I didn’t expect a debate here, but I don’t see this as very problematic.
First of all, the phone field is optional. No one expects anyone to provide any information they don’t want to.
Second, the method I propose is the way TMI handles it. The [contact club] link on Toastmasters.org requests name, phone, and email. TMI in return provides a contact phone number for the club, and it is optional. They do not provide the name associated with the number the way FTH does.
Your suggested work-around, creating a google voice number, is delegating security to the club level. Toastmasters clubs are not sophisticated organizations with IT specialists on staff. They are a ragtag band of volunteers who assume you, the FTH website provider, are looking out for them.
The current configuration creates asymmetrical risk. Club officers are exposing their name and number freely to the entire internet universe, and I suspect most club officers don’t even know their names are published.
I have not studied GDPR considerations, but I’m sure they don’t insist on every site providing a personal name and phone number in exchange for requesting a phone number from an interested party.
As of now, our only protection is that Toastmasters is a small organization that is not very interesting to bad actors. But, if someone with sinister intent did stumble on this FTH vulnerability, it would be a simple task to create a script to scrape every name and number off of the FTH platform. Then, it would be too late.
Last edit: 2 years 11 months ago by peterb323.
The following user(s) said Thank You: SteveTheTechie
The topic has been locked.