Confidential Information

Can we agree that confidential information, especially from a professional perspective, means stuff that you don’t talk about in public?

Users can of course present any of their own information that they want for discussion, including activity data via public Strava links. Then that’s not confidential information.

Nothing about user data, not qualitative or quantitative aspects is public information other than what has been provided publicly by the user.

1 Like

Is this a for you? Not a lot of context here.


It wasn’t me no, and no harm has been done. I’m more interested in the clarity of expectation here.

I just think Wahoo employees shouldn’t be commenting publicly on user data in any way shape or form other than based on what has been explicitly presented by the user publicly. Probably that often means it’s better not to look through it when it can’t be used in a response anyway, just to reduce inadvertent references.

In principle Wahoo could accept permission to act an agent in releasing details as part of discussion or whatever. I wouldn’t think they’d want to take a risk of misunderstanding there in casual discussion, but that part is up to them. If they have permission, it obviously doesn’t bother me.


If you are referring to specific individual user data then it shouldn’t be discussed or brought up, except by that user. Overall data/metrics which includes grouping of user data I think is fine (for example: across the RGT platform there have been X number of rides).


I’m also confused by this topic thread and am tempted to just say, it depends.

Eg. if a user on a public forum is seeking assistance in reference to something they’ve done, I see no harm in a wahoo employee commenting on it and saying something to the effect of that they looked at it, and what they think about it.


Over thinking everything IMO !!!


Is this topic in reference to this:

If so I have to say that was a disconcerting thing that bothered me a bit at the time and that I happened to be thinking about this morning. It does seem a bit disconcerting that (unless a specific request has been made)
(1) Wahoo employees can make a connection from a forum user to a SYSTM user profile - presumably by matching email address?
(2) It surprises me that Wahoo staff are able to access an individual’s data without a specific request from that user.

I am absolutely NOT having a go at @Coach.Spencer.R here, I’m just surprised that the information was available to him in such a seemingly casual way. That is probably/possibly more of a criticism of the culture regarding data handling and security within Wahoo, UNLESS @BlueGirl had already asked for someone to look at a specific workout or her overall data in detail.

No doubt I signed all my data privacy rights away when I blindly accepted the privacy policy, but yes I was surprised and a bit dismayed.

I have no issue at all about aggregated data e.g x people have completed the January challenge etc


No, you didn’t sign your rights away. Wahoo has a privacy policy that says all user data is “confidential.”

I understand that some are fine with Wahoo taking the liberty to take a question as an invitation to look at their confidential information and comment publicly about that (not just the numbers) but that doesn’t change that others may not be, or that it may not have been intended as such an invitation. The policy (and it’s quite standard) says the data is confidential, not “well, unless we thought maybe you’d like us to discuss it with the world.” I can see many situations where this could be problematic and there’s one clear way to stay clear of those situations.

As for overthinking? No. I don’t want my private data discussed other than the parts I make public. I’m not overthinking that at all. It’s very simple and there is a very clear line.

1 Like

How do you think banks and credit card facilities and just about any organisation that have your data operate efficiently then? If no staff member had access to anything the whole financial system would grind to a halt in about 30 seconds. I used to be a Fraud Analyst in one of our (UK’s) Major Bank’s Credit Card operations. I had access to every customers detailed information financial and otherwise, almost to the point where I knew what they ate for breakfast. I needed to, to keep their finances secure and to be able to spot fraud a.s.a.p. You have to have vetted and trusted members of staff otherwise you could not operate. How they use or abuse that trust is another thing but you still have to have it, whether we like it or not

There’s a difference between having access and going and looking up a personal account in order to inform your comments about a specific person in a public discussion.

Of course Wahoo employees have access. They shouldn’t be commenting on anything I haven’t made public, at all. It’s simple. I’m also not trying to torch this coach. No harm. But I am trying to say hey, there should be a line here, a very clear one.

1 Like

Has the “line” been crossed then as you mentioned that you personally haven’t been a victim of what you are discussing?

So I can’t care until it impacts me? I want to know what the expectations are.

Is our data confidential or isn’t it? I’m not saying anyone should sue them if that’s what you’re asking. The person this happened “to” didn’t mind, so no, no problem from that instance. I would mind. Does Wahoo know that in advance (well they do about me, but not all new coaches might)? It’s ok until it bothers someone?

I’d like to know if this is what we should expect going forward, and not just in regard to detailed numbers. The qualitative facts are no less confidential.


Since @Coach.Spencer.R apologised then I’m guessing he thought he had inadvertently done something he shouldn’t have done so the answer appears to be “yes”, if not why apologise?


He did, and actually that would be enough too, but I felt the conversation still didn’t leave a clear point that it’s not just about “numbers” being redacted. You shouldn’t be talking about people’s private information except in the sense of things like “we are backing up your private information.” Even that, if it’s about one user in particular, it’s worth thinking if it’s not more suited for discussion in a DM.

1 Like

I agree, I have no problem with the original thing - it didn’t affect me anyway(!) - a mistake was made followed by an apology and a redaction. End of issue. But yes, I also agree there is a wider point here.