Show Advanced KnowledgeHide Advanced Knowledge

Procedures for Deleting / Anonymizing xAPI Data

If you need any help in filling out this wiki page, please visit our ILIAS Community FAQ. And please complete the metadata information in the right column after having created the page.

1 Initial Problem

If data in the Learning Record Store (LRS) could be deleted from ILIAS - even automatically - then data protection requirements could be met more easily and with less work.

2 Conceptual Summary

The following scenarios are to be mapped:

• If a user has the right, he can delete his own data.
• If the user has the right to delete data of other users, he can delete data for all or a subset of users.

The scenarios mentioned are integrated into the xAPI statement viewer in order to get immediate feedback on the execution.

Furthermore, automated data should be deleted or anonymized.

• When object is deleted
• When users are deleted

During the event that initiates the deletion process, indicators of the data to be deleted are written to a queue. The queue is processed via CronJob and unsuccessful deletions are also marked.

Data that was stored via State-API is also deleted / anonymized.
Data from the same users that are stored with different mail addresses in the LRS will also be deleted.
Whether an anonymization or a deletion should take place can be set

• at the cmi5/xAPI object itself
• by default for all objects via administration
• by default of the user

3 User Interface Modifications

3.1 List of Affected Views

• … { Please list titles of all views (screens) of ILIAS that should be modified, newly introduced or removed. }

3.2 User Interface Details

{ For each of these views please list all user interface elements that should be modified, added or removed. Please provide the textual appearance of the UI elements and their interactive behaviour. }

3.3 New User Interface Concepts

{ If the proposal introduces any completely new user interface elements, you might consult UI Kitchen Sink in order to find the necessary information to propose new UI-Concepts. Note that any maintainer might gladly assist you with this. }

3.4 Accessibility Implications

{ If the proposal contains potential accessibility issues that are neither covered by existing UI components nor clarified by guidelines, please list them here. For every potential issue please either propose a solution or write down a short risk assessment about potential fallout if there would be no solution for the issue. }

4 Technical Information

{ The maintainer has to provide necessary technical information, e.g. dependencies on other ILIAS components, necessary modifications in general services/architecture, potential security or performance issues. }

5 Privacy

{ Please list all personal data that will need to be stored or processed to implement this feature. For each date give a short explanation why it is necessary to use that date. }

6 Security

{ Does the feature include any special security relevant changes, e.g. the introducion of new endpoints or other new possible attack vectors. If yes, please explain these implications and include a commitment to deliver a written security concept as part of the feature development. This concept will need an additional approvement by the JourFixe. }

7 Contact

• Author of the Request: Kohnle, Uwe [ukohnle]
• Maintainer: Kohnle, Uwe [ukohnle]
• Implementation of the feature is done by: {The maintainer must add the name of the implementing developer.}

8 Funding

If you are interest in funding this feature, please add your name and institution to this list.

• …

9 Discussion

10 Implementation

{ The maintainer has to give a description of the final implementation and add screenshots if possible. }

Test Cases

Test cases completed at {date} by {user}

• {Test case number linked to Testrail} : {test case title}

Approval

Approved at {date} by {user}.