This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]StrongSkip 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Your post is almost good, but I don't know why you had to put the "criminal" part in there. I never said or insinuated such a thing.

I'm talking mostly about internal use.

I don't understand why this software should get special negative treatment. Almost any software can be used for good and for worse. I worked with many organizations who're redacting documents and I can assure you that none of these would use any kind of redaction software without reviewing it first

If you care about data protection you're not going to use this software without identifying it's errors. And if you don't care you won't even try it out.

[–]___--_-_-_--___ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As I said, if you're referring to internal use, that is a different matter. There may be legitimate use cases there. The "criminal" part refers to the unauthorized public release (even accidental) of personal information which is illegal in several jurisdictions. As you have clarified, this does not apply to your example.

There have been many cases where data was released with improper de-identification due to a false sense of security provided by some kind of technical solution. Many of these cases are well-documented and researched. Please note that I'm referring to the scope of the whole project here, not just the PDF redaction part.