On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, seth vidal wrote: > > Sufficient anonymization would mean the data would end up being: > > AAA:BBBBBBBB:CCC > > Seriously, there's no good way to anonymize it enough w/o making it > useless. > And the trick / trap of the thing is my definition of anonymous and $RANDOM_PRIVACY_ADVOCATE's definition of anonymous might be completely different and if we've already released the results without us notifying them first then we've caused a problem. Seth's got it right, lets not be one of those organizations who doesn't handle their user info with care. -Mike _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
