enjay

Two from me. I've received text messages to my personal and work phones (and also a friend got it recently too) claiming to be from DWP about an upcoming deadline (the next day, as you would expect) to apply for my 2024-25 subsidy. My friend's one started "hi dear" so was obviously fake (!) but they'd corrected that by the time I got mine. A pre-recorded message called my work mobile yesterday telling me they're from Indeed and to add them on WhatsApp so they could discuss an opportunity with me.

99% of what we get collected is pure e-waste anyway - if it still worked, we'd still be using it!

Oddly Gemini appears to be different again, that is 13+ but with consent for under 18s!

Looking at it more, I'm not sure it is even as simple as consent as it isn't an "additional service", it is listed separately within their generative AI section. When you enable it for a particular OU in Google, you have to click confirming you aren't giving it anyone under 18. Is this a non-starter in that case?

Google recently changed things with their "additional services" meaning we have to confirm parental consent for under 18s. Is that actually necessary, or is there a similar exemption for "public tasks" as there is in GDPR? We want to start using NotebookLM with Sixth Formers.

Thanks @andy_b I'll give that a whirl and let you know. I'm testing with a mailbox that doesn't matter before I go for the real one.

Do you mean this: Get-ExoMailbox -RecipientTypeDetails UserMailbox -ResultSize Unlimited | Search-Mailbox -SearchQuery {Subject: "Spam Email" Received:1-Apr-2018..1-Jul-2024} -DeleteContent

Ah, 10 per mailbox would explain why clearing malicious emails has worked in bulk. As for looping the command, it's a bit confusing but I think I have to run the search each time too. I've just tried the purge action again, and it reported deleting 10 emails but with the exact same size as the last time I ran it.

Clearing out malicious emails is what I've used it for previously too, so a 10 email limit wasn't a huge problem (although might mean I left some behind if I didn't know about the limit at the time!), but for this usage case I need to delete hundreds. The results of the compliance search and the purge action are below, showing 1490 items found and 10 items deleted. If I run the search and purge again, it deletes another 10 items with a slightly different file size, so it does look like only 10 items have been deleted each time. That said, the search is still finding 1490 items each time I run it, shouldn't that be going down by 10 each time?

Thanks, that gets me pretty close to where I want to be. The problem I'm still having is the search identifies 1500 emails but only deletes the first 10 results.

Agreed, sometimes it is the right and only course of action, but I would want to be very sure of myself before taking it.

I need to bulk purge a load of emails from a specific mailbox. After a bit of battling, I've got a PowerShell script which does what I want but it is limited to 10 messages at a time, and I'm needing to delete hundreds if not thousands of messages. I know I should be able to do with the Compliance Center GUI or eDiscovery, but I can't get those to work. Does anyone have any pointers or know of good guides on using either of these?

I suspect a lot of HTs wouldn't take kindly to that either!

If you don't have a Business Manager or they're not interested, the HR Manager is a good one to share it with, as they're often relatively senior and have a good grasp of privacy and protocol.

As others have said, the IT involvement in this stops with "are classroom doors locked preventing damage/theft/access?" and "do laptops/applications lock on inactivity?" *. That said, many of us have advisory roles in data protection too, at which point tidy desk/noticeboards becomes important but I think any direction or instruction to colleagues, and certainly any difficult conversations regarding issues identified would come from line management or Headteacher. * My team are useful "spies" on that front though, along with the Site Team, as they are moving around the school a lot so see people's desks/noticeboards/ePost-It notes accidentally projected.

Ideally, the person would copy stuff elsewhere first or forward it on to their replacement. If this isn't practical, we ask the employee to clear out anything personal from it as we may share their mailbox with the new person or their HOD, although we very rarely actually share it. If the circumstances of their departure were a bit messy, we might retain access to the mailbox within IT and conduct directed searches ourselves if the HOD says "please can you look for an email about X from Y around Z date". Ultimately though, it is a school account so "belongs" to the school.

Yes and no, that's not an exhaustive list so I'm asking for other things we could suggest. Agreed, and we would say "here are some privacy things you may wish to consider", not "you must do the following". Some people aren't aware how visible they are, or don't realise how much time students spend trying to find them. This will be friendly suggestions to non-technical people, not a school rule. If a staff member wants to be easily contactable by randoms on social media because they run a business or are in some interest groups, that is their choice. Agreed again. Most people could find these settings once they know to look for them, and Google/ChatGPT can help if not. If they want further help, my team or their other colleagues could assist if needed.

Thanks. That's more about things parents need to know. I'm after things like: - consider not using your full name - consider a profile photo which doesn't have your face - can you be found in searches? - check whether you're posting to "friends of friends" - can anyone message you or just friends? - is your place of work listed on your profile visible to everyone?

Yeah, a step-by-step might not be possible for the reason you give, but we could suggest the changes to make.

Quietly removed too, because the "page updated" date wasn't changed.

I've only ever seen guidance not rules (other than what I linked to earlier, of course!), and you can't see the IRMS stuff without paying now either.

It definitely did say 25th birthday, my link was one of those Chrome "link to highlighted text" things. Curiously, the page says it hasn't been changed since December, but I posted the above in February. The guidance has become a bit woolier now, passing the responsibility on to us to decide (pasting the text below in case the page changes again!): The DfE page goes on to say our data retention policy should meet Ofsted's requirements, so maybe that's the next place to check.

Before I write something from scratch, does anyone have a guide for staff on some suggested privacy settings on social media? We've had an incident here where a number of staff got added in to an Instagram chat by some students. I've shown them how to stop people doing that, but before we circulate that to all staff, I was wondering what other things we should suggest. Obviously it is personal choice for the staff members and some may wish to be easily discoverable, we're just aiming to help those who don't know how or don't realise how exposed they are on their socials.

Ah, I'd assumed the codes were more complex but I suppose if you can cross-reference it against the type of bird it is on, then two digits and a colour (and location, I suppose) is probably enough.

How do they know that? I know the rings have ID numbers on them, so did he get a good look with a long lens or is there some other way you can scan them?