7 posts • joined 24 Aug 2010
services they need.....
Bullsh*t statement "it said departments should get virtually instant access to the services they need". It means the supplier will provide the services that they can give which is not the same as what the customer wants.
Its not about the size of the fine or about open wifi
I disagree with ZigZag and Tim Bates comments above.
Its not the size of the fine, its the fact that Google have been proved wrong through a legal challenge and hence now know that they have broken the law. For Google this is the problem, and hence if they pay up than they admit they did break the law, so i suspect they will use the 2 week window to appeal this.
Its not the fact that the WiFi ws open, its the fact that Google simply collected all the information without prior concent. Just because a wifi signla is open does not permit you to legally attach to it and start taking data off it. Even if people were stupid, the European Data Protection Directive makes this clear, that you are not allowed to process data without a specific agreement.
Statement from the ICO:
Dont worry it was just 17,000 Students.
No Hard done. Dont do it again.
We dont have the resource or the expertise to understand that the fact you did not Pen-Test your website at all or bothered to do it at regular intervals was actually a bad thing.
Plently of ways to backup.... any IMAP or GMAIL client... a paid product www.GmailKeeper.com is also good.
But to trust GMail blindly is just silly.
Statement from the Google CEO:
Now that the ICO has stepped back in, I am really really afraid.
Please dont let them use any of their massive powers.
Oh No someone who knows how to actually enforce the UE Data Protection Directive is actually after us.
Here's betting another £20 that nothing happens at all!!!
What about using the free Microsoft Certificate Authority for the SAN Certiciate
If you want to save money why not install you own Microsoft Certificate Autority and issue your own SAN Certificate (totally free of charge) for Exchange....
Its easy to ge every device to trust your certificate too...(deploy through Group Policy or make it avaliable on the web for a mobile device to click on and trust).
Not the ICO but the FSA
However the most shamefull thing is that it was not the toothless ICO but the FSA who levied the fine.... I am sure the ICO's office would have said - dont worry it was just 48,000 customer - No harm done...nothing to see.