Well, Legal normally makes those calls with the information provided
by the devs. I believe Legal is working on dedicated privacy nerds (or
was, some months ago?) but with the current environment I've trended
towards not believing anything written down more than 3 months ago ;p
On 8 March 2016 at 21:07, Justin Ormont <justin.ormont(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is a very good document.
Does WMF have a privacy role?
The role, as I see it, is to be an advocate for the user's interests,
answering questions like "would the user be surprised to know their data is
being used for X", "would it be ok for NYT to publish that we're doing
Y",
"what's the impact if this dataset was released/hacked", and making sure
data handling procedures are in place and followed. The privacy roles I've
interacted with sit between dev/management and legal. Dev says "X would be a
great feature"; legal says "here are the risks of doing X", and privacy
says
"X sounds great, go ahead; there is no private data handled in this
pipeline" or "X is doable within a constrained access controlled, strictly
logged and reviewed environment as it contains moderate PII".
--justin
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Hi!
As my final hurrah, I've released the data
access guidelines used by
the Discovery team in research and analysis on to Meta. It can be
found at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Discovery/Data_access_guidelines
Thank you very much for getting this done!
--
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
discovery mailing list
discovery(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery
_______________________________________________
discovery mailing list
discovery(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery