Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#31

Post by elai »

ghshephard wrote: post #11

I read through the article and thought that pretty much all the activity taken by the Apple Security team sounded reasonable. If I'm not mistaken, everything described was taking place in the work place/work systems/etc... The sketchy companies go a little further, and start doing this with people's _personal_ lives. I'm thinking about when Patricia Dunn (HP Chairman) hired a private investigator to start hacking int…

Wouldn't you have to relinquish your personal laptop/cellphone is such situations too?

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#32

Post by wheels »

tptacek wrote: post #30
wheels wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying that the right is guaranteed by the fourth amendment, just that the logic is similar. Trying to boil down our disagreement: I don't believe that ownership of a device or communications medium entitles one to all of the information which passes through it. It seems we differ there. So for me that leaves no conflict between something not being my property, but the things which are on it still being mine.…

Even in Germany, if a company states unequivocally that computer resources are for work purposes only, they can in many circumstances monitor usage. I want to believe you and I don't really disagree on a fundamental level. Because sure, to the extent that you're talking to your wife on AIM, it is simply none of IT's business what you're saying, and it is appalling that they would paw through logs of those conversatio…

To be clear, and we seem to be approaching a middle-ground, I'm not against any and all technical measures of preventing corporate information leakage. But I do believe that there's a boundary, and it seems we agree here, as to how far that should be allowed to go. Unfettered access to all information on company owned devices as presented (sensationalized as it likely is) in the article that kicked off this discussion takes a flying leap over that boundary.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#33

Post by dotBen »

geekles wrote: post #16

This sounds like due diligence to protect shareholder interests. "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." - overheard in an interview somewhere.

And don't forget, most employees are APPL shareholders - so for them it's worth supporting rather than pushing back upon.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#34

Post by tptacek »

elai wrote: post #31
ghshephard wrote: post #11

I read through the article and thought that pretty much all the activity taken by the Apple Security team sounded reasonable. If I'm not mistaken, everything described was taking place in the work place/work systems/etc... The sketchy companies go a little further, and start doing this with people's _personal_ lives. I'm thinking about when Patricia Dunn (HP Chairman) hired a private investigator to start hacking int…

Wouldn't you have to relinquish your personal laptop/cellphone is such situations too?

If you bring your personal laptop into a high-security area and refuse to submit to a search, then, without calling the police, and unless grellas shows up to school me because I am not a lawyer, all your employer can do is fire you.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#35

Post by tptacek »

wheels wrote: post #32
tptacek wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in Germany, if a company states unequivocally that computer resources are for work purposes only, they can in many circumstances monitor usage. I want to believe you and I don't really disagree on a fundamental level. Because sure, to the extent that you're talking to your wife on AIM, it is simply none of IT's business what you're saying, and it is appalling that they would paw through logs of those conversatio…

To be clear, and we seem to be approaching a middle-ground, I'm not against any and all technical measures of preventing corporate information leakage. But I do believe that there's a boundary, and it seems we agree here, as to how far that should be allowed to go. Unfettered access to all information on company owned devices as presented (sensationalized as it likely is) in the article that kicked off this discussio…

I wonder if I can pull you closer to my side of the middle by suggesting that it's reasonable for Apple to select for the 5th Generation iPhone engineers who are willing to undergo much more intrusive monitoring, especially if they are compensated for that.

Incidentally: drug testing is something you and I could bitch together about way into the night.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#36

Post by JabavuAdams »

tptacek wrote: post #12
wheels wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In more sane countries, they expect to have privacy because there are reasonable worker protection laws. Something of this sort would be illegal in most western countries. As an American that's been in Germany for the last 8 years, it often blows my mind what's actually taken for granted as being acceptable in the US. Searching through employees' mail is illegal here (as would be searching an employee's personal belo…

How is it "sane" for companies not to be able to control and monitor their own Internet connections? People clearly do abuse those connections to violate IP, confidentiality, and insider trading agreements.

I think you've over-simplified the situation to the point that it's a straw-man.

Different societies have different social contracts. There's what is legal, and what is polite / socially acceptable. In many Western countries, this kind of behaviour at a non-military company would be in shocking bad taste.

It kind of depends on whether your society thinks people > companies, or companies > people.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#37

Post by jrockway »

tptacek wrote: post #29
jrockway wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want workplace privacy, you can provide it for yourself, and you can avoid jobs where intense monitoring is a reasonable condition, such as R&D on the industry's most secret products. Can you? Can the majority of people make the right decision here? It's illegal to sell your child to someone. Why is it legal to sell your privacy?

Because that is a stupid analogy.

I don't think it is. People will often trade something for money that they really shouldn't. If a person has $a and wants $b, and someone will give them $b in exchange for $a, people will often give up $a regardless of the long-term consequences.

Apparently selling children was a problem for society, so it is generally not legal now. People made the wrong decision, and it hurt society, so now making the wrong decision is no longer an option, and our society is better for it.

I think selling your privacy for a salary is detrimental to society in the same way, so it makes sense to use the legal system to remove the option. Then employees can't be tempted into making bad decisions with respect to their privacy by their employer, or rather, by the threat of non-employment. Plus, people that care about their privacy will no longer have to be off-the-grid wackos, and their value to society is increased as a result.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#38

Post by DenisM »

The reason why they need these draconian measures is that employees feel disenfranchised and expect to gain more by leaking secrets than by contributing work and sharing in the rewards. Steve Jobs himself would never leak anything - he has a stake in the outcome that the leakers believe they don't.

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#39

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #18
wheels wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not arguing that these things aren't useful or driven by real problem; I'm arguing that they're wrong. As are the actions of employees in harming the companies they work for. But the American stubbornness in me goes back to the same logic of the Fourth Amendment, that despite the no doubt usefulness from a policing perspective of being able to search people without jumping through a lot of hoops, it is still wron…

What does the Fourth Amendment have to do with a company searching it's own property ? I just don't understand why you think that's wrong! I'm an ACLU-giving privacy nut (and I have real problems with how IT security is often managed), and I recoil from the idea that company employees should somehow have some claim on company property simply because they've been allowed to touch it.

[deleted]

Re: Apple Gestapo: How Apple Hunts Down Leaks

#40

Post by wooster »

This is wholly-fabricated nonsense. I worked at Apple for 5+ years and, besides for knowing what actually happens in these situations, there are a couple of dead giveaways that "Tom" was never an Apple employee (or, at least, not in Cupertino).
Post reply on HN