[HN Gopher] How companies like Amazon and JPMorgan spy on their ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How companies like Amazon and JPMorgan spy on their staff
        
       Author : pg_1234
       Score  : 40 points
       Date   : 2023-10-01 22:00 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.businessinsider.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.businessinsider.com)
        
       | bonestamp2 wrote:
       | Some places have laws that require employers to disclose to their
       | employees what kind of monitoring they do. I expect we'll see
       | those become more common.
        
         | caladin wrote:
         | I've seen employment contracts that just include a general
         | catch-all for any kind of surveillance, even if they "don't do
         | it right now". This in California.
         | 
         | I take your point though that you're saying some laws require
         | explicitly enumerating them (from how I understood your
         | comment).
        
         | fullshark wrote:
         | Maybe instead of expecting it we should lobby for it
        
       | southernplaces7 wrote:
       | Should they also publish a news headline declaring the sky to be
       | blue and clouds to cause rainfall?
        
       | deviantbit wrote:
       | You should know if work is not getting done. If you need to spy
       | on your employees, you have a problem with executive management.
        
         | NikolaNovak wrote:
         | 1. I agree
         | 
         | 2. To reiterate, I agree :-)
         | 
         | 3. That being said, the only places where I've seen it actually
         | used is where an employee is fired for a cause, fights it, and
         | then company retrieves logs and hammers them with proof.
         | 
         | 4. But still I agree - it's a nasty sleezy slippery path. I am
         | a manager of people and managers and have zero desire for
         | anything like that.
        
         | TheSoftwareGuy wrote:
         | Presumably these companies would like to follow up with finding
         | out __why__ work is not getting done. Not that I agree, but
         | these companies seem to think that coming to the office
         | increases productivity.
        
           | olliej wrote:
           | They're not interested in work not being done. They're
           | interested in you being in the office and at your computer
           | for a prescribed amount of time.
           | 
           | Actual productivity is not something they want to measure
           | here, what they want is control.
        
             | xyzelement wrote:
             | // Actual productivity is not something they want to
             | measure here, what they want is control
             | 
             | This doesn't seem to be a logical conclusion. When you hire
             | someone, do you care more about what they are delivering
             | for you or do you just get some weird kicks?
        
       | zinodaur wrote:
       | Yikes. I use a company Macbook to WFH - the company also offers
       | Linux desktops that you have to self-admin, I wonder if "no one
       | develops for linux" is actually a feature, and would let me avoid
       | the bossware.
        
       | c7DJTLrn wrote:
       | I worked at one of these companies. Yes, office attendance is
       | tracked by badge swipes, but that's no secret. There's an
       | intranet page where employees can see their own attendance and
       | the minimum required. Everybody knew that there was a minimum
       | attendance upon taking the job.
       | 
       | I read a post on Reddit a few months back saying that everybody's
       | body language in the office was being fed into a machine learning
       | algorithm to analyse their emotions and stress levels to feed it
       | back to their managers. Which is complete horseshit. They also
       | said that everybody's laptop camera was being used to scan the
       | surroundings for evidence of alcohol/drug use. Again, totally
       | nuts.
        
       | caladin wrote:
       | Does anyone know if on company-provided macOS/macbook, can these
       | kinds of tracking programs turn the microphone or webcam on
       | without it being indicated in the system?
       | 
       | Obviously, it is a device that's not yours and the company can do
       | all kinds of things such as installing rootkits and other things
       | to do whatever, but putting that aside, short of that level of
       | commitment, is anyone familiar with these kinds of programs and
       | whether or not they indicate in some way (e.g. macOS-level
       | indicators that some app is using the microphone/webcam).
       | 
       | I'm just curious if I have my work laptop in clamshell mode and
       | it goes to sleep, to what extent is it not a 24/7 active bug?
       | Maybe I should be shutting it down every single moment that I
       | don't want to risk being spied on?
       | 
       | Is "sleeping" the macbook and closing it shut, enough? Is it low-
       | level enough of a block, or can apps circumvent even that?
       | 
       | I'm specifically putting aside Pegasus-level circumventions here,
       | since then all bets are off. I'm just thinking about 'off-the-
       | shelf' level apps that companies can license and use.
        
         | dehrmann wrote:
         | Companies doing this have to be extremely careful. California
         | is a two-party consent state. If an employer is found recording
         | a personal conversation in the employee's home, they could find
         | themselves in court with an unsympathetic jury.
        
           | gmiller123456 wrote:
           | Almost every state is one or two party consent. That means
           | you have to be a party to the conversation at the very least.
           | I don't know any state that allows passive recording of
           | conversations in private.
        
             | KennyBlanken wrote:
             | Many employers during the pandemic engaged in all sorts of
             | electronic monitoring on employees with seemingly no legal
             | repercussions. The corporate law firms of America lawyers
             | have almost certainly devoted much time to dreaming up
             | extensive legal arguments and language to slip into
             | employee contracts, agreements, and 'handbooks'
             | 
             | When you're fired for saying something derogatory about
             | your employer that is picked up by your company-issued
             | computer sitting in your home office, do you have the
             | resources to fight them in court, especially given your
             | employer's law firm almost certainly has a cozy
             | relationship with the judiciary in your area?
        
         | paulryanrogers wrote:
         | If you don't have root, and sometimes even if you do, then you
         | cannot be entirely sure. That's why hardware shutters and
         | physical disconnects are a thing.
        
           | olliej wrote:
           | If you have root you still cannot turn on the camera without
           | the physical light turning on, and I believe you'd need at
           | least a kernel exploit to disable the screen indicator for
           | the microphone.
        
         | smithcoin wrote:
         | MDM software only allows to do so much. We use it my company.
         | We can remotely wipe a Mac or reboot it but that pretty much
         | it. I'm not aware of any 3rd party software that can turn on
         | the camera (remember the green light) or capture the screen
         | without the user knowing it's happening. Checkout Jamf it's a
         | pretty standard 3rd party tool, whatever they say they can do
         | is what's possible from a corporate "non-hostile" perspective.
        
         | a-r-t wrote:
         | > Is "sleeping" the macbook and closing it shut, enough?
         | 
         | For Apple silicon-based (and newer Intel-based), yes:
         | https://support.apple.com/guide/security/hardware-microphone...
        
           | KennyBlanken wrote:
           | ...which is pointless, because in the last two major MacOS
           | releases (well, now three) an Apple Silicon system will not
           | only remain connected to any bluetooth audio devices _and_
           | wifi (even if  "wake for network access" is set to "never"),
           | it will actively seek connections with bluetooth audio
           | devices that are turned on or come into range.
           | 
           | Not only is this a huge potential privacy issue, it's
           | extremely annoying, because on many bluetooth headphones, it
           | makes it impossible to, say, connect your phone to the
           | headphones.
           | 
           | The issue with remaining on wifi is also extremely annoying
           | if you're connected to a hotspot device. I discovered well
           | into a vacation that my macbook was remaining connected to a
           | hotspot and using up data - despite both "low data mode"
           | (which has a penchant for magically turning itself off) and
           | "wake for network access" set to never.
           | 
           | There was an option to disable allowing a bluetooth device to
           | "wake" the system, which stops the mac from keeping bluetooth
           | connections active during sleep, but that was removed in
           | Catalina.
           | 
           | There's no excuse for removal of such an option, nor is there
           | any excuse for not setting some logic such that only
           | keyboards and mice retain active bluetooth connections.
           | 
           | The dumbification of MacOS marches on, as some anonymous mid-
           | tier executive at Apple continues his or her mission to turn
           | MacOS into iOS. We also lost wifi network priority a couple
           | releases ago as well - a move that is so unfathomably stupid
           | it defies belief. You used to be able to set a hotspot as
           | high priority and then, say, a cafe's free (and far less
           | secure) wifi network as a lower priority, and when you wanted
           | to do something on the hotspot, you could just turn it on,
           | and your mac would prefer that network. Now it's a roll of
           | the dice at best.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | olliej wrote:
       | Any one working for a company that requires this BS should take a
       | hard line: your job is 9-5, there is not communication outside of
       | that work period. There is not "crunch" bs, there are no longer
       | nights, there is no work during the weekend.
       | 
       | If work can only happen in the office at prescribed time, then
       | work only happens then. If you waste your time and money forcing
       | people to work in a shitty and distraction filled environment and
       | then why should they be interested in donating their time to help
       | you compensate for poor management.
        
       | smithcoin wrote:
       | If you as a company decide to RTO and it's an expectation your
       | employees are in fact in the office I don't see how tracking
       | badge swipes can be considered Orwellian. I draw the line at
       | software installed in employee PCs to grab screens and track
       | keys. I get it's a slippery slope but tracking attendance doesn't
       | feel like "surveillance" while the other software does.
        
       | abraae wrote:
       | > One Time Doctor tool even lets businesses take screenshots and
       | video recordings of employees' screens.
       | 
       | In conjunction with a way to say "I'm on personal time now", and
       | suitable privacy prtections, I don't really see a problem with
       | this.
       | 
       | Trying to establish someone's work effectiveness through
       | keystroke or eye tracking analysis - yeah, that's creepy and
       | Orwellian.
       | 
       | But knowing that an employee is using Facebook instead of working
       | - that's an employer's right I feel.
       | 
       | The big caveat is that these tools are blunt instruments. If
       | there's no way for an employee to say "I'm doing some personal
       | stuff now" then this isn't going to work. Everyone needs to do
       | personal stuff during the day, and why not. However we've
       | probably all seen people who literally sit on Facebook (or HN)
       | instead of doing their job.
        
       | sokoloff wrote:
       | > For example, if your team is meant to be in 3 days a week, this
       | number [days swiped out of possible] should equal 60%
       | 
       | Oh geez. That tells me that less than 30 seconds of thought was
       | put into that line in the policy. Surely, there are PTO days,
       | sick days, business travel days, and other reasons to have that
       | figure show as less than 60%.
       | 
       | Said differently, if it was 2019 and the team policy is 5 days a
       | week, does HR imagine that figure would be 100%?
        
       | sylware wrote:
       | You remember the interviews with HR? Those wanting to "know you
       | better"... which what you told them ending being used as a
       | leverage to push you hard to leave by yourself?
        
         | oxfordmale wrote:
         | HR is never your friend, they are the enemy.
        
           | sylware wrote:
           | My whole professional career was only betrayals following
           | each other. Once I decided "Stop!" and actually doing things
           | to prevent that to happen again: have been unemployed for
           | more than a decade.
        
       | Ajay-p wrote:
       | A FAANG recruiter told me I should assume any company wit more
       | than 100 employees is actively spying on their employees.
        
         | imwillofficial wrote:
         | A FAANG recruiter is not in a position to know this
         | information, and is likely a third party contractor themselves.
        
         | clnq wrote:
         | That might have been a cope.
        
         | glimshe wrote:
         | FAANG recruiters, as most recruiters, know less of tech than
         | pretty much every engineer out there. They have little to no
         | exposure to this kind of information, so they probably read it
         | somewhere (on HN, perhaps!)
        
         | willcipriano wrote:
         | They lied.
        
       | DragonStrength wrote:
       | If you're turning to machines to check attendance, is that tacit
       | acknowledgement middle managers are just as opposed to RTO as
       | ICs? Why would you need to turn to an HR dashboard unless your
       | managers have undermined your plans already? Either the managers
       | are bringing people in and enforcing it or they're ignoring it
       | because they aren't in alignment, which seems like a bigger issue
       | to your ability to execute.
        
       | zrail wrote:
       | Employer provided and managed hardware is treated as a hostile
       | entity on my network. Separate SSID, separate VLAN, no access to
       | local resources whatsoever. I don't even let them talk to my
       | local DNS server, they reach out to Google and/or Cloudflare.
       | 
       | Further, I don't put any personal accounts on employer provided
       | hardware. For example, I always use a dedicated GitHub account
       | for work stuff and the key and password never leave that machine.
       | This ensures a clean break when I'm no longer at that employer.
        
         | ttt3ts wrote:
         | I find it annoying how social GitHub has become. Posting
         | notifying others when I work on public repos. I don't care for
         | my coworkers to know when I am up at 2am working on open
         | source. I also use separate accounts now.
         | 
         | Vlan is a good idea. Doing that now. Thanks.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-10-01 23:01 UTC)