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

Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 281 posts

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#171

Post by jfengel »

neartheplain wrote: post #101
Judgmentality wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is human pee any more gross than dog pee? This isn't a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely asking.

Human pee transmits human diseases.

It generally does not. Most human urine is fairly sterile. And even if you've got a bladder or kidney infection, it's the same bacteria that you have on your own skin already -- it infects the urinary tract when forced inside (most often by sex).

Human feces, on the other hand, is quite dangerous. Generally you have to touch it or ingest it to get sick from it, but there are lots of ways for the bacteria to spread.

So the urine isn't dangerous, but if people are urinating in public, there's a risk that they're also defecating in public. And that's more serious.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#172

Post by DarkByte8 »

bredren wrote: post #20

We had a driver pour out a bottle of pee directly onto the street in front of our place from his open driver’s side van window on Saturday afternoon. My wife got a photo and then immediately after they delivered packages and left I went and took a photo because I couldn’t believe it. I had not heard about the controversy until then, but my wife had been following it. I read these tweets and I also didn’t believe they…

Can you please not snitch on people like that and instead talk to them? There are dogs that piss on the street and nothing bad happens. If this becomes regular then yes, talk to them and if they don't stop report them. But seeing 1 indiscretion and pulling the trigger on the guy is not ok.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#173

Post by ziddoap »

Rule35 wrote: post #104
bredren wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another option was sending it to media, which I presumed would have gotten attention. I thought the person had a better chance of holding on to the job if it was handled without publicity. I don't have a lab, so I can't determine if it was pee. And I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. Our friend with the USPS said "[at USPS] we’re allo…

Amazon's drivers are contractors if anyone is pushing them to pee in bottles, it's themselves. So there's no actual answer to this issue. Are they not being paid enough, such that they can't pee, or are they making an reasonable decision to pee in a bottle in order to save 15 minutes and make more money. Considering they keep taking the contracts one has to assume that they're profitable, at least usually. > I can't…

>These are contractors and if they don't make money today they can courier for another company tomorrow.

Spoken like someone who has lived a full and blessed life.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#174

Post by vineyardmike »

tmpz22 wrote: post #57
bredren wrote: post #20

We had a driver pour out a bottle of pee directly onto the street in front of our place from his open driver’s side van window on Saturday afternoon. My wife got a photo and then immediately after they delivered packages and left I went and took a photo because I couldn’t believe it. I had not heard about the controversy until then, but my wife had been following it. I read these tweets and I also didn’t believe they…

What were the biggest factors in reporting them? The average delivery driver works way harder and probably commits way fewer immoral actions then the average HN user for a fraction of the salary.

> probably commits way fewer immoral actions

Wow. This seems loaded, unmeasurable, and very unrelated to anyones job.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#176

Post by kingTug »

DarkByte8 wrote: post #172
bredren wrote: post #20

We had a driver pour out a bottle of pee directly onto the street in front of our place from his open driver’s side van window on Saturday afternoon. My wife got a photo and then immediately after they delivered packages and left I went and took a photo because I couldn’t believe it. I had not heard about the controversy until then, but my wife had been following it. I read these tweets and I also didn’t believe they…

Can you please not snitch on people like that and instead talk to them? There are dogs that piss on the street and nothing bad happens. If this becomes regular then yes, talk to them and if they don't stop report them. But seeing 1 indiscretion and pulling the trigger on the guy is not ok.

Blows me away that he/she would even consider trying to get the driver fired over this. That individual works for a poverty wage and clearly isn’t given time to use the restroom by their employer. And your first instinct is to get them fired. Disgusting.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#177

Post by colineartheta »

JeremyBanks wrote: post #135
napoleond wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looks like someone from the security or PR departments took a picture of the ticket with their cellphone and sent them to the reporter. Out of those two groups, Occam's razor implicates the one with a vested interest in currying favor with reporters.

This is a bad take.

Based on the argument given, looks like a fair take to me.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#178

Post by vineyardmike »

swyx wrote: post #149
fotta wrote: post #25

> According to Recode, the suspicious tweets in fact came at the behest of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, who had recently conveyed disappointment to Amazon officials that the company was not pushing back against criticisms that he considered misleading. > But company personnel think Amazon’s aggressive actions on Twitter are “embarrassing.” It's amazing how tone-deaf Bezos sounds.

there's a big difference between "hey guys Amazon isn't pushing back against criticism enough" and "lets start tweeting snarky shit at US Senators from Amazon official accounts". have a little cynicism; Recode doesn't have proof it came from Bezos or it would show it.

I am sympathetic to labor issues at amazon and other places, but a lot of tech criticism seems out of place and undue. Amazon warehouses don't seem fun (i've never done that job) but they do pay fairly well above min wage, which they deserve some credit for. If anything it validates the Senators' pushes for better wages proving it won't bankrupt businesses.

It seems obvious that amazon would want this to be the focus, instead of bottles of pee. They could be a great ally to democrat politicians pursuing changes - amazon shows they can be a trillion dollar biz with change X, amazon isn't chastised in WashingtonDC. Win-Win.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#179

Post by colineartheta »

bredren wrote: post #20

We had a driver pour out a bottle of pee directly onto the street in front of our place from his open driver’s side van window on Saturday afternoon. My wife got a photo and then immediately after they delivered packages and left I went and took a photo because I couldn’t believe it. I had not heard about the controversy until then, but my wife had been following it. I read these tweets and I also didn’t believe they…

The fact that you reported it is far more disgusting and petty than a driver dumping it out.

Re: Amazon security staff reported its own tweets as “suspicious,” fearing hack

#180

Post by throwawaysea »

whoknew1122 wrote: post #115
slickrick216 wrote: post #3

Somewhat off topic but this is actually pretty positive proactive approach to security in the finest spirt of due diligence. It should be ok for people to open tickets to look into curious things no matter how trivial. Tickets don’t have to become incidents. This is what triage is for. The real security incident here is how did the intercept learn of that ticket as that should really be classified.

At Amazon you're encouraged (and expected) to escalate early and escalate often. Amazon security did its job very well. >"The real security incident here is how did the intercept learn of that ticket as that should really be classified." Looks like someone from the security or PR departments took a picture of the ticket with their cellphone and sent them to the reporter. Security tickets are immediately encrypted and…

Someone else in this discussion says this ticket was not locked down (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26626369). How do you know that someone from the security or PR department took a picture? It seems much more likely this is typical left leaning employee activism that is prevalent at tech companies.
Post reply on HN