching in European Union (EU) markets. Experts say this is only the beginning of the privacy battle facing the Twitter clone.

>Judging by its entry in the Apple app store, it's no wonder that Threads is being shielded from EU scrutiny. Browsing history, geolocations, health and financial information, and much more are all up for grabs. There's even a dedicated category for "sensitive information" which, according to Apple's documentation, includes "racial or ethnic data, sexual orientation, pregnancy or childbirth information, disability, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, political opinion, genetic information, or biometric data."