Timeline for Chat messages and SO Jobs data are missing from the GDPR Data Access Request JSON dump
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
37 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 2021 at 7:45 | vote | accept | Ilmari Karonen | ||
| Jul 22, 2021 at 0:36 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | It's truly completed now. See the updated staff answer. | |
| Jul 21, 2021 at 17:02 | history | edited | JuiceStaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| S Jul 7, 2021 at 15:51 | history | bounty ended | reneMod | ||
| S Jul 7, 2021 at 15:51 | history | notice removed | reneMod | ||
| Jul 2, 2021 at 5:22 | comment | added | rene Mod | @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog thanks. Not thrilled by the 6 to 8 weeks timeline but it is progress so I'm happy for now. | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 23:00 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | The staff answer has been edited by another CM; just mentioning. (cc @rene) | |
| Jul 1, 2021 at 22:27 | history | edited | PhilippeStaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 30, 2021 at 22:20 | comment | added | Ilmari Karonen | @EkadhSingh: While there's no simple and unambiguous definition of what accepting an answer on meta.SE means, generally doing so suggests that the issue has been resolved and that an acceptable solution has been found. While I haven't had much time to pursue this issue recently, I do not consider that to be the case here, as I note in my comment below. | |
| Jun 30, 2021 at 21:02 | comment | added | Ekadh Singh | Shouldn’t The official staff answer be marked as accepted so that more people can view it? | |
| S Jun 30, 2021 at 12:07 | history | bounty started | reneMod | ||
| S Jun 30, 2021 at 12:07 | history | notice added | reneMod | Authoritative reference needed | |
| Jun 30, 2021 at 11:29 | answer | added | User that hates AI | timeline score: 16 | |
| S Jun 30, 2021 at 8:05 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Jun 30, 2021 at 8:05 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| Jun 23, 2021 at 7:33 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | I'm not sure that the tag should be status completed. After all it was half declined. Shouldn't it also have status declined at least. | |
| Jun 22, 2021 at 14:18 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | I saw that you are from Finnland. If the current practice does not suffice you and you think there might be a failure to comply with the GDPR framework, you might be able to file a complaint with the Finnish Data Protection ombudsman. The FAQ on GDPR is unfortunately in Finnish only. :) | |
| Jun 22, 2021 at 7:32 | comment | added | Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog | I've filed a feature request regarding the backslashes. | |
| Jun 22, 2021 at 6:32 | comment | added | rene Mod | Are you considering further legal steps given the current answer? | |
| S Jun 22, 2021 at 6:30 | history | bounty started | reneMod | ||
| S Jun 22, 2021 at 6:30 | history | notice added | reneMod | Canonical answer required | |
| Jun 21, 2021 at 13:50 | answer | added | JuiceStaffMod | timeline score: 16 | |
| Jun 21, 2021 at 13:47 | history | edited | JuiceStaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| May 18, 2021 at 10:23 | comment | added | Ilmari Karonen | @Juice: I'm also rather confused by the claim that chat "message content that could contain the PII of another user." Sure, technically that's true. But we're talking about chat messages sent by me, so surely they cannot contain any PII that I wouldn't already have access to? Also, chat messages are (generally) public, so isn't any PII in them already out there anyway? And I also don't see what makes chat messages special — surely the same concerns apply to Q&A posts and comments too? I'd very much appreciate an answer to these questions from whoever provided you with that explanation. | |
| May 17, 2021 at 19:56 | comment | added | 0Valt | @Juice - but the messenger can take the reply back with them to those who provided the explanation, can't they? :) After all, proper attribution in posts requires one to add information about other users in the body of the post. The same goes for comments - usernames, etc. I can only second zcoop98 here - it doesn't make sense that chat messages are treated as a special case. | |
| May 17, 2021 at 19:49 | comment | added | zcoop98 | @Juice Thanks for coming back with an answer at least, I appreciate it! | |
| May 17, 2021 at 19:27 | comment | added | Juice StaffMod | @zcoop98 That applies to all chat messages. Edit I've brought this up internally to see if I can get an explanation. | |
| May 17, 2021 at 18:34 | comment | added | zcoop98 | @Juice Re: chat messages – Does that apply even if we're talking about exclusively chat messages sent by the requesting user? The given reason just sounds odd to me, since I would think you'd be able to use the same argument for comments or even posts; you'd never be able to 100% guarantee that some user-inputted text field doesn't have PII of another user, right? | |
| May 17, 2021 at 18:28 | comment | added | Juice StaffMod | Quick update. We are investing the missing Jobs information. Chat content does not contain message content by design. There's no way for us to guarantee that we're not handing out message content that could contain the PII of another user. | |
| May 17, 2021 at 11:42 | comment | added | Juice StaffMod | I've opened a bug report with the community engineering team to look into this ASAP. | |
| May 17, 2021 at 11:42 | history | edited | JuiceStaffMod |
edited tags
|
|
| May 16, 2021 at 7:18 | comment | added | amon | @Luuklag Personal data is any information relating to an identifiable person. OP's chat messages clearly relate to OP, and OP is clearly identifiable. It is not necessary that the personal data itself is identifying, but it can also be linked data. Furthermore, chat messages are clearly information that OP has provided to an information society service, so that they are covered by the right to data portability. | |
| May 16, 2021 at 0:33 | history | edited | Journeyman GeekMod |
edited tags
|
|
| May 15, 2021 at 22:51 | comment | added | Luuklag | Also, it is questionable if chat messages are data as protected by GDPR. Times could be, as work schedules (which could place a person at a certain place at a certain time) are such gdpr data. | |
| May 15, 2021 at 22:50 | comment | added | Luuklag | Just to be sure: your jobs account is linked to your current account? | |
| May 15, 2021 at 20:06 | history | edited | Ilmari Karonen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
request sent
|
| May 15, 2021 at 19:55 | history | asked | Ilmari Karonen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |