9 posts • joined Wednesday 8th August 2007 10:03 GMT
Re: Perhaps Marissa has an evil Elop-like mission
Yes, I agree with the dogfood concept. I have given up on Yahoo mail mainly because when I open it (after reboot) it locks my PC up for a solid minute or two. Unless I'm the only one with this issue, Yahoo staff would soon twig to the problem if they tried to use their own product. Me I'm no Marissa fan. I've abandoned both Yahoo groups & mail now because of the "improvements".
PCI DSS compliance - NOT
WorldPay are NOT PCI DSS compliant!!
"The Royal Bank of Scotland Group (RBS) takes data security and compliance with its many legal and regulatory obligations extremely seriously. The WorldPay payment systems are located in RBS Data Centres that comply with the stringent policies and procedures of RBS and have been designed to the highest standards that the Bank’s regulators and legislators expect.
As you may be aware, WorldPay has been involved in a major project to replace the existing system and migrate to a new and enhanced platform. As part of this project, all work necessary to comply with the PCI DSS rules is therefore being directed at the new system and as a result WorldPay will remain 'In Progress' for PCI DSS compliance until work on the new system and migration of customers is complete.
RBS maintains in regular and open dialogue with both VISA and MasterCard, sharing progress reports and updating plans, ensuring, as the enforcers of Scheme regulations, that they are up to date and aware of the project’s developing position towards compliance and endorsing of our plans."
Do you think your email address is "personal data"? Wrong! (probably...)
I have a written ruling from the Information Commissioner that an email address is NOT personal data (unless the part before the domain name is your exact name e.g. email@example.com).
So MOST email addresses do not count as personal data and can be harvested and abused at will.
Counter-intuitive? Welcome to the new scholasticism of the ICO! ("How many angels can dance on the head of a pin"). They're confused; We're confused; The bad guys run rings around them.
The ICO has lost the plot
It doesn't surprise me that the ICO's idea of "personal data" should raise eyebrows at the EU. The ICO is paying scholastic games with the definition of personal data - so much so that their concept is now quite counter-intuitive. For example I bet most folks would be surprised to learn that their email address is almost certainly NOT "personal data" by the ICO's lights.
Obscurantism & Inaction
I'd say the ICO are losing the plot and spending too much time worrying how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. And it leads to some bizarre conclusions...
I think most people (the people who pay the piper but don't seem to call the tune), would assume that their email address is protected by the ICO and DPA as "private data". But they'd be wrong! I have had a written ruling from the ICO that an email address is NOT "personal data" - unless it is made up of your full names (initials won't cut it). That means that anyone with a mind to harvest email addresses, or sell on the email addresses in their database to the bad guys, have nothing to fear from the ICO. But then it's not the bad guys who DO fear the ICO, it's honest "data controllers" who have cause for concern!
Re: Bye & Good Riddance
Heavens! What a simple world you live in. One where you think it your place to remind people of the patently obvious; One where you think people have never heard of warranties; One where they won't know what number to dial unless you patronisingly point it out to them. You aren't an Evesham ex-support employee by any chance?
Your basic mistake is to assume I did NOT push Evesham on the warranty issue (I had on-site warranty and, when pushed very, very hard they met their obligation on this. It's just they did not have the competence to fix it). Or to assume I did not fix anything myself (not that I should have to of course).
I guess you know the old adage about ASSUME?
Do you know anything about Quality Management? It is not about shoving rubbish out on the market and waiting for the punters to shout to get the problem fixed. Nor is it about falling back on your small print. Quality is built in up front, for example by sourcing XP certified components if you're shipping an XP certified machine. That's one thing Evesham didn't do for example. When I gave them the specific hardware error messages they performed the knee-jerk "re-install Windows" routine. They just weren't interested. So in this case I researched the error messages for myself, discovered the hardware and driver compatibilty, fixed it and carried on. But you see that was just one element in one long, sad story.
You don't know the half of it, so have the decency to spare me your glib platitudes.
Re: Re: Bye & Good Riddance
Perhaps if you were in your default sober state you would be charitable enough to credit folks with a bit more savvy. No doubt too you would twig that it may not be appropriate here to document all the sad twists and turns of my Evesham woes. But, no, "warranty" didn't cut it.
Bye & Good Riddance
Around 2002 I splashed out on an Evesham top end model. It was rubbish - cynically assembled with incompatible non-certified hardware. The support was very, very arrogant and incompetent. I think they thought they were the bees knees. After three months of blue screens I put their PC in the loft where it still sits gathering dust, though I still use the monitor. So I take some considerable satisfaction in seeing their demise.
ICO = Toothless Wonder
The ICO love to posture rather than bite.
A while back I complained to the UK Information Commissioner over a privacy issue relating to my email address with Orange. The email address in question comprised my initials (i.e firstname.lastname@example.org).
To my great surprise the ICO ruled that an email address like this could not be considered to be "personal data". Therefore, they claimed, their hands were tied (or they preferred to "sit on them" I suspect). I was told that "personal data" is defined in the DPA as "information that identifies a living individual" and my email address failed this test (although I find that claim completely counter-intuitive. If you have my email address you have a direct route to my desktop). Had my email address been of the form "email@example.com" I understand they might have been prepared to take action on my behalf.
Of course only a tiny proportion of email addresses are of the form firstname.lastname@example.org. So at a stroke this ruling excludes the vast majority of personal email addresses from data protection regulations!
That's good news for spammers and email list traders - bad news for the rest of us poor suckers, eh?