The data protection officer of the federal state Berlin has issued an updated report in German which Video Conference supplier are recommended to be used from a legal perspective.

The report uses a traffic light system 🚦so it should be possible to get an initial view for non German speaker as well.

Many of the concerns are actually not technical but more contractual that would prevent the legal use in Germany.

  • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    33 years ago

    I can’t read German but I like that they ranked a lot of Jitsi Meet providers and seem to have favorable opinions on most of them.

    • @marcuse1w@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      23 years ago

      Some free and open Jitsi instances are actually marked red. The reason is that the contractual situation is not clear enough to ensure data protection. This does not mean that the provider cannot be trusted, it’s just as there is no strong relationship with the provider, it’s free after all, that a institution would have to rely on the T&C rather than having assurances from the provider in contractual form which can be enforced in court. Actually an interesting thought, although mostly relevant for organisations public or private who are obliged to adhere to privacy laws.

      • @kevincox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        23 years ago

        Of course. The provider is a critical part of the decision. However if most providers were marked poorly that likely means that it is difficult or impossible to run Jitsi Meet in a way that satisfies their requirements. If there are many providers that rank well it means that Jitsi can be, and often is, run well. Which is a nice thing to see.