> FWIW in EU GDPR which starts to apply in May 2018 the IP address is now > considered personal data, legally and must be anonymized. So software > vendors who provide such "features" or who close tickets because they are > not in the mood will perhaps be forced to comply with all that. Or who knows > what other tricks they may have to escape from that.
I'm sure they'll do their best to get around it, but this is still good news. If only laws like this had a prayer of passing in the US. > I am unaware of that history for Chromium especially. As long as there is no See the bug Supertramp posted much earlier in this thread. > I am unaware of that history for Chromium especially. As long as there is no > proof that the _current_ versions of Chromium do anything malicious refusing > to look at actuality because of something in the past makes no sense. It > would be like rejecting to trust SSL because in the past there was > Heartbleed or anything along these lines. If the SSL intentionally created Heartbleed, only fixed it because they got caught, and had a profit incentive to do so again, then yes, you would be a fool to trust them. > They have all the reasons to create trust because > trust is what allows them to break privacy deeper. And it would be > absolutely silly on their side to do it blatantly in an open source project > like Chromium. They've already done it at least once, yet someone as privacy-conscious as you is willing to use their browser because that particular issue has been fixed. Most people do not think as critically as you do about privacy, or even care at all, so I doubt that next time will have a signficant impact either. > I think you should really face the present and leave the past in the past. ... > doesn't work for privacy and security. Privacy and security are about > certainty. It is not about having only 1 spy camera in your bedroom compared > to 3. It is 0 or anything else. Unfortunately, you don't have certainty with any browser, so there is no choice to account for probability, and the past is very relevant. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMALm1VthGY I never said they were, but thanks. This looks interesting and I'll watch in when I have the chance. > Speaking of privacy and security: Please remove it. I prefer my email > address not to be publicly visible. :) You're right. I'm sorry for that oversight. I've gotten used to knowing people by their email address and didn't think. I can't edit a comment that has been replied to, but I'll email a mod and ask them to remove the screenshot. You should know though that the mailing list is publicly archived. https://listas.trisquel.info/pipermail/trisquel-users/ > And yes - this discussion is pretty much finished. Yeah, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on Chromium. We'll get further with the more pressing issues we agree on. Feel free to make one more response if you'd like the last word and then I'll let it go.
