How can I just delete my profile for Apple Communities?

At least, if only Apple shall have access, I know who is to be addressed in case of a misuse.

Not necessarily; there is no place online I know of that would be 100% safe - hackers have been able to penetrate too many different databases that I would not trust any one of them.

It may interest you to know that most internet security experts agree that the one biggest flaw in any secure system is the human beings involved.

If you read up on how the breaches of the Big Ones that make the news occurred, the common denominator is that some Admin got cleverly "Phished" for their password = "The Keys to the Kingdom"

As tt2 has said, if you scrub your ASC user account - little can be gleaned from what remains.

Another thing to consider about "what remains" in the main Apple ID account after scrubbing it - purchase history, email address(NOW false or throw away) and RealName should be about all. Not much use to sophisticated hackers.

To be safEST, you should probably start over with a new Apple ID - being Extra Special Security Minded in creating and using it.

Those same security experts will also say that the only secure system is a "closed" one - no connection to the Internet. But a determined attacker "could" find a way to get into even it... StuxNet & the Iranian centrifuges for example (pretty "Mission Impossible" sounding, but it happened)

At bottom, your vulnerability would really be what you did in response to anything AFTER the breach - changing password would effectively defeat any attempt to impersonate you for nefarious gain.

I have been at this since before all this InterWeb stuff existed, and I am not worried at all. The NSA is watching and I cannot do a thing about it - but I am not doing anything wrong either.

A potential problem with this attitude, is you've sought to blame Apple

for what clearly has not occurred; and appear to seek to lay the same

on their doorstep for any other online issue.

• Apple - Legal:

http://www.apple.com/legal/

Is that fair, just, or equal to the immensity of the internet as a whole?

Also, in targeting Apple, you should carefully read all aspects of the

Apple Legal web pages and consult a lawyer who is either naive or

able to throw countless hours away on a losing your case, for free.

• Contact Apple Legal

"If you have questions about legal topics, we’d like to hear from you. Use this

page to connect with the right department for your specific type of question."

{This method reminds me of a man who called his dog across the

railroad tracks in a semi-wilderness area, then sought to bring a

suit against the railroad when the train hit is dog. Witnesses placed

the man on the Railroad right-of-way, so he was trespassing, with

intent on committing a crime. A lawyer took case on contingency.}

Of course, thankfully, he lost; since that idea involved blocking any

one who did not pay him to use a private crossing in RR property,

to visit the scenic & historic shoreline of a glacier-fed mountain lake.

He was the only person to have a safety incident there, up to then.

So be wary of any opportunistic sounding ideas you may hear if you

choose to pursue this kind of action. If you do not like what you may

have access to online, the lack of privacy, etc... Do not use the web

and avoid all kinds of social media content where you always have

to commit your personal information online to use it. More than here.

Good luck & happy trails! 🙂

[yikes!]

And I too am outta here! > Happy Trails likely went right over a German's head

In defense of the OP, unless someone is an attorney with an international privacy laws specialty, no one here knows how Europeans/laws deal (or wish to deal) with privacy and, just as importantly, how they feel about protecting their privacy (unless they were born or still reside there). There are historical and cultural differences to consider.

I believe I mentioned this earlier, but some/many/all European countries' ISPs must encrypt their customers' emails. That is just one rule. Anyone reading this might find this interesting:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-data-privacy-law-raises-daunting-prospects-for-u- s-companies-1450306033

Here is one small excerpt:

The new version requires any company to delete personal information it has about individuals who request that it be removed, except in certain circumstances, such as when that information is necessary for historical research or for exercising free expression.

So it would appear, unless defined by legal interpretation by correct and informed

legal representation of both parties, that by continuing to reply and engage in this

discussion by the O.P. is to say they're happy with that status quo...?

Seems to me the first question has been solved. Or at least a door stopper applied

and 'solved' indicator appeared at some point of partial agreement with an opinion.

Given much of the same has been covered (across ASC) in various discussion topics

here, some of it removed for whatever terms of use discrepancies, etc; the Legal stance

of product, service and continued use of the online ASC being non-compulsory, one

stops using the product &/or service, if it is found to be objectionable or against ones

true beliefs, etc.

Such is the state of the global community, where distinctive locations or regions do have

varying states of law and some of them do try and get along one way or another. Such

as consumer laws and warranties in the EU/UK vs USA.

There may be in the code of legalese, certain written meaning that allows a certain degree

of complacency or agreement through using the end product; that forgoes certain aspects

otherwise in general law. Such as using a product or service in a region, compared to that

provided in another; the regional rules could be managed in a narrower sense, then. If a

user of a EU or other region ASC or other online product wanted their own access to be

to the letter of their region's ruling, that may be in conflict or slow global community access.

And so, there are many sub-pages and open-ended items that would require direct inquiry

and long standing patience if one expects to get a reply; if one is in a hurry, the user can

always hire legal representation and see if a future date can be set for the lawyers to meet.

Anyway, I posted links for anyone who may wish to start reading at the elementary level;

as the rules apply to these items from the perspective of Apple Legal and their products

and or services, across the global divide. As interpreted and represented by treaty, etc.

Subject to renegotiation and changes in terms... 🙂

The EU law seems to be targeting "what companies DO with the data that they collect about users/visitors" - as far as I can tell, the issue of the data's SECURITY from being hacked may not be part of this law - "right to be forgotten" seems aimed at the folks opposed to being "profiled" for targeted advertising, etc.

Another excerpt or three from your article ...

...

The combination of stiff penalties and ambiguously worded provisions in the new EU-wide data-protection law, which would replace a patchwork of 28 national laws, raises daunting prospects for companies operating in Europe.

...

Executives from some Silicon Valley corporations say that the new law poses a big threat because it combines legal uncertainty with massive fines of up to 4% of global revenues. Some provisions rely on fluid notions, like risk-based harm to individuals, that could be interpreted differently by companies and regulators.

...

The new law also enshrines a broader version of the controversial “right to be forgotten,” applied to search engines since a 2014 decision by the EU’s top court. The new version requires any company to delete personal information it has about individuals who request that it be removed, except in certain circumstances, such as when that information is necessary for historical research or for exercising free expression. Search engines including Alphabet Inc.’s Google said the rule has already proven difficult to comply with.

All this sounds rational and reasonable, until it is put into practice (as these comments illustrate)

Note that besides the NSA(US) - there are other agencies powerful enough to do the same things - and just as well protected = GCHQ(UK), FIS(DE), DGSE(FR) to name a few

The governments themselves are the ones that should be targeted with laws, rules & regs - but best of luck with that

Anyway, I posted links for anyone who may wish to start reading at the elementary level;

as the rules apply to these items from the perspective of Apple Legal and their products

and or services, across the global divide. As interpreted and represented by treaty, etc.

Subject to renegotiation and changes in terms.

Just like ebay, Yahoo, and any other company doing business globally, Apple will need to comply with other countries' laws when that law becomes effective. A few years back, they lost a case in Italy for selling (and charging) for a 2 year Applecare (for Macs, not iDevices) plan which, in Italy (and other European countries), was really only for one year because the minimum mfr's warranty in Italy is 2 years required by that country's laws. So, they were really only getting one year of extra coverage while paying for two. Shortly thereafter, Apple changed/added verbiage in the Applecare legal terms to reflect that.

But, it won't be easy for any US company, what with the lack of basic individual privacy rights which is the "norm" for the average US consumer, having been able to do whatever they want with that consumer's info.

With that, I am going to remove myself here as no one can predict now how/what any US company will do when the laws become effective. I am most likely the only one in this thread who understands the OP's reasoning having grown up in Europe myself and being used to stringent privacy laws.

FWIW, whatever the EU Commission in Brussels sets down as law (with representatives from all EU countries participating) - if it was written to apply to all EU members - will be adhered to by all the countries (and their governments) or they will face consequences.

Providers (networks) are helpless against a determined hack.

We are helpless against a determined government.

I guarantee that we and businesses do everything we can think of to protect ourselves.

Our efforts will always have weaknesses until they are revealed by the hackers.

"Safety" by legislation is a false premise meant to make us "feel better".

We live in a world of glass houses.

Only safety is "off the grid" - but that is merely safe from cyber attack, what about a physical attack where there is no hope of rescue by authorities?

If I put a wall around my property with razor wire atop, place cameras and sensors all over the grounds, keep hungry attack dogs roaming on guard, have armed former SEALS as security personnel, place booby traps on all entrance points to my home, arm myself with all sorts of weapons - a determined, skilled invader can still "get at me".

My Mother is in constant fear of home invasion, and has been all her life. There has never been any form of intrusion into her home or property in all her 90 years. Her fear is not based on reality, it is based on "the news".

A police officer once told me, "Locks only keep honest people out."

There are no precautions we can take to ensure our safety in the physical or cyber world.

"Keep your clothes and weapons where you can find them in the dark." - Lazarus Long (Robert Heinlein)

You do realize that you are commenting on a year old thread? That is not helpful.