Goodness Me I'm With Cob Again....

[youngmafbog]

Surely this falls under GDPR rules? It's hardly Stalanist, any company does this with disgruntled employees.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6727225/Jeremy-Corbyn-blocks-MPs-accessing-Labour-databases-amid-claim-defectors-tried-data.html

[naomi24]

I wonder how sensitive the information is that Labour keeps on its databases?

[spathiphyllum]

Regardless how sensitive it is, Yes YMB it's a breach of data so it is against GDPR rules.

[spathiphyllum]

I had a credit check via Experian and i noticed i had to untick a box, if i did not then i would have received emails, offers and spam from them. That is also against GDPR laws. I must have to opt in not opt out , if so then it is against the law.

Hefty fines on GDPR stuff also.

[Quizmonster]

You're querying the Daily Mail, YMB? There's a turn-up for the book!
Why would anyone who resigns from an organisation even expect to go on having access to that organisation's information banks?
As I understand it, people who hold such knowledge - but who are being sacked - are routinely escorted from the premises without further ado. Why would a willing leaver have better treatment?

[spathiphyllum]

"Yesterday, Labour sources claimed that one of the party’s breakaway MPs had tried to access its supporters’ data, prompting it to shut down its key canvassing software."

So if the MP broke away, then they weren't part of the party anymore? So not only were they trying to steal data from a database, but the database they were trying to steal from was a government official one, one of which they were not a part of. Is this treason?

[ichkeria]

Haven’t they blocked ALL access not just the alleged “traitors”

No surprise some people here are sticking up for that

[youngmafbog]

The problem is Ick, more are shouting about going so they have 'traitors' in their midst.

Not only do Labour have the responsibility of taking care of their data but in addition it is darned careless to allow disgruntled employees to wonder off with your intellectual property. I would hope the Tories have done the same.

I am sure if anyone really needs access then they can get it. Really it should be like that anyway - using principal of least privilege.

"I wonder how sensitive the information is that Labour keeps on its databases?"
It would be nice to think they hold a file on everyone, however I suspect it is fairly limited.

[ichkeria]

The way Labour is reacting shows the leadership in its true colours. Paranoid and retrenching. The party as it is now is surely finished. And I’d not bet huge sums on the Tory party in its current form surviving either

[naomi24]

//The way Labour is reacting shows the leadership in its true colours. Paranoid and retrenching. //

I agree. I can understand them restricting access to data, but it could have been done quietly just as a matter of course.

[Peter Pedant]

// I wonder how sensitive the information is that Labour keeps on its databases?//

comes in two flavours - personal ( sensitive ) and not personal.
Should only be used for the purpose for which it was submitted - so if it is the defectors collection they cant really block it
BUT
does no one in this world ( xc me) not keep back ups?

It is commonplace for fired employees to try to wipe their work space computer ....

[Peter Pedant]

can someone tell me what / using principal[sic[ of least privilege. / means please ?
it isnt in the old rules - and I havent quite got to grips with the new GDPR

[agchristie]

//I wonder how sensitive the information is that Labour keeps on its databases?//

The firewall has caused a raging inferno and JC and his pals are ashen faced...

[naomi24]

.. not to mention hot under the collar .....

[agchristie]

Oh yes,that as well Naomi!

[youngmafbog]

"And I’d not bet huge sums on the Tory party in its current form surviving either"

Excellent, get rid of the liberal elite and I might have a Prty to vote for.

[youngmafbog]

"can someone tell me what / using principal[sic[ of least privilege. / means please ? "

Certainly. It means you only give the least access to someone. So if they work in Manchester then you might give them access to people in that area, not the whole country. You might only give it to the person in charge of mailing but not the person that does the artwork. That sort of thing.

[Gromit]

Blocking non members from the party’s website is entirely reasonable and good practice.

Setting up is petitions is not acceptable and illegal. And will be counter productive. Any MP attracting a lot of signatures calling for them to give up their seat, will be less inclinded to.
And Corbyn should be careful what he wishes for. To lose just one Labour seat in a by-election at this would be very damaging.

[Gromit]

The situation is nothing like GDRP. GDRP is about privacy, and this is about security.

[ludwig]

Fair enough. If they're resigned from the Labour party, why should they have access to it's data?

Naomi // I can understand them restricting access to data, but it could have been done quietly just as a matter of course. //

It probably was, but obviously the Mail is hostile to Corbyn and is most likely blowing the whole thing out of proportion.

[youngmafbog]

"The situation is nothing like GDRP. GDRP is about privacy, and this is about security."

If the database holds members' details, which I would expect it to then it is very much in the remit of GDPR.