Dropbox Pursues Business Accounts, But Falls Short On Privacy Laws

deadeyefred writes "Dropbox last month launched its Teams service, targeted at small and mid-sized businesses — but acknowledges it's not PCI-, HIPAA- or Sarbanes-Oxley compliant. Company executives say they also don't provide a highly visible warning largely because customers in beta tests didn't make it an issue. Should cloud services focused at businesses provide clear warnings if they are not compliant with key regulatory requirements, or should business customers just assume they are not?"

Call me old fashioned

[Dunbal]

But with computers and storage being relatively cheap, and with internet access being ubiquitous, why exactly should I trust a 3rd party with my data anyway?

Compliance == Smart Business

[ohnocitizen]

If they are smart they will be compliant, and advertise that highly. How long until a competitor springs up who is compliant? When it comes to business needs, security is rightly a key focus. Not catering to that is ignoring the very market they want to serve.

They don't need warnings.

[flimflammer]

Companies should assume they are not compliant unless the company tells them they are. I don't think Dropbox should need to put they are not compliant on their webpage, but they should be able to answer questions regarding their compliance if asked by a prospective business client.

Dropped Dropbox

[Bieeanda]

Seriously, if a company is going to shrug and blame something like this on a lack of beta tester vigilance, don't bother with them because you can be sure they'll pass the buck on anything that happens to your data too.

Hell, don't deal with this particular outfit, period. I mean, how could people forget them basically turning passwords off for four hours [geek.com] in June?!