Additional question:
"Registration-Dialog need to have a button/step to agree the data
processing. And to this belongs a button to disagree."

I guess user should be able to register only if he/she agree to data processing
Registration should be impossible if user disagree
So I guess having following controls at registration dialog would be sufficient:

1) "I agree my data will be processed" checkbox
2) "display agreement" button

would it be OK?

On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 11:17 PM, Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello Peter,
>
> this is partially implemented
> Could you please test current implementation using latest nightly build?
>
> And maybe you can provide sample "personal data agreement" text?
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 6:38 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I try... ;-)
>>
>>
>> Am 11.04.2018 um 13:11 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
>>
>> Will write it as a requirement, will see what can be done here
>> Thanks a lot for the quick answers!
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> ip-address is now a private date... it have to be at least anonymised
>>> after 7 (maybe 14 days)... ipv4 addresses delete last 8 recommended 16 bit
>>> (192.168.123.0 or 192.168.0.0) and ipv6 preserve first 48 -8 or better 16
>>> Bit (2a00:1234:56:: or 2a00:1234::) Maybe this could be done automated after
>>> 7 Days?
>>>
>>> Greetings Peter
>>>
>>> Am 11.04.2018 um 09:31 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
>>>
>>> According "Hash algorithm" I planned to use random UUID
>>> so All fields will look like this:
>>> "Purged_54cd4426-1c0a-4ab8-bb35-eb6d26da99cf"
>>>
>>> Are you sure IP should be cleaned-up? There will be no chance to "restore"
>>> who was this user .....
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> I think this list is complete and you are right, this is a lot of stuff.
>>>>
>>>> The option that you suggest sound much more feasible. From my point of
>>>> few this should be enough.
>>>>
>>>> Hash algorithm need to be state of the art. IP-address in ConferenceLog
>>>> need to be cleaned.
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a good way.
>>>>
>>>> Btw... is there is a way/setting to anonymize IP-adresses while logging?
>>>> Otherwise I need to write a script to do so. Maybe I need to do it anyway 
>>>> to
>>>> kick out usernames. Logfiles need to be delete after 7 (maybe 14) days or
>>>> they need to be without any userdata.
>>>>
>>>> Greetings Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:43 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Peter,
>>>>
>>>> Here is the high level list of what need to done to "hard delete" user
>>>> from the system:
>>>>
>>>> delete user
>>>> delete all user contacts (also users, so we might have recursion here)
>>>> delete user from all groups
>>>> delete user from room moderators
>>>> delete all appointments with owner == user
>>>> delete all calendars with owner == user
>>>> delete all meeting members in appointments where owner != user
>>>> delete all Private Messages where user is in to/from fields
>>>> delete all UserContact + Requests
>>>> delete all invitation sent by this user
>>>> delete all private rooms owned by this user
>>>> delete all user private files/recordings
>>>> delete all chat messages send/received by this user
>>>> clean email messages
>>>> clean all Polls/answers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This list scares me a lot :(((
>>>>
>>>> So let's discuss the option: "Mark user deleted and clean-up sensitive
>>>> information"
>>>>
>>>> What I would propose:
>>>>
>>>> In Admin->User area
>>>>
>>>> display all users (deleted should be "read-only" with restore and purge
>>>> options only)
>>>> add additional "Purge" button
>>>> In case Purge will be selected:
>>>>
>>>> User will be marked deleted
>>>> AsteriskSipUser and Address will be replaced with empty objects
>>>> User fields "age, externaluserid, firstname, lastname, login, pictureuri"
>>>> will be replaced with "Purged_some_hash"
>>>> User profile picture will be deleted
>>>> ChatMessage: fromName will be replaced with "Purged User"
>>>> MailMessage: should be purged (some search by email will be required)
>>>>
>>>> ConferenceLog right now contains userId+UserIp right now, so it is 2
>>>> numbers should it be cleaned up?
>>>>
>>>> SOAPLogin contains clientURL and doesn't contains userId, so it is
>>>> impossible to associate SoapLogin object with particular user
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Would it be enough?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 4:21 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>>
>>>>> hard delete as only option would be the easiest way (for the admin). One
>>>>> doesn't need to remind "hard delete" at a given time... I think it need to
>>>>> be implemented anyway. I thought just the ones that doesn't need to take
>>>>> care about these regulation could keep things as they are now...
>>>>>
>>>>> Greetings Peter
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 06.04.2018 um 10:09 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm afraid there will be no option to "final delete one record"
>>>>>> It will be: perform total clean-up and hard delete all soft deleted
>>>>>> records
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or better to perform: hard delete as the only option?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Maxim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "soft" and "final delete" should be enough I think...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It just need to be "findable" and described for new admins that
>>>>>>> provide the
>>>>>>> service in the EU...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> jira in a second...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Greetings Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 05.04.2018 um 17:47 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello Peter,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This sounds like lots of new testing :(
>>>>>>>> Will try to find time and include it in 4.0.3/4.0.4
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (have very limited time right now :( )
>>>>>>>> Will appreciated any help with testing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would it be OK to perform "final delete" in clean-up widget? i.e.
>>>>>>>> delete will be "soft delete", then in if will push "Clean-up" all
>>>>>>>> soft
>>>>>>>> deleted data will be hard deleted ...
>>>>>>>> Or it doesn't worth to have both? only hard delete will be enough?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:55 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hey there,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> new privacy regulations will take place on the 25th May 2018 in
>>>>>>>>> Europe.
>>>>>>>>> You
>>>>>>>>> could find informations about it by searching for General Data
>>>>>>>>> Protection
>>>>>>>>> Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To use openmeetings after the 25th of May (in Europe) there need to
>>>>>>>>> be a
>>>>>>>>> few
>>>>>>>>> changes. We use openmeetings integrated. So I will mainly be focused
>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> room.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have 3 points that are really necessary:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. User deletion: Datasets of users that will be deleted need to be
>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>> from the database, not just marked as deleted. Probably it is enough
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> hash
>>>>>>>>> those fields.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>       I think critical fields are in table:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              om_user -> age, externaluserid, firstname, lastname,
>>>>>>>>> login,
>>>>>>>>> pictureuri (and picture itself) and sip_user_id
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              conferencelog -> email, external_user_id, firstname,
>>>>>>>>> lastname,
>>>>>>>>> user_id, userip
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              soaplogin -> client_url (contains the ip-address)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              sipusers (here empty so please check) ->  defaultuser,
>>>>>>>>> host,
>>>>>>>>> ipaddr, name
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              address ->  email, fax, phone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              chat -> from_name
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>              e-mail_queue (if not empty) -> recipients, replyto
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. There need to be a place to place a (customized) privacy policy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3. Registration-Dialog need to have a button/step to agree the data
>>>>>>>>> processing. And to this belongs a button to disagree.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As far as I can see this need to be done in the first place. I'm
>>>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>> are more things to do. Maybe someone can complete it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Greetings Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> WBR
>>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> WBR
>>> Maxim aka solomax
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> WBR
>> Maxim aka solomax
>
>
>
> --
> WBR
> Maxim aka solomax



-- 
WBR
Maxim aka solomax

Reply via email to