News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by adastra22 on Sunday December 22, 2024 @04:55PM (#42489480)
There are backup systems that are write-only. What’s to be done then?
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by mtmail on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:16PM (#42489635)
Facebook used an encryption key per user for their backups. For deletion they just delete the encryption key which makes the data unreadable. There was an article years ago about their cold storage infrastructure, Blueray discs if I recall. https://www.datacenterfrontier.com/cloud/article/11431537/in...
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by polskibus on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:01PM (#42489513)
You could replay this backup, and skip problematic record when writing new copy of the backup. Delete old backup. What’s important is to keep such log of „records to be deleted from backup”.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by adastra22 on Sunday December 22, 2024 @07:23PM (#42490429)
That cost real money and requires literally throwing out the old backup (which may or may not be destroyable). Think optical media and stuff like that.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by Y-bar on Wednesday December 25, 2024 @04:56AM (#42507966)
The GDPR was proposed and discussed in 2014, it was voted on in 2016, and went into effect in 2018. As 2025 is at the door, what excuses are there really to use a non-compliant tech stack when handling personal data?
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by cyberpunk on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:34PM (#42489752)
How does one do this with a 20TB SQL database?

Our approach would be to add some filters into our 'restore' pipeline which drops the problematic data should we ever attempt a restore, but I don't think it's good enough, and we have to maintain a list of user id hashes or such to power the filters.

Edit: I mean, in a way that won't eat a lot of costs. I can imagine a malicious group opening and demanding deletions for 1000s of users which would mean a deletion job running on a large number of these 20TB backups, say 100 daily backups and for multiple users?

Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by martijnarts on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:47PM (#42489847)
You don't need to delete data instantly, you just need to do it within a reasonable timeframe. So batching data deletion requests and running a clear out once a week should be fine.

You may even be okay to just reply to the user that you've deleted all active copies of the data and it'll be fully gone when your backups expire in 30 days.

IANAL tho.

Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by Y-bar on Monday December 23, 2024 @11:55AM (#42495784)
> a malicious group opening and demanding deletions for 1000s of users

I am not aware of any provision within GDPR that allows anyone else but the individual person (and courts) to request deletion of their personal data. So I think your example is highly unlikely to ever happen.

Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by polskibus on Monday December 23, 2024 @03:05PM (#42497191)
A group of individuals could do a gdpr flashmob and make any data admin miserable.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by Y-bar on Monday December 23, 2024 @05:54PM (#42498257)
This is a solved problem as far as I am concerned.

We have automated systems to deal with requests in that category, it would probably have to be in the double-digit percentage of our customer base before we see any significant impact on our ability to conduct business.

We know which dat belongs to which customer, we know which data we must delete if requested, we know which data (eg invoice related for bookkeeping) we must keep even if requested to delete personal data.

If we ever piss off such a large portion of our customers, that they want to delete their accounts, GDPR-related requests will be the least of our concern.

Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by post-it on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:02PM (#42489526)
It's imprudent to use technology that makes it impossible to comply with the law.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by williamdclt on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:24PM (#42489686)
I’ve had a cursory look into that recently (just a simple googling) and it seems that it’s considered OK to keep the data in backups.

Which does seem weird… but to be fair, it would be near impossible to delete from backups as they exist today, it would be a law that can’t be practically applied.

Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by unit149 on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:15PM (#42489622)
Store everything on a decentralized P2P server for privacy enhancing technologists (PETs) to deconstruct.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by fh973 on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:06PM (#42489555)
Encrypt it and delete keys.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by loriverkutya on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:03PM (#42489537)
Simple. Destroy the backup physically.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by im3w1l on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:06PM (#42489559)
Encrypt write-once backups and store the keys on rewritable backups.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by dboreham on Sunday December 22, 2024 @05:01PM (#42489522)
The acid bath.
Re:German watchdog orders Sam Altman's biometric ID project ... by tzs on Sunday December 22, 2024 @10:41PM (#42491533)
Depends on which country's GDPR authorities you ask. At one point the French authorities said you don't have to delete data from backups, the Danish authorities said you have to delete when technically feasible, and the UK authorities said you had to put the data "beyond use" which has been interpreted to mean that if you ever restore from the backup you have omit the "deleted" data.

My guess is that most places go with not taking any active steps to delete things from the backups themselves, counting on media rotation to eventually overwrite the data. When restoring they omit anything that is on the "should be deleted" list.