Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mrlipring
What part of that is incorrect?
|
That I have "nothing to worry about". I subscribe to Which? magazine and could show you dozens of cases where people have had all sorts of problems because companies have got incorrect data stored about them.
Quote:
|
I know google are US-based, therefore liable only for american (non-existent) DP laws. The point still stands that your data isn't going to be read by anyone but you, so you've nothing to worry about.
|
Here's an example of "nothing to worry about"...
"A flaw in Froogle, Google's price-comparison service, created a means for attackers to swipe cookies used to access GMail accounts. Israeli hacker Nir Goldshlager demonstrated how users fooled into executing script by clicking a link pointed at Froogle could be redirected to a site that steals usernames and passwords for the "Google Accounts" centralised log-in service. Google has fixed the vulnerability, preventing further theft. But Goldshlager warns that data from already stolen cookies can still be used even if the password of compromised accounts is changed."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01...security_bugs/
Quote:
|
If you don't use Gmail, why do you even care?
|
I don't buy extended warranties. Should I therefore not care about telling anyone else that they're a waste of money?
