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

Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

pupuweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 317 posts

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#11

Post by tpmx »

gtvwill wrote: post #8
tpmx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One approach is to run/work for small companies with adult smart people who trust each other without surveillance.

Lol depends what industry your in. Im a one man band msp so I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Most folks don't realise they exist, even fewer use the data produced by the systems. Legit 90% of the time it's just kept in case of gov audit or something going pear shaped and we need proof it wasn't us. Trust is all well and good, but trust ain't gonna pass an audit or get you out of trouble i…

Small software companies doing innovative things. Any business area that might need an external audit is a severe red flag in this context. That also typically means it's less fun, IMO.

A software company running a Microsoft-based email/etc system is also a red flag in this context. I mean, why...

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#13

Post by gtvwill »

tpmx wrote: post #11
gtvwill wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol depends what industry your in. Im a one man band msp so I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Most folks don't realise they exist, even fewer use the data produced by the systems. Legit 90% of the time it's just kept in case of gov audit or something going pear shaped and we need proof it wasn't us. Trust is all well and good, but trust ain't gonna pass an audit or get you out of trouble i…

Small software companies doing innovative things. Any business area that might need an external audit is a severe red flag in this context. That also typically means it's less fun, IMO. A software company running a Microsoft-based email/etc system is also a red flag in this context. I mean, why...

Eh, it's in healthcare. Specifically disability support. I get a kick out of building software that makes providing support for these folks that need it. It makes their lives better, helps them achieve their goals. But it's also a largely tax payer funded industry in my country so hence the audits. Which is ok, as a tax payer myself I'd be pretty gutted if we as a country weren't auditing companies getting our hard earned tax dollar especially if they are in a sector like healthcare.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#14

Post by gigel82 »

m-p-3 wrote: post #6

Next step will be to detect potential attempt at unionizing.

They have "workplace collusion" as a category, and even more dystopian shit, like:

EDIT: apparently these 2 are just jokes, sorry for not checking my sources!

`Negative emotions: Expressions of sadness, unhappiness, discontent, anger, rage, anguish, or existential ennui, as these may negatively affect team cohesion.

Joy: Language suggesting hopefulness, optimism, anticipation of a brighter future, faith in humankind and/or in a loving and benevolent creator, as these may imply that the user is thinking about topics other than the best interests of the organization.`

From https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/v3b2mn/microsoft_...

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#15

Post by Closi »

humbleMouse wrote: post #3

If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool. I'd go as far to say that if you think there is any form of electronic communication that isn't being monitored on some level you're also being foolish.

> If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool.

Mine doesn't. I know that because I am the 365 admin.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#16

Post by tpmx »

gtvwill wrote: post #13
tpmx wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small software companies doing innovative things. Any business area that might need an external audit is a severe red flag in this context. That also typically means it's less fun, IMO. A software company running a Microsoft-based email/etc system is also a red flag in this context. I mean, why...

Eh, it's in healthcare. Specifically disability support. I get a kick out of building software that makes providing support for these folks that need it. It makes their lives better, helps them achieve their goals. But it's also a largely tax payer funded industry in my country so hence the audits. Which is ok, as a tax payer myself I'd be pretty gutted if we as a country weren't auditing companies getting our hard e…

Yeah, makes total sense and I wouldn't want to work there.

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#17

Post by Karellen »

gtvwill wrote: post #8
tpmx wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One approach is to run/work for small companies with adult smart people who trust each other without surveillance.

Lol depends what industry your in. Im a one man band msp so I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems. Most folks don't realise they exist, even fewer use the data produced by the systems. Legit 90% of the time it's just kept in case of gov audit or something going pear shaped and we need proof it wasn't us. Trust is all well and good, but trust ain't gonna pass an audit or get you out of trouble i…

> I literally set up these catch all employee tracking systems.

Does that bother you at all?

Not just about the employees you’re doing this to, but about being part of the system that normalises this kind of surveillance generally?

Is this really the kind of world you want to live in?

Re: Microsoft Purview: Additional classifiers for Communication Compliance (preview)

#19

Post by justinclift »

Closi wrote: post #15
humbleMouse wrote: post #3

If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool. I'd go as far to say that if you think there is any form of electronic communication that isn't being monitored on some level you're also being foolish.

> If you've ever thought your employer isn't monitoring the chat then you're a fool. Mine doesn't. I know that because I am the 365 admin.

> ... I am the 365 admin.

For now. Remember MS can literally run these tools on your communications and if/when something gets flagged... raise it out-of-band to a senior business person at your company for follow up.

They likely have the contact details for senior business people at your company already. ;)

Post reply on HN