Why you should not store ANY information in Logos

Page 1 of 4 (63 items) 1 2 3 4 Next >
This post has 62 Replies | 8 Followers

Posts 521
Russ White | Forum Activity | Posted: Sat, Sep 10 2016 5:47 PM

Y'all --

Bob just closed the uservoice suggestion to allow users to selectively synchronize information to the Logos cloud. Logos doesn't encrypt your data, the count on the cloud provider (whoever that really is) to do so, which means that whichever cloud provider Logos is using can read _everything_ you put in your Logos notes, prayer lists, etc. Given this, I have a simple suggestion to make:

Stop storing anything in Logos at all.

Yes, I know -- "I don't have anything to hide, so I don't care." Keep repeating that to yourself long enough, and maybe you'll actually believe it. Two words: Brendan Eich. When you're fired because you've pushed something into a note file that Logos couldn't be bothered to protect, will you be able to sue Logos? No, I didn't think so. "But this is the way the world works!" So the world is always right? Read the Scriptures recently?

Until Logos takes user privacy seriously, I don't think we, the user community, should hand Logos any information. 

Feel free to pile on with the "Logos is the the best thing since sliced bread, Logos is the best company/product/people/etc. ever, Logos is more important than Moses himself" replies -- I'm not going to answer anything on this thread. I'm just sick of Logos' inability to care one bit about what is right in their mad rush to get rich.

Dear Logos: you are a Christian company. You can rise above the way the world works, educate your users, and do the right thing. 

Posts 10307
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 6:00 PM

Well, Russ. I get the feeling you might not be thrilled with the big 'L'.

I agree ... about the only stuff I have is highlights, which I periodically delete ... as also Amazon/Kindle.

When Mr Bob started shipping my created notes, etc to his servers without permission (L4), that's when I decided Libronix had better management.


Posts 1691
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 6:43 PM

I'm sorry, Russ, that we're disappointing you with our continued use of the cloud.

We kept this suggestion around for a while in case it turned out there was a widespread demand for avoiding the cloud, but it seems like the whole tech world is embracing the cloud, and that consumers are coming to appreciate the value and convenience.

Like you, I'm an 'old school' tech guy in many ways, and still do some local and physical backups to offline media stored in different locations, for the things that are most important to me. But much of what I type into a computer isn't _that_ important, and I trust that Amazon / Microsoft / Google's financial interests are (for once) aligned with my interest of my data not being lost. I also use the low cost of the cloud to store important (to me, but likely unimportant to anyone else -- like family photos and my own writing) stuff on multiple cloud platforms.

As for privacy, I don't get the Brendan Eich reference -- his persecution was in response to a public record, not something found on a data store he thought was private.

If persecution intensifies for what we believe, local data storage isn't going to protect me: I'll tell you what I believe. It's not a secret.

And if I've got stuff that I should be hiding (for reasons other than simple personal security/privacy -- like my bank account password), then putting it on my local computer but not the cloud is a pretty poor protection. If your local computer is connected to the Internet, it's not at all unlikely, no matter how smart or technical you are, that some hacker has/will access the data. And if could get you in legal trouble, local storage may actually be easier for a subpoena to get to than something at a big, monolithic cloud provider. We already know that have dogs that can sniff our USB drives hidden in homes, and various hacks out there can capture data from even air-gapped computers, with techniques that range from phone microphones listening to keystroke noise to interpreting the blinking lights on Ethernet adapters.

So, if you take user privacy _really_ seriously, I agree you shouldn't store stuff in our Notes files. And you shouldn't type it into any computer, anywhere, ever, unless you built the computer from scratch (inside a Faraday cage), bootstrapped it yourself, and didn't use an already compiled C compiler. (This last one is my favorite... :-) )

Posts 26988
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 6:51 PM

Russ White:

Given this, I have a simple suggestion to make:

Stop storing anything in Logos at all.

Please trust me to be able to make my own decision ... don't try to tell me what to do 'cuz there's nothing that would make me less likely to pay attention to your argument than disrespecting my ability to get information and make an informed decision.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 47
Bob Price | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 7:07 PM

I can see both sides of this topic, and both have merit.  It's true that the notion of privacy is largely non-existent these days, but I don't think that means that we should just shrug our shoulders and not think about it.  My use of Logos continues to increase, and I'm moving more of my notes to Logos precisely because they're backed up to the cloud.  However, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some level of protection for my notes.  Encryption while the data is at rest makes sense, but I suppose the issue is how handle the encrypt/unencrypt process when notes are synced from the cloud to one of my devices.  So, while I recognize the difficulty of doing this, I do hope that measures are being taken to safeguard the data that we entrust to Logos cloud storage.

I think the OP's point is that he doesn't believe that the stored data is being protected at all, and if that's true, then I agree that it is irresponsible.  Certainly I shouldn't be saving sensitive personal data there, but who knows what kinds of thoughts will one day be considered "hate thought"?  So, again, I'm hoping that safety measures are being taken, and it would be in Logos' interest to demonstrate that they care about our data.  I think that FaithLife has done a great job of creating a fantastic tool for the study of God's Word, and these are part of the growing pains of blazing new trails.

Posts 2764
Erwin Stull, Sr. | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 7:44 PM

Regardless of whether I like the cloud or not (for the most part, I don't), it is the future (and now present) of where technology has taken us. I choose to embrace the cloud, knowing that if I store anything in the cloud, I cannot consider it extremely private, so I take precautions. For one thing, I won't stop using computers and networks, as that happens to be my lifelong career (and I'm in the senior stage now). Once you get used to the cloud, and begin to develop your own security measures and rules of operation, you will find that it is no worst or better than the internet itself. Now, considering all of the opposition when the PC began to replace file cabinets, do you thing anyone would want to go back now?

Posts 499
SteveHD | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 8:18 PM

I bet there is something good and of value underlying the OP but I can't see it through the disrespectfulness.

Russ White:

"But this is the way the world works!" So the world is always right? Read the Scriptures recently?

"Logos is the the best thing since sliced bread, Logos is the best company/product/people/etc. ever, Logos is more important than Moses himself" replies -- I'm not going to answer anything on this thread. I'm just sick of Logos' inability to care one bit about what is right in their mad rush to get rich.

Posts 494
Richard Villanueva | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 9:15 PM

As it has already been said, both arguments have merit, and what Bob states is true. Russ makes some important privacy issues that I can relate to because I am involved in ministry and that causes me to be involved with private, personal, and possibly embarrassing information in other peoples' lives.  Things I would not and should not have exposed to the general public, things that I would hope that if I were to entrust them into a database, note file, or prayer list, they would be encrypted and at least have a reasonable amount of security in place.  But as we've seen, multi-billion dollar international companies and brands (let alone the United States Government) are not impervious to hackers and people with malicious intent, so I would not expect expect Logos to match or exceed that of Target, AMEX, or the Cyber-Defense Branches of the DOD.

This just means that I, as a prudent customer and minister, have to be wise with what information I have and where I put it.  Probably gonna keep mildly-confidential prayer requests on my prayer list, and not keep deeply-personal notes on my bible study.  Manuscript portions scattered through clippings and highlights for my future New York Bestseller? Wink Not going into Logos, most likely.

I guess my greatest problem with the OP is not the validity of his concern, and I'm only mildly bothered by the attitude in which he states it, but mostly this -

Russ White:
I'm not going to answer anything on this thread. I'm just sick of Logos' inability to care one bit about what is right in their mad rush to get rich.
 

I've always ascribed to the idea that if I'm going to bring a complaint, I should at least try to bring a solution. And this feels like someone walking into a crowded party, yelling a complaint about the host, then turning around and leaving.  At the very least, an intelligent discussion about something important would welcome a two-way conversation, while this feels like a tantrum.  Unfortunately, its a tantrum about something that could be important.  This is not meant to be a Logos-fanboy response, but a plea for an intelligent, adult-like conversation.  

Either way, maybe I've made the mistake of responding to this and putting it back at the top of the Topics List and entertaining the rant?  Any increased encryption/security features for anything I have in cloud is definitely welcome and desired, until then I will use discretion with sensitive information.

MBPro'12 / i5 / 8GB // 3.0 Scholars (Purple) / L6 & L7 Platinum, M&E Platinum, Anglican Bronze, P&C Silver / L8 Platinum, Academic Pro

Posts 1691
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Sep 10 2016 9:53 PM

FWIW, I just want to add that Russ and I have had many interactions on this subject over the years, as well as phone calls. He's very knowledgeable on technology and the cloud, and I respect his position even if I don't agree with the implications, particularly for Logos.

I realize that my response may have come across as flippant, and that wasn't my intention. I get his point, and was just continuing this (7 year, by my count) argument by agreeing and going further... 'Do stop storing anything [super-private] in Logos...and go further, stop storing [super-private] information on computers, period.'

But if it's not super-private, my position is that storing it in Logos isn't appreciably less-secure / retrievable-by-law than storing it on your own hardware.

Posts 773
Armin | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 5:39 AM

Hi Bob,

But I assume that the communication between my computer and the cloud is encrypted. Is this correct? 

Armin

Posts 10307
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 5:51 AM

'Personal hardware' is a banking credentials problem , CCs, etc.  And indeed, why I will finish off Windows7 and pull its web plug ... the hardware at issue. Ergo, waiting for Britannica this week. This last week I was surprised to see Social Security having to reverse course on authentication, and their issue is 'who are you?'.  This week we're having more and more trouble moving money to Japan ... same question ... 'who are you?'.  In Japan, you're issued a physical device to deal with your bank.  And for good reason.

The Logos problem is a social one. The scenario I find interesting is a large chunk of data stolen, and then published on the web. With attendent headlines on how even Christians are at risk. The company refusing to protect.  It's an interesting sequence, since people's imaginations are in play. Would swirl around the Christian web for years, like Target.

But swatting Russ is a more managable solution.  


Posts 521
Russ White | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 6:01 AM

https://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-7/suggestions/16014034-add-option-that-allows-selective-synchronization-t

Bob -- I wasn't going to respond to this thread, but since you jumped in -- 

You are going to be hit with a data breach at some point in the future. It's not a matter of "if," it's a matter of "when." That data breach is going to leak information that will cost people their jobs/etc. You need to allow people to opt out of storing their information in your cloud, no matter how secure you think it is -- let me take my own risks, rather than you taking them for me.

Certainly I can just "not store my information in Logos," but -- then I lose some of the functionality of Logos itself. There is another option, of course -- an option I would actually prefer -- better integration between Logos and Evernote and OneNote (both, not one or the other). I would prefer this because it would allow me to fully use Logos without storing information in Logos. This suggestion, including the two rather modest features I asked for to start the process, however, has also been completely ignored by Faithlife for 5+ years.

But -- whichever route -- the right answer is never, "don't put stuff we think is private in there." It implies you know what "private" means, and that users should restrict their usage of your software to the things you think are useful (although you do put the prayer list in there, which likely contains some of the most private information possible about anyone).

You need to respect your users on this one, in one way or another -- allow better integration with outside software to use external notes functionality, or up the notes functionality to be on par with other packages (including selective synchronization of notes). 

Russ

sorry for the many edits

Posts 3264
Forum MVP
PetahChristian | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 7:23 AM

I think most people just bought Logos for its bible study features. Privacy probably wasn't high on their list of requirements.

If FL can transparently improve how data is protected, it's icing on the cake, but I'm not going to lose sleep over someone reading my notes.

In regard to any vision of the future, "Therefore whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed on the housetops. Lk 12:3". Since all our deeds will be exposed in the future, perhaps we should be more concerned about repentance than our "private data" being protected in the short-term?

Russ White:

better integration between Logos and Evernote and OneNote (both, not one or the other). I would prefer this because it would allow me to fully use Logos without storing information in Logos.

Your argument is that Evernote and OneNote are more secure than Logos, so notes should be stored there instead of Logos. That doesn't solve the issue of documents not being encrypted, end-to-end. If FL would resolve that issue, wouldn't that eliminate any need for storing notes elsewhere?
Russ White:

But -- whichever route -- the right answer is never, "don't put stuff we think is private in there." It implies you know what "private" means, and that users should restrict their usage of your software to the things you think are useful (although you do put the prayer list in there, which likely contains some of the most private information possible about anyone).

I would think that any company, including FL, would have some obligation or requirement to protect its user's cloud documents, regardless of whether they contain "private" things or not. To put the burden on the user to not transmit or store "private" information on FL servers, seems to ignore any responsibility or liability on the part of FL.
Russ White:

You need to respect your users on this one, in one way or another -- allow better integration with outside software to replace the notes functionality, or up the notes functionality to be on par with other software packages. We're well past doing neither.

Russ

If by functionality, you meant (lack of) security, you may want to clarify that. Any other feature request probably should be listed separately from a call to improve security for document transmission and storage.
Posts 13368
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 8:50 AM

Armin:

Hi Bob,

But I assume that the communication between my computer and the cloud is encrypted. Is this correct? 

Armin

I'm not Bob, but yes, communication between your computer and Logos' servers is encrypted, using the https protocol. No-one could intercept it on the way. However, once your Logos data arrives at Logos' servers, it is stored on those servers in unencrypted form. (This doesn't apply to your account information, of course [password, credit card, etc]. I'm sure that is encrypted. This conversation is about your Logos documents only.)

Posts 2363
Jan Krohn | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 9:08 AM

Russ White:
You are going to be hit with a data breach at some point in the future. It's not a matter of "if," it's a matter of "when." That data breach is going to leak information that will cost people their jobs/etc.

Especially since Logos is marketing towards the Chinese market now, it can also cost people their lives. I'm sure the Chinese government wouldn't mind having a look into the prayer lists of their unregistered churches' pastors.

Encryption really is paramount, and could and should happen on many layers - file system, data base, end-to-end encryption of data transfer.

Oh, oh, one more thing, before I forget...

How do you know Faithlife doesn't do that?

Past IT Consultant. Past Mission Worker. Entrepreneur. Future Seminary Student.
Why Amazon sucks: Full background story of my legal dispute with the online giant

Posts 499
SteveHD | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 9:10 AM

Is the content of prayer requests, Bible notes, sermon outlines and other religious written artifacts potential PII? Is evidence of religious practice PII? If it is then it is then as the document linked below states:

"Organizations should minimize the use, collection, and retention of PII to what is strictly necessary to accomplish their business purpose and mission."

http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-122/sp800-122.pdf (all quotes below are pulled from this pdf) defines PII as "any information about an individual maintained by an agency, including (1) any information that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity, such as name, social security number, date and place of birth, mother's maiden name, or biometric records; and (2) any other information that is linked or linkable to an individual, such as medical, educational, financial, and employment information."

"Examples of PII include, but are not limited to:

"Name, such as full name, maiden name, mother‘s maiden name, or alias

"Personal identification number, such as social security number (SSN), passport number, driver‘s license number, taxpayer identification number, or financial account or credit card number

"Address information, such as street address or email address

"Personal characteristics, including photographic image (especially of face or other identifying characteristic), fingerprints, handwriting, or other biometric data (e.g., retina scan, voice signature, facial geometry)

"Information about an individual that is linked or linkable to one of the above (e.g., date of birth, place of birth, race, religion, weight, activities, geographical indicators, employment information, medical information, education information, financial information)."

Posts 228
Graham Owen | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 9:43 AM

Jan Krohn:
I'm sure the Chinese government wouldn't mind having a look into the prayer lists of their unregistered churches' pastors.

Prayer lists have been the focus of this type of discussion on the past.

Good thing about Prayer Lists is that, unless you have a special attachment to the Logos implementation, unlike Notes they don't need to be integrated into your Bible study application and so there are a number of alternatives that can be used.

In general I'm all for ensuring that sensitive and confidential information is properly protected. Personally though the notes I make in Logos are neither sensitive or confidential.

Posts 26988
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 12:38 PM

I think we have several separate issues here:

  • for people who are from their country's perspective "engaging in illegal activity" e.g. China, I suspect mere internet activity with Logos is sufficiently damning that personal content on Logos has little net effect.
  • for pastors in country's with tight confidential information stored outside the country laws, e.g. England I would expect pastors to be very cautious with regards to details in prayer lists, counseling notes, etc. But then again, I would expect all pastors to be very cautious with such information regarding any internet connection
  • for authors concerned that their notes will be hacked, that is always a concern but one to which you are exposed the moment you  have your machine connected to the internet. Only you can decide what level of risk you are willing to take.
  • for the rest of us, yes, we will be the object of hacking at some point - whether from point of sales, medical records, bank records, personal computer or cloud storage. Most of these hacks we will never know about. Some we have to trust that due diligence watching our accounts etc. will expose and that current law provides some protection from the consequences. The rest we need to show detrimental consequences before we waste a life worrying about them. If our personal evaluation of consequences does not match that of the company that stores the data - Netflicks, Amazon, Microsoft, Logos, IRS ...then we need to decide how we will use that product/company.

I agree that many of us approach this with great apprehension because it is a new danger that we have yet to learn to evaluate and to understand what to do if it happens - much like my first experience of a tornado which I'd only seen on TV or a newly arrived Northwestern experiencing their first earthquake (or last one freaked out a transplant from Southern California). But we have to strike a balance between preparedness and fear ... and recognize when our personal fear exceeds the preparedness others are willing to pay for.

And, yes, I am strongly in favor of stronger international law and enforcement of laws against malicious cyber behavior ... from spam on up.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 1184
Myke Harbuck | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 2:16 PM

Russ White:

You need to allow people to opt out of storing their information in your cloud, no matter how secure you think it is -- let me take my own risks, rather than you taking them for me.

You need to respect your users on this one, in one way or another -- allow better integration with outside software to use external notes functionality, or up the notes functionality to be on par with other packages (including selective synchronization of notes). 

I, for one, suggest that you use a much more respectful tone in the forums. In the end, Logos is a private company. I don't feel like you have the right to tell it's owner what he or the company "need to do;" they do not take orders from you or any other users in the forums (though some might feel as though they do). Take the high road - articulate your concerns in a manner that demonstrates 1) your respect for Bob as a fellow image bearer of God and 2) demonstrates your ability with contain your unhealthy emotions in order to convey respect and love for others in the midst of what appears to be a highly-emotional scenario for you. You MOST certainly have a right - maybe even an ethical, and perhaps moral, duty - to express your concerns and wishes; but please remember that the forums isn't a moral free-for-all whereby we simply unleash our most brutal and demanding verbal assaults in order to ensure people stop what they are doing and cater to our desires in that immediately moment. Please, engage in healthy dialogue, and ensure your writing and tone are seasoned with love and gentleness. Trust me, you'll feel much better about yourself and get more accomplished that way. 

Russ White:

Stop storing anything in Logos at all.

I'm not going to answer anything on this thread. I'm just sick of Logos' inability to care one bit about what is right in their mad rush to get rich.

Part of conflict for the Christian is conflict resolution. This idea that "Im gonna tell you how I feel but you cant tell me how you feel is immature at best, Christ-dishonoring at worst." It's childish (with all do respect to you), and should have no place in the forums. If you want to bring a serious issue to the table, do so...but be mature enough to have the conversions that are inherently and intrinsically necessary to bring logical and meaningful resolutions to the table. To me this sounds as if you are not willing to have a discussion because its too difficult - you'd rather gripe and run. In this regard, few are going to take you seriously. The others that do take you seriously will be too alienated with you to help you achieve the resolutions you want to obtain. Still others will have the (perhaps faulty) view that you aren't willing to do the hard work to solve problems, and that you merely want to do as the Israelites did in the wilderness..."and the children of God complained continually before the Lord." We all know how well that ended for them, huh?

Russ White:

Dear Logos: you are a Christian company. You can rise above the way the world works, educate your users, and do the right thing. 

Doesn't the "world" also "work" by making abrupt and aggressively assertive claims about others without any attempt to have the serious dialogue through which those claims can be fleshed out and resolved? Doesn't "the world" demand things of others in a kind of "my way or the highway" attitude? Doesn't "the world" care more about their own interests than the interests of others?? If so, maybe your own advise might be inherently good for the goose along with the gander?  

Russ White:

Bob just closed the uservoice suggestion to allow users to selectively synchronize information to the Logos cloud. 

Any you know this was specifically "Bob" how? Wouldn't it be more accurate to simply say that Faithlife did this? That way you can maintain the integrity and accuracy of your statement. 

Russ White:

Stop storing anything in Logos at all.

Your "suggestion" sounds much like an order. I'm with MJ here. If you want to be taken seriously, please don't disrespect our ability to make decisions for ourselves. Just because you're uncomfortable with the process of data storage with Logos, doesn't necessarily mean that others are. It seems to me as though your post is intended more as an effort to garner support and to arouse the level of discomfort with others than it is to provide resolutions to your concerns. In other words, it seems like you're simply "stirring the pot", so to speak. 

Why not meekly and gently state your concerns, and then offer solutions. I worked in the banking world for over a decade, and I always told my employees that they were never allowed to bring a complaint to me without offering a solution. You really haven't offered any solutions here. You have simply complained and barked orders, in a not so gentle and Christ-like manner, in my humble opinion.

I understand that privacy is a huge concern for people nowadays, especially when it seems like technology is almost exclusively migrating toward the cloud storage scenario. But we're talking about Bible study here, folks. You can call me naïve if you'd like, I don't care. But I don't have my Social Security number,  tax returns, credit card information, date of birth, or my favorite love letters from my wife stored in my Notes documents. Rather, I've got commentary on various books of the Bible,  devotional thoughts, word studies, among other things.

As such, praise the Lord if that data gets hacked. At least then the hacker is going to be reading the Word of God, the Gospel message, and my thoughts related to the Word of God. 

And this idea that Bob needs to beef up security, or needs to move to new levels of encryption, because someone's prayer list could get hacked and a person in China could die as a result is preposterous. Come on! I'm sorry, but you're not going to get me to buy that. While that theoretically could happen, It's just as likely, if not more likely, that I'm going to have a flat tire today, which will cause me to run off the road and kill a family of six. Or, better yet, that me and my wife will BOTH be hut by lightening at two different places on the same day. I concede that a data breach could happen; I do not concede that it is as easy, frequent, or likely as the primary poster or conspiracy theorists might suggest.

I mean, any things possible. We cannot eliminate risk. In the corporate world, the idea of mitigating risk is called Risk Management, not Risk Elimination. I was VP of Risk Mngt for a very large credit union for 12 years, focusing on fraud, loss prevention, security and risk, before becoming a uni-vocational pastor. My job was to mitigate or reduce risk. Everyone at the table there knew that the elimination of risk was impossible, for in order to eliminate risk we must eliminate business transactions entirely. The idea is not to eliminate risk; its to strike the perfect balance between operational convenience and efficiency and security. There's always more security levels that can be implemented; however they're not always cost-effective. For example, I for one would not want to pay an extra 10 or 20 bucks a month in order to have my data encrypted with AES-256 BE (CIA and NSA level encryption - used in the Federal Reserve Bank system servers); it simply isn't worth the tradeoff to pay more money for the elimination of a level of risk exposure that is that minimal to begin with. This is why logical and open discussions about the level of privacy risk someone is willing to assume in relationship to the amount of resources they were willing to expend to mitigate that risk must be had. 

The same applies with Logos. There's a certain level of risk inherent in anything you they do / we do, whether you realize that or not; whether you store documents on your machine natively or you store those documents in the cloud. It cannot (emphatically stated) be proven that a greater level of risk exposure exists by storing data in the cloud. The research just isn't there, nor are the stats (at least none apart from those generated by the conspiracy theorists). We have to admit that those concerns are purely personal in nature, and are not born out of any tangible evidence for concern.

So if you don't want to accept the minimal amount of risk that comes with storing your data in the cloud, simply don't use Logos document features, or better yet don't use Logos at all. But the very same data that you decide to store on your machine locally is just as likely, if not more likely, to be breached as it is in the cloud. This is because in the cloud scenario there's an entire team - long varying companies -  of people mitigating your exposure to risk, along with various complexity to penetrating your data that are not present in the native storage scenario; at your home, it's you and you alone who has an interest in securing your data. 

Myke Harbuck
Lead Pastor, www.ByronCity.Church
Adjunct Professor, Georgia Military College

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Sep 11 2016 4:42 PM

Graham Owen:
In general I'm all for ensuring that sensitive and confidential information is properly protected. Personally though the notes I make in Logos are neither sensitive or confidential.

I agree with your usage policy, Graham. No one will be hurt by my usage of Logos through privacy breach of notes or prayer lists. Of that you can be sure,

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Page 1 of 4 (63 items) 1 2 3 4 Next > | RSS