4 ms·

Citations needed on those violations. (I work for Google, and cannot access your data)

by skj 10y ago

__john 10y ago
An old story (from 2010) http://gawker.com/5637234/gcreep-google-engineer-stalked-teens-spied-on-chats http://gawker.com/5637234/gcreep-google-engineer-stalked-tee... https://www.wired.com/2010/09/google-spy/ https://www.wired.com/2010/09/google-spy/ I'm sure if you dug around you could find more. I'm certain it doesn't happen often. I'm not sure how accurate the "source" in those articles is but ... > "We dismissed David Barksdale for breaking Google's > strict internal privacy policies. We carefully control > the number of employees who have access to our systems, > and we regularly upgrade our security controls–for > example, we are significantly increasing the amount of > time we spend auditing our logs to ensure those controls > are effective. That said, a limited number of people will > always need to access these systems if we are to operate > them properly–which is why we take any breach so seriously." > — Bill Coughran, Senior Vice President, Engineering, Google
- chatmasta 10y ago
  Totally unrelated, but when is gawker going to disappear? Didn't they declare bankruptcy? Who is paying the server bills?
  - 1123581321 10y ago
    Univision bought Gawker during the bankruptcy and still owns them.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  Both times, those were rogue employees caught by Google, who had legitimate business reasons to access the data. I mean, Google is a big company. If you can come up with a 100% accurate way to screen for people who would never act in an unethical way, the FBI and CIA would like to have a word.
  - tedmiston 10y ago
    If you have ever participated in an FBI background check interview for someone getting a mid- to high-level security clearance, they have an extremely thorough process down. The only real downside is speed: it can take 6+ months to do enough interviews.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      Well, my point is that they still have moles and foreign agents that slip through. There is no 100% test.

Citations needed on those violations. (I work for Google, and cannot access your data)

by skj 10y ago

Citations needed on those violations. (I work for Google, and cannot access your data)

An old story (from 2010) http://gawker.com/5637234/gcreep-google-engineer-stalked-teens-spied-on-chats http://gawker.com/5637234/gcreep-google-engineer-stalked-tee... https://www.wired.com/2010/09/google-spy/ https://www.wired.com/2010/09/google-spy/ I'm sure if you dug around you could find more. I'm certain it doesn't happen often. I'm not sure how accurate the "source" in those articles is but ... > "We dismissed David Barksdale for breaking Google's > strict internal privacy policies. We carefully control > the number of employees who have access to our systems, > and we regularly upgrade our security controls–for > example, we are significantly increasing the amount of > time we spend auditing our logs to ensure those controls > are effective. That said, a limited number of people will > always need to access these systems if we are to operate > them properly–which is why we take any breach so seriously." > — Bill Coughran, Senior Vice President, Engineering, Google

chatmasta 10y ago
Totally unrelated, but when is gawker going to disappear? Didn't they declare bankruptcy? Who is paying the server bills?
- 1123581321 10y ago
  Univision bought Gawker during the bankruptcy and still owns them.
jimmywanger 10y ago
Both times, those were rogue employees caught by Google, who had legitimate business reasons to access the data. I mean, Google is a big company. If you can come up with a 100% accurate way to screen for people who would never act in an unethical way, the FBI and CIA would like to have a word.
- tedmiston 10y ago
  If you have ever participated in an FBI background check interview for someone getting a mid- to high-level security clearance, they have an extremely thorough process down. The only real downside is speed: it can take 6+ months to do enough interviews.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    Well, my point is that they still have moles and foreign agents that slip through. There is no 100% test.