I think your concerns are way overblown, and you mishcaracterize or
misunderstand the nature of the data collection that occurs. You also fail
to even mention that there are safeguards that apply to how the data is
used and how long it is retained.
Far from escaping accountability, the WMF privacy policy is a leap ahead of
the types of policies (if any) that you encounter elsewhere on the web. It
places strong limits on the use and retention of data, is provided to users
in an easily understandable manner with a prominent and accurate brief
summary and it was developed with the very substantial input of community
members.
As a result, the finished policy has rightly garnered a lot of support and
approval, and personally I'm happy to see it go live tomorrow.
~Nathan
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Trillium Corsage <trillium2014(a)yandex.com>
wrote:
I am writing to ask that the new privacy policy be
stopped, pending
briefings of and thorough consideration by the incoming executive director
Lila Tretikov. The timing of this major policy change with all its
implications, including great legal implications, is at minimum
discourteous to Ms. Tretikov in this the second day of her tenure, and in
my judgement should additionally be viewed as alarming.
"Wikimedia is beholden to no one, yet accountable to each and every human
being," she said day before last. Yet the new policy makes every effort to
distance it from accountability, by attempting to force every editor to
consent to the most privacy-invasive technologies known, which include, all
quoted:
"You should be aware that specific data made public by you or aggregated
data that is made public by us can be used by anyone for analysis and to
infer information about users, such as which country a user is from,
political affiliation, and gender." "Type of device you are using possibly
including unique device identification numbers." "The type and version of
your browser, your browser's language preference, the type and version of
your device's operating system." "The name of your internet service
provider or mobile carrier." "Which pages you request and visit, and the
date and time of each request" (note: says "visit," not merely
"edit"). "We
actively collect information with tracking pixels, cookies, and local
storage." "We use your email address." "We can use GPS and other
technologies commonly used to determine location." "We may receive
metadata." "IP address of the device (or your proxy server) you are using
to access the Internet, which could be used to infer your geographical
location." (
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy).
What is the heck is all this? Editors don't know they are signing up for
this! But it gets even worse, because the WMF is not only providing this to
its employees, but to hundreds of anonymous "administrators" to whom it
grants access to this non-public, easily personally-identifying data. This
means particularly, but not limited to: checkusers, arbitrators, stewards,
UTRS users, and "community developers." Who are they? While Ms. Tretikov
aspires to accountability, the new privacy policy flees to "exemptions" and
"we know nothing." It specifically exempts these hundreds of people from
the privacy policy. The WMF's Privacy Fellow Roshni Patel said two weeks
ago "the Foundation can’t control the actions of community members such as
administrative volunteers so we don’t include them under the privacy
policy." Is this accountability? No. She further mystifyingly continues:
"however, under the access policy, these volunteers must sign a
confidentiality agreement." Mystifyingly, because it's *not* *true*. That
part of the privacy policy "Requirements for Community Members Applying for
Access to Nonpublic Information" requires only an email address and an
assertion from an anonymous individual that he or she is 18 or over. Is
there requirement there somewhere for a signature? No. Shall they sign for
example under the nicknames of the prominent administrators like
"Beeblebrox" and "Wizardman?" This is not accountability. (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Access_to_nonpublic_information_policy#Mini…
.)
How can the executive director be expected to assume responsibility for
this stuff in 14 hours, on her third official day on the job? Out of simple
courtesy to her, it needs to be delayed, while she is briefed on it by
those who most understand it, like the general counsel Geoff Brigham.
Trillium Corsage
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>