undefined | Better HN

0 pointssirius872y ago0 comments

"Disclosing an IP address" maybe a matter of the medium of comms being inadvertently TCP/IP, if MS does not log or store the IP in a meaningful/reversible way, are they processing PII?

0 comments

cowl2y ago

in the Google fonts CDN the court ruled that: it's irrelevant if the website or Google had the opportunity to link the IP address to the user. the mere possibility of this is enough to consider it as protected PII.

sirius87OP2y ago

Question is whether Google Fonts CDN/server was storing the IP address or not. Linking to a user is secondary. If a server does not log or store raw IPs in the first place, where's the fault?

cowl2y ago

My man you are arguing with an established case verdict. https://rewis.io/urteile/urteil/lhm-20-01-2022-3-o-1749320/ The wording that is irrelevant what Google does with the IP (just the theoretical possibility of misuse is enough) is in the case verdict.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointssirius872y ago0 comments

"Disclosing an IP address" maybe a matter of the medium of comms being inadvertently TCP/IP, if MS does not log or store the IP in a meaningful/reversible way, are they processing PII?

0 comments

cowl2y ago

sirius87OP2y ago

Question is whether Google Fonts CDN/server was storing the IP address or not. Linking to a user is secondary. If a server does not log or store raw IPs in the first place, where's the fault?

cowl2y ago

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse