- From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:46:10 -0800
- To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com>
Rigo, Currently the 18 months applies to Log Files. Profiles themselves tend to live for much shorter timeframes (sub 6 months). Once a DNT:1 signal is received, the data should no longer be profiled so this would mean all historical profile data naturally decays within 6 months or less for the most part. - Shane -----Original Message----- From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 9:31 AM To: Shane Wiley Cc: public-tracking@w3.org; JC Cannon Subject: Re: ACTION-75: Write-up a hybrid of Do Not Profile and Do Not Cross-Site Track Nice suggestion Shane! So either take 18 month (and have Rob confirm that this is ok with Art. 29 WP) or apply minimization principles. The question then is: What are those minimization principles and to what data do they apply? To log data or to profile data or to both? Rigo On Thursday 09 February 2012 09:16:51 Shane Wiley wrote: > If we're going to use arbitrary time spans for retention, I would recommend > that we leverage 18 months as the standard. This is the time Google, MSFT, > and Yahoo! currently use for search logs and have shared this policy with > all of the EU DPAs and A29WP. As the advocates in this working group will > likely share the perspective of wanting this to be lower in common with EU > DPAs, it's a helpful starting point. Otherwise we can stop using arbitrary > numbers and leverage minimization principles instead - which I personally > believe are the better standard to apply to varied business models and can > stand the test of time and innovation.
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 17:47:20 UTC