Slashdot Mirror
New Service Blocks EU Users So Companies Can Save Thousands on GDPR Compliance (bleepingcomputer.com)
Catalin Cimpanu, reporting for BleepingComputer: A new service called GDPR Shield made the rounds last week and for all the wrong reasons. The service, advertised as a piece of JavaScript that webmasters embed on their sites, blocks EU-based users from accessing a website, just so the parent company won't have to deal with GDPR compliance. GDPR, or General Data Protection Regulation, is a new user and data privacy regulation slated to come into effect in the EU three weeks from now, on May 25, 2018.
The new regulation brings a wealth of protections to user privacy but is a nightmare for companies doing business in Europe. The reasons are plenty, but the humongous fines for failing to meet GDPR standards are at the top of the list for most companies ($24 million or 4% of a company's annual worldwide revenue -- whichever is higher). There's also the 72-hour deadline to reveal data breaches and the necessity of hiring a so-called "Data Protection Officer." Plus, GDPR also mandates that companies must inform users on what data they collected about them, allow them to review the data, and even let users delete the data from the company's servers if they so wish.
The new regulation brings a wealth of protections to user privacy but is a nightmare for companies doing business in Europe. The reasons are plenty, but the humongous fines for failing to meet GDPR standards are at the top of the list for most companies ($24 million or 4% of a company's annual worldwide revenue -- whichever is higher). There's also the 72-hour deadline to reveal data breaches and the necessity of hiring a so-called "Data Protection Officer." Plus, GDPR also mandates that companies must inform users on what data they collected about them, allow them to review the data, and even let users delete the data from the company's servers if they so wish.
geofencing is not exactly a new concept. At least it finally is being used for good (privacy protection) rather then for evil (arbitrary geographical media blocking)
We didn't find much trouble in compliance. Sure we had to write a few policies and work out a procedure for exporting and deleting data from our systems. We did not spend even 25k in work to pull this off. It was fairly trivial for companies that don't make a product out of consumers.
The way I see it as a European, it will mean that they where selling my data anyway, so that means they won't do that anymore. It also means they will not be able to do that for any of the other 350+MM Europeans.
This was also the intended reason for the law. It is as if Europe is saying "You are not allowed to take our data" and these websites are saying "Well, if that is the case, as punishment, we are not going to take your data."
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
As a EU resident, I don't mind if companies are choosing to block EU if they can't comply with privacy rules. I'd rather not do business with those companies.
It depends on how onerous the GDPR really is. The biggest one is the requirement to have a Data Protection Officer, but this is required "only for those controllers and processors whose core activities consist of processing operations which require regular and systematic monitoring of data subjects on a large scale or of special categories of data or data relating to criminal convictions and offences." For the rest it is pretty basic stuff: you need to be aware of the rules, and prepared to take action e.g. in case of a data leak. A lot of it really is common sense stuff, that is if you're a conscientious operator.
The big companies will have no trouble complying, paying lip service or working around the rules. The smaller companies might at first decide to forget about Europe. This happened with a couple of smaller service providers when the EU VAT rules were changed: I got a few notices that such-and-such company was no longer able to provide their service in Europe. However they probably looked at the amount of business they were getting from Europe, had another look at the rules and found them not that hard to comply with, and removed the block.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Disclaimer: I've worked myself into GDPR details to shape my employer up for it.
GP is a little off on some details.
You have to *name* a Data Protectoin Officer. This can be anybody empowered to check compliance. Usually this is done by some administrative or IT specialist. Germany has had this for decades. No need for an extra hire.
You don't have to spend thousands or millions. You just need to have a proper setup and due diligence in place. The new thing is that you need to document procedures in a standardized manner. The big difference between the law that come in on 25.4.2018 is that someone could only sue you if he was damaged and only if he could prove a data breach of critical personal data. The fines up to this point also were laughable.
Now anyone involved, including customers, can ask how data is handled and the authorities and others have the right to review documentation of your SOPs for data protection. Also you're in for big trouble with massive fines (up to 4% of global anual revenue) if you're careless with data and aren't willing to comply with the GDPR.
In short: If you have your IT in order GDPR compliance isn't that much of a big deal.
Documentation is, but compliance is not.
If however your IT is shit, then you're in for trouble if they come for you. Big time. ... Can't really complain about that actually.
Since they *will* eventually come for you *and* most companies (online *and* brick and mortar) IT setups are somewhere between disorganized shite and abysmal, companies would rather opt out than go through the hassle of complying. Which means only companies with proper procedures and due diligence in their IT will remain doing business in the EU.
Thus endeth some real-world details on GDPR.
You're welcome.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
If you don't want to have to deal with the laws of a certain country, should have the right to not do business inside that country.
Of course, that leaves a big underserved market. In less than 4 years someone will come along and serve them, while abiding by the laws they hate.
Which could very well lead to those companies losing world wide market share as those new, privacy conscience companies expand out of their underserved market into the general world wide marketplace.
As for the laws they are trying to avoid? We need them in our country.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
A one person shop does not need a DPO:
(Source: GDPR FAQ)
Unless that one person shop does engage in large scale processing of sensitive personal data, of course, but then they either have enough revenue to afford a DPO, or they are a shady 'ethicul biznizman' (aka spammer).
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
If the short-bus version actually respects people's privacy instead of spying on visitors, then maybe we need more short buses.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
I run a website with worldwide audience. I've also never been to Europe. Tell me why I should comply or face fines to a jurisdiction I've never been to?
You are servicing their citizens while they reside in their country, so you should follow their laws. Just because the Internet makes it so easy to reach those customers doesn't mean you should be able to ignore their laws.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
People you do business with don't have to be sitting in the EU when they visit your site for you to be liable.
... as long as they are EU citizens.
A EU citizen sitting in Starbucks in the US is equally as protected as if they were sitting in France.
Also, if you stored the shipping label to let's say...send them a package to their vacation home in Iowa, you're still liable
If all you do is Geo-fence, you're already not going to make it.
Okay, so what you're saying is that in a world wide economics, I have to comply with often mutually excusive rules and laws. I must do this in this jurisdiction, and I am forbidden to do the same thing in another. Good one.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.