Talk:Telecommunications data retention

Tip: #section links are case-sensitive on most browsers

Links from this article with broken #section links :
[[IP_address#dynamic|dynamic IP addresses]]

You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem

Links from this article which need disambiguation (check | fix): [[CLI]], [[DNI]], [[mixmaster]]

For help fixing these links, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Fixing a page.

Added by WildBot | Tags to be removed | FAQ | Report a problem

European Union Redirect‑class Low‑importance

	European Union portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article appears to me to be mis-titled, since this is about special case of data retention, rather than the wider issue of data retention, which, for example, includes legal obligations to keep accounting, insurance, and other company documents for long periods? Perhaps it should be moved to telecoms data retention? -- Anon.

I see no reason to merge the pages. The other page only consists of a few sentances, at least one of which is inaccurate.

I agree. There is no reason to merge. R Pollack

Lacks Balance

Extended discussion of arguements against data retention and techniques for avoiding retention but little given space given to arguments for retention (supposing there are some, of course ;)).

There is nothing to prevent somebody making that arguement. --R Pollack 19:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, discussion of techniques for avoiding 'retention' are about avoiding identification - data is still retained.

--DP.

Please sign your comments DP. --R Pollack 19:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will there be time?

Seems to me that, as with many legislative or regulatory changes, businesses are leaving things too late to comply.

Not sure what the likely penalties will be and how compliance will be tested

wtf

"if 1 million users at an ISP connected and disconnected every minute and did this 24/7 an ISP would need 11 Tera Bytes of storage, for 365 days of retention"

lol, thx for the useless hypothetical calculation

it averages more like 1 dhcp re-connection per day, meaning two DVD-R disks per year. i think a million subscriber ISP can manage that.

-- Yes, and also, even 11TB is not all that much. A 500GB hard drive costs less than 500$. 11TB adds up to 5500$ - negligible for a million-subscriber ISP. 217.128.17.159 (talk) 21:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about this?

This article looks quite similar to http://www.retentia.com/dataretention.htm and I didn't notice either place citing references.

Any explanation?

--Jsorah (talk) 00:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 January 9.--Tikiwont (talk) 16:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The wayback machine seems to suggest that the page only appeared on retentia.com in mid-2007. (It is possible, though probably not likely, that it was there earlier, but that archive.org hadn't indexed it.) The page on Wikipedia was already in its current form as early as the start of 2006, probably earlier. Looking at the ends from late 2005, it is clear that this page evolved into its current form through a series of edits by many different editors. Had the Wikipedia article been copied from retentia.com, this is not what would have happened — instead there would probably have been a small number of edits by one editor when the version from retentia.com was copied. So I rather suspect that that retentia.com has copied the data from here, and not vice versa. — ras52 (talk) 11:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for investigating this. That is convincing and also supported by the fact that retentia.com only has a generic copyright notice dating form 2006 on (which is then of course invalid). So we can remove the tag here, but it might be advisable to contact them. (Not sure if we have a process or notice board for that kind of action or if it is up to individula editors.) --Tikiwont (talk) 10:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Australia considering EU provisions

http://www.zdnet.com.au/govt-wants-isps-to-record-browsing-history-339303785.htm TRS-80 (talk) 06:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Data retention hardware

Is there any difference between data retention hardware and computer data storage, or is the first term just a fancy way of referring to the second? —Wbm1058 (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]