131–140 of 259 posts
PGP is the gold standard but the ease of use wins again.
I recommend filing a report with the Microsoft Security Response Center, especially in light that a malicious party may now have information on you, and as people below pointed out there may be (1) risk of Doxing, and/or (2) there are some suggestions that Microsoft (LinkedIn) employees may be compromised. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/msrc (Report an Issue)
Quoted post unavailable.
Do social networks stand a chance against infiltration? With the high turnover of moderators, it's easy to get somebody on the inside to get to know the inner workings of the moderation process.
1 can be achieved by making it costly to break the rules. If new accounts have fees and privileges that accumulate over time (such as being able to post links, upload media, etc basically anything that is prone to abuse) then people will be less likely to break the rules since creating a new account will cost them money and time having to "level up" the new account before it can be useful again. This raises the cost of spamming dramatically and will often make it unprofitable.
Stack Exchange has a model of this where new accounts with little "reputation" can't do much and are heavily rate-limited & unable to post links/images and gaining reputation involves contributing to the community which makes spam significantly harder. The same "reputation" system is used to encourage people to moderate the community (in a way that requires input from multiple people & fully transparent, so misuse is hard and will be easily detected).
2 involves making money which means "growth & engagement" goes out the window and you need to charge for the service. Not being based on "growth & engagement" means you can also achieve 1 because you can now be selective with the kinds of people & content you accept.
> it's easy to get somebody on the inside to get to know the inner workings of the moderation process.
Knowing the process shouldn't be a problem. Ideally the process should already be public - aka the list of "rules" one should abide by when joining the community.
This is a non-problem that forums from back in the day managed to solve on a much lower (often zero) budget. It's only a problem when your business model is "growth & engagement".
I never thought I would say this but LinkedIn seems to have gone even further downhill than it was a few years ago. You know things are bad when even the low end recruiters seem to have left the platform. These days 90% of the contacts/connect requests I receive are from dodgy pension "advisors" trying to get their hands on my pension pot cash.
Further downhill than secretly installing an IMAP proxy on your phone and hijacking all your email to go through it in a way that destroyed all TLS security to your real mail server? Impressive...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't even need LinkedIn Pro btw, they just have to turn Private Mode off. If you let other people see that you viewed their profile then LinkedIn will let you see who viewed your profile. So yeah your theory seems most likely unless OP had Private Mode turned on for his profile (then they wouldn't be able to see that he saw their profile regardless of whether or not they have LinkedIn Pro).
My ESTA ran out shortly after covid started, and I didn't renew it until Febuary this year. Shortly after putting in for it, my linkedin reported I had a visit from a "Law Enforcement professional from the Washington-Baltimore area", which I thought was amusing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Not OP, but if you are from LinkedIn or affiliated in any way I hope you understand the apperance of you as a fresh account with 2 karma just inquiring for the case # must seem odd and not entirely legit. In any case, it raises a set of red flags for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did that maybe 10 years ago and haven't had a single opportunity to regret.
I did that 10 years ago when they got hacked[1], later recruiters from two FAANG companies even found me without it (The first found me on Github, and another through a referral) and I worked for a couple of years at both companies. Like you, I'd thought I had a good run without it. More recently, I noticed that some of the people who were way junior to me earlier in my career, are way ahead of me because they were s…
I do very actively maintain my linkedin page, but honestly I got all of my jobs by personally reaching out to companies where I want to work (through their own website).
As such, I wonder if this is correlation vs causation: people are really eager to advance their career might want to keep all options open, including linkedin, regardless of whether it has actually helped them in their career so far.
Good to know, makes me consider closing my account myself. Linkedin always had a bit of a scammy feeling to it. Especially when it comes to recruiters' spam messages.
I got surprising results sending canned messages back asking for basically a 50% salary bump over my current. Never followed through but at least one person said "I can do that."