Anyone using JW Scheduler software?

[Qapla]

Maybe someone should simply call or write the Branch and ask them if we are to avoid using JWS ...

 

 

[Aja]

I really enjoyed bro Splane's final talk for the Saturday convention. Really helps put everything in perspective, especially if we ask ourselves those 4 questions. 

[luisenriquereyes]

On 7/27/2022 at 1:18 PM, howudodat said:

Same thing holds true for both KHS and JWS.  While I highly disagree and can easily de-bunk most of what JWS says on their website about sharing, I can do the same for KHS.  I successfully decrypted both systems and decoded the data in under 30 minutes  (but I had access to the computer, I didn't try to access data on the sharing server).  

 

Obfuscated, encrypted data is as secure as it can get.  

As a white hat, are you able to suggest to the JWS programmers better security?   Or suggestions on what to implement for the best security on the sharing servers?

[Aja]

I'm just trying to see if everyone is having the issue that your "My Tasks" screen shows a list of "Duties not scheduled" but it is for weekend meetings where you don't have a CLM timer scheduled? Is there a way I can setup my program so that doesn't happen (I admit to being a notification clearer and it's difficult for me to see those sitting there but there is nothing I can do)? Or is this just an issue that needs to cleaned up so that JWS (properly) doesn't even have an option for the CLM timer on a weekend meeting?

[jayrtom]

On 7/28/2022 at 12:42 AM, Jared said:

This was discussed last September and I agree with @howudodat. If you anyone is going to start condemning JWS they better not be using email, WhatsApp, or any other service that send data over the internet.

The difference is that when you use email or any other similar service you're using it by your own decision. You can share YOUR data if you want. But the fact that an organization (or even just a site, app, etc...) saves your information, doesn't matter where, is against the law! Unless they specifically make you accept that, right before using the service. And that means every user on mobile would need to accept that situation specifically

 

I don't think that is being done

 

Every publisher signs an agreement accepting that their data can be shared with the secretary and the organization. But thats the scope of it. No one can use that data for any other purpose

 

This is no organization procedure it's an european law that can also be appied all over the world if the concerned data is from an european citizen

 

What is GDPR, the EU’s new data protection law? - GDPR.eu

Quote

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the toughest privacy and security law in the world. Though it was drafted and passed by the European Union (EU), it imposes obligations onto organizations anywhere, so long as they target or collect data related to people in the EU. The regulation was put into effect on May 25, 2018. The GDPR will levy harsh fines against those who violate its privacy and security standards, with penalties reaching into the tens of millions of euros.

I don't know how privacy laws work in the US...

Complete Guide to Privacy Laws in the US | Varonis

Quote

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the US does indeed have data privacy laws. True, there isn’t a central federal level privacy law, like the EU’s GDPR. There are instead several vertically-focused federal privacy laws, as well as a new generation of consumer-oriented privacy laws coming from the states.

 

 

I do use JWS software but with a standalone registration. I'm the overseer for the CLAM meeting and I use it only to prepare the parts for the brothers. But I don't send the info anywhere. Just print it, cut the paper slips and distribute them as normaly done before this softs appeared

 

 

 

 

BTW, after I installed the new 6.4 version I lost my registration and the software is asking me to pay again when I did it 3 months ago....

Any one had the same problem?

 

[Jared]

1 hour ago, jayrtom said:

The difference is that when you use email or any other similar service you're using it by your own decision. You can share YOUR data if you want.

But what about something like Google Contacts? Google claims the service is GDPR compliant, but the fact remains that personal (sensitive) information about people other than yourself is being stored online. And while Google itself might not use the data for anything else, my point is that anyone who is complaining that JWS might be storing sensitive info about congregation members online should not use Google for email or contacts. Even if you are not discussing sensitive matters via Gmail, personal details about your contacts are stored online. The same goes for WhatsApp - it stores backups of conversations online, so again personal (sensitive) info about others is stored online.

 

I'm not sure how many Witnesses have GDPR protection, but I'd be surprised if it was more than 15% or 20%. There is an "Allow Data Processing Message" option in JWS that looks like it might have been designed with GDPR in mind. JWS does claim to be GDPR compliant because they do not access the data from JWS. But the sfl does not say that storing sensitive data online is okay if it meets privacy rules of a specific government - it says sensitive info should never be stored online.

 

This splitting of hairs feels silly and unreasonable. There is a massive difference between storing sensitive congregation files in OneDrive, Dropbox, Google Drive, etc and encrypted application data being sent over a secure transport layer. The risk of a data breach while the info is in transit or at rest in the JWS servers is incredibly low and is a ridiculous proposition. Even if an unauthorized person could get the data, they'd need encryption keys from the individual computer. Most services such as AWS or Azure encrypt data at rest, so the bad actor would have to get past that encryption and then get past the JWS encryption. If they had access to the computer and the keys for JWS, why would they need to hack the JWS servers at all?

 

I'd be much more concerned about a brother storing stuff in OneDrive and accidentally sharing it with his family or others, or having his phone lost or stolen and then the docs being available to whoever end up with the phone, or letting his grandkids play games on his phone and then they can access private stuff, or taking his phone/laptop in for repair and the files being visible to the techs, or Microsoft/Google scanning the sensitive cloud docs for indexing. I feel those are the scenarios the organization is trying to prevent, not trying to preven us from using a secure application that happens to store bits of encrypted strings in a secure encrypted server somewhere.

 

[jayrtom]

46 minutes ago, Jared said:

But what about something like Google Contacts? Google claims the service is GDPR compliant, but the fact remains that personal (sensitive) information about people other than yourself is being stored online. And while Google itself might not use the data for anything else, my point is that anyone who is complaining that JWS might be storing sensitive info about congregation members online should not use Google for email or contacts. Even if you are not discussing sensitive matters via Gmail, personal details about your contacts are stored online. The same goes for WhatsApp - it stores backups of conversations online, so again personal (sensitive) info about others is stored online.

 

I'm not sure how many Witnesses have GDPR protection, but I'd be surprised if it was more than 15% or 20%. There is an "Allow Data Processing Message" option in JWS that looks like it might have been designed with GDPR in mind. JWS does claim to be GDPR compliant because they do not access the data from JWS. But the sfl does not say that storing sensitive data online is okay if it meets privacy rules of a specific government - it says sensitive info should never be stored online.

 

This splitting of hairs feels silly and unreasonable. There is a massive difference between storing sensitive congregation files in OneDrive, Dropbox, Google Drive, etc and encrypted application data being sent over a secure transport layer. The risk of a data breach while the info is in transit or at rest in the JWS servers is incredibly low and is a ridiculous proposition. Even if an unauthorized person could get the data, they'd need encryption keys from the individual computer. Most services such as AWS or Azure encrypt data at rest, so the bad actor would have to get past that encryption and then get past the JWS encryption. If they had access to the computer and the keys for JWS, why would they need to hack the JWS servers at all?

 

I'd be much more concerned about a brother storing stuff in OneDrive and accidentally sharing it with his family or others, or having his phone lost or stolen and then the docs being available to whoever end up with the phone, or letting his grandkids play games on his phone and then they can access private stuff, or taking his phone/laptop in for repair and the files being visible to the techs, or Microsoft/Google scanning the sensitive cloud docs for indexing. I feel those are the scenarios the organization is trying to prevent, not trying to preven us from using a secure application that happens to store bits of encrypted strings in a secure encrypted server somewhere.

 

When you create you gogle account or watsapp or watever, you have to accept their terms which include privacy terms

If anyone gives you their contact they are automaticaly accepting the fact that you are going to store that information anywhere. Even when you get a new phone number, you are automatically accepting that your data is going to be stored on the company servers

If you don't want your data anywhere you must stay completly "off the grid"

 

But putting that aside, the data we're talking about is theocratic data and for that is up to the organization to decide how that data is to be handled. And it's up to us to follow the direction

[Aja]

Can we/should we create a separate thread for those who are only interested in following JWS updates and support questions and answers? I'm not interested in this ongoing debate about the appropriateness of JWS. In my humble opinion, it's no longer a constructive conversation but rather just feels like a lot of people are trying to impress their opinions on others. I just keep thinking about brother Splane's part "Safeguard Our Uniting Bond of Peace". It seems we could do well to ask ourselves: am I more interested in being "right" or pursuing peace? 

[Floyd]

1 hour ago, Aja said:

I just keep thinking about brother Splane's part "Safeguard Our Uniting Bond of Peace". It seems we could do well to ask ourselves: am I more interested in being "right" or pursuing peace? 

Me too. Everybody has to follow their own conscience. But I also consider Gal. 6:1. So I voiced my concerns here since I am in the business and know how stuff works. The current direction is sensitive information should never be stored online. Phone numbers and addresses are public as we have seen over the last 2 years in our phone and letter witnessing so I don't have a problem with storing contact info in gmail. But there is other information such as age, baptism date, emergency contacts, field service reports, etc. that might get sent to the "sharing server" for a period of time. I know its encrypted and personally I think its safe. But it doesn't matter what "I" think is ok. I am doing my best to follow direction. I know a bunch in the area who have started using JWS. I explain to them how it works, point out the contradictions on the JWS website, and let them make their own decisions.

 

 

[molnarj]

No offense. Not at all!

 

But have you contacted the brothers who made the software? Aren't they the ones you should apply Gal. 6:1 to in the first place and use your knowledge to help them see what they should change or improve or what ever?

 

Agape!

[Jared]

3 hours ago, Aja said:

Can we/should we create a separate thread for those who are only interested in following JWS updates and support questions and answers? I'm not interested in this ongoing debate about the appropriateness of JWS. In my humble opinion, it's no longer a constructive conversation but rather just feels like a lot of people are trying to impress their opinions on others.

I like that idea! I follow the JWS site pretty closely, but I appreciate the posts on here about updates and new features

I apologize if I have come across as opinionated. That certainly was not my intention. 

 

Much love to you, friends!

[Floyd]

20 hours ago, molnarj said:

But have you contacted the brothers who made the software? Aren't they the ones you should apply Gal. 6:1 to in the first place and use your knowledge to help them see what they should change or improve or what ever?

Honestly I thought they followed this thread. But also they obviously have done their research and came to the conclusion that its ok. They are very well aware of the direction and how their software works.  They are "aware of it." My opinion is not going to carry any more weight. My comments are for people who are not "aware of it," not aware of the direction or how the software works. I have also taken to heart Brother Splaine's talk about the conscience and I know its not my place to enforce direction on others based on my conscience. I said what I needed to say about it. Its up to others to make their own decisions.

[New World Explorer]

13 minutes ago, Floyd said:

I said what I needed to say about it. Its up to others to make their own decisions.

That's right, I just appreciate their time and willingness to develop the software.

Perhaps a little of commendation is appropriate as well. 

 

[Qapla]

Has anyone checked with the Branch about the appropriateness of using this software - or are we still just kicking this subject around without checking?

 

 

[Sooner Guy 89]

I think it may have been asked earlier. But can we remove or edit the sent by signature in the email templates?

[howudodat]

1 hour ago, Benjamin said:

I think it may have been asked earlier. But can we remove or edit the sent by signature in the email templates?

No, it is hard coded into the software

[JJWest]

Apparently even a lot of C.O.’s use it, our CO even said we could send him the congregation records via JWS and KHS . If some CO’s are ok using it for their visits it would probably be safe to assume the branch is aware of it also and would send out correspondence letting us know not to use it if they felt it wasn’t secure?

[Paul T]

On JW Scheduler, you can set up group elders as groups, which means you can issue maps to the group, so all the group can access the map on their apps, makes life easy.   Question, if anyone knows..  it seems the “check in” option doesn’t work with booking back in group maps..  anyone found this, seen any workaround?  Thought I’d check here before emailing the makers.. thanks. 

[molnarj]

41 minutes ago, Paul T said:

On JW Scheduler, you can set up group elders as groups, which means you can issue maps to the group, so all the group can access the map on their apps, makes life easy.   Question, if anyone knows..  it seems the “check in” option doesn’t work with booking back in group maps..  anyone found this, seen any workaround?  Thought I’d check here before emailing the makers.. thanks. 

 

I noticed the same thing yesterday. It doesn't show up in the report either. So in my opinion it needs to be reported.

[Sooner Guy 89]

I apologize if this has already been asked. But is there a way to import a KHS Public Talk file into NWS?

 

Our current PTC wanted to continue to use KHS. We were then simply adding the schedule into NWS. But we are getting a new PTC and wondering if we can simplify it for him.

[Jeffjazzy]

Hello brother. I would assume it could be done. If your congregation have already began using NW Scheduler I would think that you just need to follow the export procedure listed in the directions of NW Scheduler. this is what we did when we began using the program. Our PTC didn't have any problems doing so. If I'm reading your question correctly it should not be a difficult process at all. I hope this helps. 

Jeff E

[Sooner Guy 89]

Thank you for your reply. We have been using it for a year. Secretary, COBE, cleaning. The PTC was locked in on KHS so we never imported any Neighboring congregation information. We now have a new PTC and he wants to import the Public Talk KHS file from other congregations.

[More4me2do]

From the NWS FAQs on importing data from KHS.

 

https://nwscheduler.com/how-to/getting-started/import-from-majestic-khs/

[Paul T]

On 11/13/2022 at 8:20 PM, Paul T said:

On JW Scheduler, you can set up group elders as groups, which means you can issue maps to the group, so all the group can access the map on their apps, makes life easy.   Question, if anyone knows..  it seems the “check in” option doesn’t work with booking back in group maps..  anyone found this, seen any workaround?  Thought I’d check here before emailing the makers.. thanks. 

I’m also getting a lot of copies of maps when issued to a group, making it a bit of an issue, anyone having or had the same problem?  Thanks

[Dantheman136]

In NW Scheduler the app, the assignments are coming up for Wednesday, instead of Thursday for 2023. I checked to make sure it was correct on the main screen and everything seems to be okay. Any suggestions as to why that would be. 

thanks