21–30 of 277 posts
What would the EU fine for Google be now GDPR is enforced? 2.2 billion dollars?
From what is in the story and from what we know, there has been no breach.
As 'tptacek has noted, it is very unusual to announce a security bug without a resultant breach.
The buried lede is that Google is shutting down Google+. (EDIT: for consumers: Google is keeping it as an enterprise product)
Technically it's shutting down all consumer functionality for Google+.
GDPR proving to be great once again. The case for a US equivalent gets stronger. And more importantly, all these fuck ups will ensure that whatever bill gets drafted isn't just what the Facebook/Google lobbyists find acceptable.
The buried lede is that Google is shutting down Google+. (EDIT: for consumers: Google is keeping it as an enterprise product)
Technically it's shutting down all consumer functionality for Google+.
> At the same time, we have many enterprise customers who are finding great value in using Google+ within their companies. Our review showed that Google+ is better suited as an enterprise product where co-workers can engage in internal discussions on a secure corporate social network. Enterprise customers can set common access rules, and use central controls, for their entire organization. We’ve decided to focus on our enterprise efforts and will be launching new features purpose-built for businesses.
Company finds a security vulnerability caused by a bug. Logs show that it has never been used by anyone. It patches the vulnerability. [Honest question] Should the company announce it publicly? PS: Keeping in mind that this is part of the Murdoch vs. Google war going on for about 10 years: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2009/11/murdoch_vs_google... https://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/03/28/timing-everything-ru... h…
>PS: Keeping in mind that this is part of the Murdoch vs. Google war going on for about 10 years: Changes the facts of the story 0%
Company finds a security vulnerability caused by a bug. Logs show that it has never been used by anyone. It patches the vulnerability. [Honest question] Should the company announce it publicly? PS: Keeping in mind that this is part of the Murdoch vs. Google war going on for about 10 years: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2009/11/murdoch_vs_google... https://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/03/28/timing-everything-ru... h…
Your statement: "Logs show that it has never been used by anyone." The Wall Street Journal: "Because the company kept a limited set of activity logs, it was unable to determine which users were affected and what types of data may potentially have been improperly collected, the two people briefed on the matter said. The bug existed since 2015, and it is unclear whether a larger number of users may have been affected o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically it's shutting down all consumer functionality for Google+.
What does "consumer" mean in that context?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, because when you go public with the issue you are able to control the narrative. Bad judgement to assume that these issues will never reach the public eye. Especially knowing that a patched was successfully applied...instead Google looks like it is having trouble living up to it's Don't Be Evil motto.
No, they would have to issue like 10 reports a day. Bugs that are never exploited in web sites are rarely published for multiple reasons. Definitely not something to blame Google for.
What would the EU fine for Google be now GDPR is enforced? 2.2 billion dollars?
GDPR enforcement would come into effect only if there was a breach and it was not handled. From what is in the story and from what we know, there has been no breach. As 'tptacek has noted, it is very unusual to announce a security bug without a resultant breach.
> Because the company kept a limited set of activity logs, it was unable to determine which users were affected and what types of data may potentially have been improperly collected, the two people briefed on the matter said.
Company finds a security vulnerability caused by a bug. Logs show that it has never been used by anyone. It patches the vulnerability. [Honest question] Should the company announce it publicly? PS: Keeping in mind that this is part of the Murdoch vs. Google war going on for about 10 years: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2009/11/murdoch_vs_google... https://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/03/28/timing-everything-ru... h…