Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

Mumsnet Data Breach - Q&A

189 replies

JustineMumsnet · 19/04/2018 21:04

As many of you already know, some screenshots of Mumsnet posts were recently uploaded to Twitter by a former Mumsnet intern – here’s a link to a previous thread discussing this in case you've not seen it.

Three of the screenshots showed an Admin’s view of the site and therefore contained the IP addresses of the posters concerned.

Understandably there have been loads of questions about the implications, about what data we hold and who has access to it so we've collated them here. Please do post any queries here or email [email protected] if you’ve any concerns or further questions.

Thanks and huge apologies if this has caused you any concern.

OP posts:
merrymouse · 19/04/2018 21:40

From previous thread:

Why do you think EH posted screenshots from her work computer when the posts she put on twitter are visible on the MN website to anyone with an internet connection?

Why use screenshots from her work account after she left?

ObiJuanKenobi · 19/04/2018 21:40

The MNHQ Moderation Team: Thread 2http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3226060-The-MNHQ-Moderation-Team-Thread-2#77245708

(Tweet Info Here)

SciFiFan2015 · 19/04/2018 21:39

@JustineMumsnet - thanks for the stance you are taking about protecting the space to debate. Thanks for updating us about this particular matter.

ObiJuanKenobi · 19/04/2018 21:39

The recent twitter post by 'Ariel' (see other thread) is really worrying saying more data is to be released over the weekend. @JustineMumsnet can you offer any reassurances on its legitimacy?

AuntieStella · 19/04/2018 21:38

Could she access only the email address with which someone are currently registered? Or would previous email addresses also have been there?

(Ditto if you've changed name)

KatherinaMinola · 19/04/2018 21:36

Repeating my question (also asked by other people) from the previous thread:

Are you conducting an investigation into Emma Healey's claims that she still has friends at MN who might make moderation decisions at her suggestion? Because we don't know what else they might do at her suggestion.

Mogleflop · 19/04/2018 21:29

Hi again Justine! Does your database allow audit trails? Can you see if she's accessed information for key vocal people (like Datun?)

Also on another note how are you doing? I hope there hasn't been too much personal nastiness after speaking up in the Times?

Ihavenofuckstogive · 19/04/2018 21:28

That is the same as the statement earlier but I imagine it's being said again as a direct statement from Justine?

I'm still happy with it.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 19/04/2018 21:26

@CrochetBelle

Slightly off-topic, but important in knowing who our information is shared with, you say...

The intern needed access to user information in order to carry out her work duties, which included contacting MNers to pass on press enquiries.

What type of press enquiries? Why would the press need to contact a Talk user? And how often does that happen to have it specifically written into the 'work duties' of a member of staff?

What else were her 'work duties'? Comprehensively, please...

It was for media case studies and it doesn't happen very often - a few times a month. We reviewed our policies about who had access to user data during Emma's time at Mumsnet and she (along with some other staff members who only needed access intermittently) had their access removed. Obviously we wish we'd done this a bit sooner.

OP posts:
TrollHunterGeneral · 19/04/2018 21:23

thank you Justine

LineyHasntLeftTheBuilding · 19/04/2018 21:21

That apology from the intern reported in the Guardian - I'm very unhappy about that final comment from her about MNners' 'mental health'. Just want to say that really.

Insult to injury, and all that.

CrochetBelle · 19/04/2018 21:19

Slightly off-topic, but important in knowing who our information is shared with, you say...

The intern needed access to user information in order to carry out her work duties, which included contacting MNers to pass on press enquiries.

What type of press enquiries? Why would the press need to contact a Talk user? And how often does that happen to have it specifically written into the 'work duties' of a member of staff?

What else were her 'work duties'? Comprehensively, please...

KeneftYakimoski · 19/04/2018 21:18

What data did interns have access to, and what is your basis for concluding that it does not constitute sensitive personal data within the meaning of the act?

Specifically, why leads you to believe that the combination of signup data including email addresses and (potentially names, dates of birth and postcodes), connected with postings and IP numbers, is not sensitive personal data?

What organisational and technical measures were in place to prevent personal data (as you saw it) or sensitive personal data (as I think it is clear it actually was) being inappropriately accessed, processed and exfiltrated by interns?

mrselizabethdarcy · 19/04/2018 21:07

Thanks for explaining.