1
1
2
1
submitted 7 months ago by makeasnek@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
3
1

I use a unique email address whenever I signup for a service. Occasionally a service provider will (legally) forward the email address and a other data points to a third party on a need-to-know basis.

Since about I year I'm receiving spam / promotional email / phishing to such addresses from unrelated entities. This allows for two interpretations

  • the original company sold my data; thus, violating GDPR
  • the original company failed to keep the data secure, and did not notify the public / affected clients about breach; which also violates GDPR or other regulations.

I tried emailing some company that leaked my email and got a canned response, not understanding the issue.

If their is a government agency or NGO where I can file report regarding a likely data leak?

4
1
submitted 1 year ago by JRepin@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
5
1
submitted 1 year ago by JRepin@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
6
1
Nextgov Hackathon (nextgov-hackathon.eu)
submitted 2 years ago by kir0ul@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml

Nextcloud is currently used by many public services in Europe (universities, governments, cities etc.) as an alternative to Big Tech solutions, keeping their documents and communication safe in Europe. The European Commission’s Open Source Programme Office is organising a hackathon to enhance Nextcloud with additional features so that more public administrations can include such solutions as part of their digitalisation journey.

Help us build and protect Europe’s digital sovereignty!

7
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
8
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
9
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
10
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
11
1
Criticizes boom in biometric mass surveillance in Germany (www-patrick--breyer-de.translate.goog)
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
12
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
13
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
14
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
15
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
16
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
17
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
18
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
19
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
20
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
21
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
22
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
23
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml

The Belgian government will oblige communication services such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger and Telegram to store metadata. The services must keep track of who was in contact with whom and where this happened. Legislation for this should come into effect at the end of this year.

According to De Standaard, the obligation to keep metadata is contained in a draft law of the Belgian government. That draft has already been approved by the federal government and it is planned that the law can be introduced in the autumn. Other Belgian newspapers, such as De Morgen and De Tijd, also write about this.

The bill would emphasize that encryption of communications is allowed, but that this should not prevent chat services from storing identification, traffic and location data. The content of the communication traffic does not have to be saved; it's only about metadata. Telecom providers must also store such metadata.

The new law replaces the data retention law, which was overturned by the Belgian Constitutional Court earlier this year. Privacy and human rights organizations had successfully challenged that law; they believed that the preventive maintenance and mass storage of data was in violation of the right to privacy.

In the new law, the government would take into account the 'legitimate concerns about the right to privacy'. When the data retention law was annulled, the Constitutional Court set conditions that such a law must meet, and this would have been taken into account in the new bill.

https://tweakers.net/nieuws/183702/belgische-overheid-verplicht-chatapps-zoals-whatsapp-metadata-op-te-slaan.html

24
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
25
1
submitted 3 years ago by fittonia@lemmy.ml to c/europrivacy@lemmy.ml
view more: next ›

Europe Privacy

142 readers
6 users here now

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS