9 ms·

Geek Squad staff 'paid by FBI' to flag illegal imagery

180 points by alexcroox 9y ago

erikb 9y ago
Dear FBI, I'm happy to join the effort in my spare time. You probably have my Whatsapp and bank account already, so let's just make it happen.
Waterluvian 9y ago
I get it. When you're FBI and your life is having to look at child porn, you've got plenty of reasons to be super motivated to catch these people with whatever means necessary. And with something as awful as child exploitation, a reasonable person can come to genuinely believe that the ends justifies the means. It's still manifestly wrong, but I get it.
- NutriSugar 9y ago
  My concerns are the other issues. What happens when children are stripped from families for normal images? What happens when teens are caught for normal behavior? What happens when people are put in prison over drawings? All three of these have already happened. And what happens when this gets automated and large entities like the RIAA/MPAA get other illegal content added to these searches?
  - inevitable2 9y ago
    Also, what happens when the Best Buy Geek needs some money and plants incriminating things?
  - mfoy_ 9y ago
    The first three are policy / legislation issues. Rather than focus on the FBI / GeekSquad / See-something-say-something bits, take issue with what constitutes "illegal imagery". Basically, all your concerns are about the scope of this, not the essence of it.
    - kakarot 9y ago
      > Basically, all your concerns are about the scope of this, not the essence of it. Congratulations, you've discovered the Slippery Slope argument. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
      - mfoy_ 9y ago
        I think you replied to the wrong person.
    - NutriSugar 9y ago
      Yes, the core problem is the law. But until the law is fixed, I'll take issue with something that extends the application of the law. And I think it does get to the essence of it, because of just how we quantify something as illegal. The laws are very poorly written, where the worse images possible are treated just as no more illegal than images that are on the borderline of legal (not to mention that the border itself is very fluid, especially when considering artistic images that would be illegal if they weren't artistic but which is left up to a random jury to make a judgment call on).
- mayniac 9y ago
  How is it manifestly wrong? From the article: "The documents also suggest that Geek Squad technicians report only material they happen to find while doing repairs, rather than actively searching for illegal content on customers' devices." Oftentimes child abuse imagery isn't hidden at all, it's very likely that Geek Squad employees will come across it at some point purely by accident. It's no different from hitting the report button on a website if you see similar imagery.
- interstitial 9y ago
  I'm pretty sure I'm shadowbanned by the HN-righteous-bot, but are you sure the FBI pursues with vigor? Have you seen how long it takes them to make a case? Years up to and including never. We have a nation of arbitrary laws, arbitrarily enforced between a spectrum of convenience and political metrics. The FBI is an asset-gathering agency, pursuing small timers is to turn them into assets.
snarf21 9y ago
I don't think they should be paid but I don't see it much different than seeing someone assault someone in the store. Again, not a full scan trying to find violations but witnessing a crime as part of your job. A law was broke so call the police. I personally think you lose your rights around search and privacy when you publicly give it to someone else. Even therapists and psychiatrists are allowed to break privacy when the patient is openly admitting to planning to assault/kill someone else. This is obviously a different seriousness but with a therapist there is an expectation of complete privacy.
- ransom1538 9y ago
  It's about incentive. If you pay people underhand money for "finding" illegal imagery -- you will get more illegal imagery. It also gives massive amounts of power to a non officer. These charges are almost impossible to defend. With this type of charge hardcore prison... -- its probably better to commit suicide (guilty or not).
  - snuxoll 9y ago
    > It also gives massive amounts of power to a non officer. It actually doesn't, which is why this is an INCREDIBLY stupid move by the FBI. Evidence submitted that was recovered by a private citizen of their own accord is admissible in court even if there was no search warrant issued or other illegal activity occurred to gain said evidence (breaking into somebodies house and finding CP on their computer doesn't give grounds for dismissal of the case, although the person who did the B&E could still be charged for said act). This is the private search doctrine, and it has well established case law. However, just because you are not on government payroll you are not free from being considered a government agent. If a government employee actively encourages you or incentivizes you to perform a search you can (and likely will) be considered an agent of the government when evidence is submitted at trial - meaning the 4th amendment can be used to throw the case out since no search warrant was issued. This case gives anybody who has been convicted and had evidence submitted by a Geek Squad employee grounds to appeal their case, or for active cases the charges dismissed. What was the FBI thinking?
yanslookup 9y ago
I think people are missing the issue here. Of course everyone agrees with a see something say something policy. The issue is that they were getting paid to report crime. Given that these people are not trained law enforcement, are typically low paid, and there is no chain of custody of the equipment whatsoever there is an incentive and real opportunity here to make crime in order to cash in.
- erikb 9y ago
  Isn't flagging pictures making a suggestion so that a real law enforcement officer can check a reduced number of pictures instead of all pictures in existence? Starting from the real officer making a decision the process is normal law enforcement isn't it?
  - amykhar 9y ago
    I had the same thought, but then realized the tech could plant images on the computer himself.
    - NutriSugar 9y ago
      I'm not as worried about techs planting the images because even among people willing to break the law to make money, this is an area often considered too immoral to touch and the consequences are massive if caught. I'm more worried about people over reporting images and people having lives ruined over the mere allegations and investigations. Photos of your own kids running around a water sprinkler on a hot summer day can be enough for some busy body to call inappropriate. Even fully clothed images fall on the copine (spelling?) scale. Or maybe there is some films of people who specialize in looking young, but who are of age (I remember a court case where a court expert testified than someone was clearly underage, until that person showed up and proved they were of age and were a professional in the industry; imagine what could've happened if she hadn't shown up).
      - logfromblammo 9y ago
        It goes beyond that. My father once tried to print some photographs through Wal-Mart. They refused to do so without a copyright waiver from the photographer--which was him. They looked at the images, decided they were "too professional", and proceeded to enforce the copyrights of the imaginary professional photographer. Not only is this troubling from a law enforcement perspective, but it also provided him with a true story he could use to backhandedly brag about how great his photos are, and also an excuse to purchase expensive, top-of-the-line photo printers until the end of time. ~Thanks, Wal-Mart.~ There is good reason to avoid empowering busybodies to enforce laws on other people in public when they would have no standing to do so in a court. We simply can't trust random people to know the laws they purport to enforce, enforce them fairly and impartially, and preserve the rights of those they target for that enforcement. We can't even fully trust professional cops, judges, and lawyers with all that at once, which is why the legal system is set up to be adversarial. If you witness a crime, you can certainly report it if you feel that's necessary, but paid informants and vigilante enforcers are a few steps too many down a very dark path.
quietbritishjim 9y ago
If I'm an electrician on call-out to someone's home and, totally by accident, I discover someone tied up in their basement, should I report it to the police? If I'm repairing someone's computer at their request and, totally by accident, I discover illegal material on it, should I report it to the police? It seems pretty straightforward to me that you can, and in fact you really ought to. Maybe you disagree with what counts as "illegal" (like if didn't report finding pot in someone's home in a country where it's illegal) but that's a different discussion from whether this is generally reasonable behaviour.
- manjushri 9y ago
  The "totally by accident" excuse is not valid when people are paid bounties to conduct vigilante surveillance. How much money would it take for someone in need to plant evidence?
  - jbigelow76 9y ago
    Anybody dumb enough to go source a bunch of kiddie porn to plant on computers to collect bounties probably doesn't have the smarts to actually pull it off correctly.
- madshiva 9y ago
  It's not that you should or not. Is that you don't know if it's illegal or not. It's like you see someone tied up, thinks it's illegal but it's maybe not. Maybe they play a game and it's on purpose. Same apply with the content, you don't know if it's illegal or not. You are not judge, stick to your job.
- Lewton 9y ago
  > totally by accident not an accident if you're paid to do it
  - mfoy_ 9y ago
    The article does not clarify the nature of the payment. It's not clear whether or not he knew he would get paid when he reported it. It's not necessarily that the FBI has an arrangement with technicians to snoop around.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
powvans 9y ago
If you discover child porn in the course of repairing someone’s computer, you should report it. The problem is getting paid to actively search for it. That sets up some perverse incentives. While it’s unlikely that an enterprising Geek Squader would want to run afoul of the FBI, it’s a very bad idea to create a profit motive for someone to plant this sort of evidence. I wonder about Best Buy’s position in this? They aren’t exactly alienating the non-pedophile public with this activity and aren’t going to lose business over it. That said, deputizing your employees is sort of odd.
- nsnick 9y ago
  I am pretty sure they are alienating a lot of their customers by having their employees snoop on their customers' computers. The argument you are making is "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" which is ridiculous.
  - Cthulhu_ 9y ago
    There's a lot of freedoms being taken when it concerns child porn or terrorism though.
    - FrozenTuna 9y ago
      Its also different whenever you physically hand it over to someone.
  - powvans 9y ago
    I doubt the average Geek Squad customer pays any attention to this. The average customer also knows that they don’t have child porn on their computer and thus, in their minds, have nothing to fear. The example in the story sounds like the doctor had a picture of his grandkids in the bath tub, so of course there is a grey area and it’s terrible if someone is arrested for that. I think that falls under poor discretion and/or badly written laws. It doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t report real “you know it when you see it” porn involving children. Also, how stupid do you have to be take a computer full of child porn to be repaired at Best Buy?
ebbv 9y ago
I think the headline is kinda missing the point here; the issue is not the flagging of illegal images once found, the issue is snooping around people's computers that were left for repairs deliberately looking for illegal images and the violation of trust there. My computer doesn't have anything illegal on it, that doesn't mean I want a Geek Squad employee looking around at what is there. And if they know there's a payday from the FBI if they find something, you bet they are going to look around. Then what happens when they find something not illegal but that they like; pictures of my wife or friends and family at the beach or something. This is really not acceptable on multiple levels.
- tbyehl 9y ago
  I think most commenters are over-analyzing. Deliberately looking for evidence of crime is high effort with low probability of being rewarded. Planting evidence of a crime is very high risk relative to the reward. People with access to someone else's computer snoop for their own entertainment, because they can. The reward is low but the probability of finding something entertaining is high and the risk is practically non-existent.
- ataturk 9y ago
  "My computer doesn't have anything illegal on it" Don't worry comrade, if you step out of line politically or do anything we otherwise disagree with, your computer WILL have something illegal added to it, it's not a problem at all, especially if it leaves your control for a day or three.
nsnick 9y ago
This is a classic example of the cobra effect where Geek Squad employees are incentivized to plant child pornography on customers computers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect
- jerf 9y ago
  This is something that would be beneficial to blast across social media. Best Buy would have to get on top of this if a simple explanation of "why the techs at Best Buy are incentivized to put child porn on your computer and report you" started going viral.
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  The cost of being caught is incredibly high for the employee - they have to illegally download and store, and distribute, the illegal imagery! and commit fraud, and probably commit contempt of court, and be prepared for the fallout from the falsely accused and their family. There's undoubtedly far easier ways for an corrupt employee to get extra cash that don't risk getting a conviction for sexual offences and for fraud/deception. Moreover, your work colleagues have an incentive to report you too. I'm not going to say no-one would ever, but the level of short-sighted stupidity needed is very very high.
  - vorpalhex 9y ago
    This seems a trivial crime to commit. Use an unmonitored public computer to download your illegal imagery to a USB drive, write a little autorun script to copy it half-randomly around and change some names, and boom - done. Sure there's some chance of the employee being caught, but more than likely they won't be. Plus, why would your work colleagues report you (once, for $500) when they can make their own $500 repeatedly? Remember, and this is the important part - criminals are not typically longterm thinkers. They don't think about retirement, medical expenses, or even next week. They're simply interested in obtaining the thing they want today and believe, reasonably or not, that they can get away with it.
  - JohnStudio 9y ago
    A >>former-friend<< was running an illegal FTP full of software on Macs at CompUSA for years through their firewall even. Don't think it doesn't happen. Its like weed growers on state-federal owned land. Worst thing that happens is they loose their job, in most cases. Woop .. flip burgers.
asow92 9y ago
Before I started programming in College, I worked as a Geek Squad "Counter Intelligence Agent" and this is something that definitely came up in conversations with veteran employees. State police were contacted and arrests were made.
jaclaz 9y ago
Recent discussion (different article, same topic): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403
- mfoy_ 9y ago
  I'd say the linked item actually has the better article as it discusses some of the issues with this.
ericfrederich 9y ago
When my son was circumcised the pediatric urologist said if we had any concerns we could text a picture of it to him. I thought that sounded weird, but could see how this is totally legitimate doctor trying to save himself time and save ourselves an appointment, and money for an office visit.
- moccachino 9y ago
  I'm sorry for your son's loss :( Downvote all you want - Doing this to a child that can't defend itself is horrible, no matter how much you think it is OK and for how long it has been done. I speak from experience.
  - djsumdog 9y ago
    I wish we'd see a reduction of male circumcision in the US, like it's been falling in other western countries. I agree it's a totally unnecessary procedure. People are annoyed when they equivocate it with female circumcision today, but there will come a time in the future when we'll look back at both forms and say to ourselves, "How did we ever think mutilating kids genitalia for non-medical reasons was ever okay?"
- lampenrad 9y ago
  Genital mutalation of a child is fine (assuming here it wasn‘t a medical necessity. Maybe it was in this case, hence why I didn‘t downvote), but taking a completely non-sexual photograph of a healing wound is considered weird. Sums up modern America pretty well.
chasd00 9y ago
It should cost Best Buy a $100 processing fee to report child porn. That's a small price to pay to catch a criminal but too high to go actively snooping through hard drives.
throwawaymanbot 9y ago
Although its an older story, its important, because in the future with the erosion of privacy by design, and ubiquitous surveillance you can be damn sure that the FBI and others will be paying/coercing more companies to proactively Report "Crime" - Best Buy Style.
SirFatty 9y ago
As if I needed another reason not to shop as Best buy.
sathackr 9y ago
Previous discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
JohnStudio 9y ago
define "illegal" imagery .. two steps to avoid 1337 h@x0rs is to not send in a personal hard drive in the first place. Ethics at the $10/h counter is about as transparent as this glass of water I'm drinking. Morality, especially when a smart 18 year old, sees cash -> a few bits of planted evidence -> huge pay day (relative to what they know as such) can be a lot easier to overcome thanks to money. I replace the storage device on my Apple laptops immediately, and store it in case a unit dies. Warranty services outside of the care of a local shop - mail in stuff - is also a big no-no. Nobody looking at my 4th Amendment rights. Call me paranoid, but if you are remotely ignorant to the fact that snooping teenagers aren't looking through your stuff ... think again. It's just common sense to just replace the drive as a matter of privacy.
Sevii 9y ago
Would you hire geek squad if you knew they were paid to look through your photos for the FBI?
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  I wouldn't hire Geek Squad even if I didn't know that. (And even if I didn't know about the stories of their staff trolling through private data long before the FBI started paying them to.)

180 points by alexcroox 9y ago

Dear FBI, I'm happy to join the effort in my spare time. You probably have my Whatsapp and bank account already, so let's just make it happen.

Waterluvian 9y ago

I get it. When you're FBI and your life is having to look at child porn, you've got plenty of reasons to be super motivated to catch these people with whatever means necessary. And with something as awful as child exploitation, a reasonable person can come to genuinely believe that the ends justifies the means. It's still manifestly wrong, but I get it.

NutriSugar 9y ago
My concerns are the other issues. What happens when children are stripped from families for normal images? What happens when teens are caught for normal behavior? What happens when people are put in prison over drawings? All three of these have already happened. And what happens when this gets automated and large entities like the RIAA/MPAA get other illegal content added to these searches?
- inevitable2 9y ago
  Also, what happens when the Best Buy Geek needs some money and plants incriminating things?
- mfoy_ 9y ago
  The first three are policy / legislation issues. Rather than focus on the FBI / GeekSquad / See-something-say-something bits, take issue with what constitutes "illegal imagery". Basically, all your concerns are about the scope of this, not the essence of it.
  - kakarot 9y ago
    > Basically, all your concerns are about the scope of this, not the essence of it. Congratulations, you've discovered the Slippery Slope argument. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope
    - mfoy_ 9y ago
      I think you replied to the wrong person.
  - NutriSugar 9y ago
    Yes, the core problem is the law. But until the law is fixed, I'll take issue with something that extends the application of the law. And I think it does get to the essence of it, because of just how we quantify something as illegal. The laws are very poorly written, where the worse images possible are treated just as no more illegal than images that are on the borderline of legal (not to mention that the border itself is very fluid, especially when considering artistic images that would be illegal if they weren't artistic but which is left up to a random jury to make a judgment call on).
mayniac 9y ago
How is it manifestly wrong? From the article: "The documents also suggest that Geek Squad technicians report only material they happen to find while doing repairs, rather than actively searching for illegal content on customers' devices." Oftentimes child abuse imagery isn't hidden at all, it's very likely that Geek Squad employees will come across it at some point purely by accident. It's no different from hitting the report button on a website if you see similar imagery.
interstitial 9y ago
I'm pretty sure I'm shadowbanned by the HN-righteous-bot, but are you sure the FBI pursues with vigor? Have you seen how long it takes them to make a case? Years up to and including never. We have a nation of arbitrary laws, arbitrarily enforced between a spectrum of convenience and political metrics. The FBI is an asset-gathering agency, pursuing small timers is to turn them into assets.

snarf21 9y ago

I don't think they should be paid but I don't see it much different than seeing someone assault someone in the store. Again, not a full scan trying to find violations but witnessing a crime as part of your job. A law was broke so call the police. I personally think you lose your rights around search and privacy when you publicly give it to someone else. Even therapists and psychiatrists are allowed to break privacy when the patient is openly admitting to planning to assault/kill someone else. This is obviously a different seriousness but with a therapist there is an expectation of complete privacy.

ransom1538 9y ago
It's about incentive. If you pay people underhand money for "finding" illegal imagery -- you will get more illegal imagery. It also gives massive amounts of power to a non officer. These charges are almost impossible to defend. With this type of charge hardcore prison... -- its probably better to commit suicide (guilty or not).
- snuxoll 9y ago
  > It also gives massive amounts of power to a non officer. It actually doesn't, which is why this is an INCREDIBLY stupid move by the FBI. Evidence submitted that was recovered by a private citizen of their own accord is admissible in court even if there was no search warrant issued or other illegal activity occurred to gain said evidence (breaking into somebodies house and finding CP on their computer doesn't give grounds for dismissal of the case, although the person who did the B&E could still be charged for said act). This is the private search doctrine, and it has well established case law. However, just because you are not on government payroll you are not free from being considered a government agent. If a government employee actively encourages you or incentivizes you to perform a search you can (and likely will) be considered an agent of the government when evidence is submitted at trial - meaning the 4th amendment can be used to throw the case out since no search warrant was issued. This case gives anybody who has been convicted and had evidence submitted by a Geek Squad employee grounds to appeal their case, or for active cases the charges dismissed. What was the FBI thinking?

yanslookup 9y ago

I think people are missing the issue here. Of course everyone agrees with a see something say something policy. The issue is that they were getting paid to report crime. Given that these people are not trained law enforcement, are typically low paid, and there is no chain of custody of the equipment whatsoever there is an incentive and real opportunity here to make crime in order to cash in.

erikb 9y ago
Isn't flagging pictures making a suggestion so that a real law enforcement officer can check a reduced number of pictures instead of all pictures in existence? Starting from the real officer making a decision the process is normal law enforcement isn't it?
- amykhar 9y ago
  I had the same thought, but then realized the tech could plant images on the computer himself.
  - NutriSugar 9y ago
    I'm not as worried about techs planting the images because even among people willing to break the law to make money, this is an area often considered too immoral to touch and the consequences are massive if caught. I'm more worried about people over reporting images and people having lives ruined over the mere allegations and investigations. Photos of your own kids running around a water sprinkler on a hot summer day can be enough for some busy body to call inappropriate. Even fully clothed images fall on the copine (spelling?) scale. Or maybe there is some films of people who specialize in looking young, but who are of age (I remember a court case where a court expert testified than someone was clearly underage, until that person showed up and proved they were of age and were a professional in the industry; imagine what could've happened if she hadn't shown up).
    - logfromblammo 9y ago
      It goes beyond that. My father once tried to print some photographs through Wal-Mart. They refused to do so without a copyright waiver from the photographer--which was him. They looked at the images, decided they were "too professional", and proceeded to enforce the copyrights of the imaginary professional photographer. Not only is this troubling from a law enforcement perspective, but it also provided him with a true story he could use to backhandedly brag about how great his photos are, and also an excuse to purchase expensive, top-of-the-line photo printers until the end of time. ~Thanks, Wal-Mart.~ There is good reason to avoid empowering busybodies to enforce laws on other people in public when they would have no standing to do so in a court. We simply can't trust random people to know the laws they purport to enforce, enforce them fairly and impartially, and preserve the rights of those they target for that enforcement. We can't even fully trust professional cops, judges, and lawyers with all that at once, which is why the legal system is set up to be adversarial. If you witness a crime, you can certainly report it if you feel that's necessary, but paid informants and vigilante enforcers are a few steps too many down a very dark path.

quietbritishjim 9y ago

If I'm an electrician on call-out to someone's home and, totally by accident, I discover someone tied up in their basement, should I report it to the police? If I'm repairing someone's computer at their request and, totally by accident, I discover illegal material on it, should I report it to the police? It seems pretty straightforward to me that you can, and in fact you really ought to. Maybe you disagree with what counts as "illegal" (like if didn't report finding pot in someone's home in a country where it's illegal) but that's a different discussion from whether this is generally reasonable behaviour.

manjushri 9y ago
The "totally by accident" excuse is not valid when people are paid bounties to conduct vigilante surveillance. How much money would it take for someone in need to plant evidence?
- jbigelow76 9y ago
  Anybody dumb enough to go source a bunch of kiddie porn to plant on computers to collect bounties probably doesn't have the smarts to actually pull it off correctly.
madshiva 9y ago
It's not that you should or not. Is that you don't know if it's illegal or not. It's like you see someone tied up, thinks it's illegal but it's maybe not. Maybe they play a game and it's on purpose. Same apply with the content, you don't know if it's illegal or not. You are not judge, stick to your job.
Lewton 9y ago
> totally by accident not an accident if you're paid to do it
- mfoy_ 9y ago
  The article does not clarify the nature of the payment. It's not clear whether or not he knew he would get paid when he reported it. It's not necessarily that the FBI has an arrangement with technicians to snoop around.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

powvans 9y ago

If you discover child porn in the course of repairing someone’s computer, you should report it. The problem is getting paid to actively search for it. That sets up some perverse incentives. While it’s unlikely that an enterprising Geek Squader would want to run afoul of the FBI, it’s a very bad idea to create a profit motive for someone to plant this sort of evidence. I wonder about Best Buy’s position in this? They aren’t exactly alienating the non-pedophile public with this activity and aren’t going to lose business over it. That said, deputizing your employees is sort of odd.

nsnick 9y ago
I am pretty sure they are alienating a lot of their customers by having their employees snoop on their customers' computers. The argument you are making is "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" which is ridiculous.
- Cthulhu_ 9y ago
  There's a lot of freedoms being taken when it concerns child porn or terrorism though.
  - FrozenTuna 9y ago
    Its also different whenever you physically hand it over to someone.
- powvans 9y ago
  I doubt the average Geek Squad customer pays any attention to this. The average customer also knows that they don’t have child porn on their computer and thus, in their minds, have nothing to fear. The example in the story sounds like the doctor had a picture of his grandkids in the bath tub, so of course there is a grey area and it’s terrible if someone is arrested for that. I think that falls under poor discretion and/or badly written laws. It doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t report real “you know it when you see it” porn involving children. Also, how stupid do you have to be take a computer full of child porn to be repaired at Best Buy?

ebbv 9y ago

I think the headline is kinda missing the point here; the issue is not the flagging of illegal images once found, the issue is snooping around people's computers that were left for repairs deliberately looking for illegal images and the violation of trust there. My computer doesn't have anything illegal on it, that doesn't mean I want a Geek Squad employee looking around at what is there. And if they know there's a payday from the FBI if they find something, you bet they are going to look around. Then what happens when they find something not illegal but that they like; pictures of my wife or friends and family at the beach or something. This is really not acceptable on multiple levels.

tbyehl 9y ago
I think most commenters are over-analyzing. Deliberately looking for evidence of crime is high effort with low probability of being rewarded. Planting evidence of a crime is very high risk relative to the reward. People with access to someone else's computer snoop for their own entertainment, because they can. The reward is low but the probability of finding something entertaining is high and the risk is practically non-existent.
ataturk 9y ago
"My computer doesn't have anything illegal on it" Don't worry comrade, if you step out of line politically or do anything we otherwise disagree with, your computer WILL have something illegal added to it, it's not a problem at all, especially if it leaves your control for a day or three.

nsnick 9y ago

This is a classic example of the cobra effect where Geek Squad employees are incentivized to plant child pornography on customers computers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect

jerf 9y ago
This is something that would be beneficial to blast across social media. Best Buy would have to get on top of this if a simple explanation of "why the techs at Best Buy are incentivized to put child porn on your computer and report you" started going viral.
pbhjpbhj 9y ago
The cost of being caught is incredibly high for the employee - they have to illegally download and store, and distribute, the illegal imagery! and commit fraud, and probably commit contempt of court, and be prepared for the fallout from the falsely accused and their family. There's undoubtedly far easier ways for an corrupt employee to get extra cash that don't risk getting a conviction for sexual offences and for fraud/deception. Moreover, your work colleagues have an incentive to report you too. I'm not going to say no-one would ever, but the level of short-sighted stupidity needed is very very high.
- vorpalhex 9y ago
  This seems a trivial crime to commit. Use an unmonitored public computer to download your illegal imagery to a USB drive, write a little autorun script to copy it half-randomly around and change some names, and boom - done. Sure there's some chance of the employee being caught, but more than likely they won't be. Plus, why would your work colleagues report you (once, for $500) when they can make their own $500 repeatedly? Remember, and this is the important part - criminals are not typically longterm thinkers. They don't think about retirement, medical expenses, or even next week. They're simply interested in obtaining the thing they want today and believe, reasonably or not, that they can get away with it.
- JohnStudio 9y ago
  A >>former-friend<< was running an illegal FTP full of software on Macs at CompUSA for years through their firewall even. Don't think it doesn't happen. Its like weed growers on state-federal owned land. Worst thing that happens is they loose their job, in most cases. Woop .. flip burgers.

asow92 9y ago

Before I started programming in College, I worked as a Geek Squad "Counter Intelligence Agent" and this is something that definitely came up in conversations with veteran employees. State police were contacted and arrests were made.

jaclaz 9y ago

Recent discussion (different article, same topic): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403

mfoy_ 9y ago
I'd say the linked item actually has the better article as it discusses some of the issues with this.

ericfrederich 9y ago

When my son was circumcised the pediatric urologist said if we had any concerns we could text a picture of it to him. I thought that sounded weird, but could see how this is totally legitimate doctor trying to save himself time and save ourselves an appointment, and money for an office visit.

moccachino 9y ago
I'm sorry for your son's loss :( Downvote all you want - Doing this to a child that can't defend itself is horrible, no matter how much you think it is OK and for how long it has been done. I speak from experience.
- djsumdog 9y ago
  I wish we'd see a reduction of male circumcision in the US, like it's been falling in other western countries. I agree it's a totally unnecessary procedure. People are annoyed when they equivocate it with female circumcision today, but there will come a time in the future when we'll look back at both forms and say to ourselves, "How did we ever think mutilating kids genitalia for non-medical reasons was ever okay?"
lampenrad 9y ago
Genital mutalation of a child is fine (assuming here it wasn‘t a medical necessity. Maybe it was in this case, hence why I didn‘t downvote), but taking a completely non-sexual photograph of a healing wound is considered weird. Sums up modern America pretty well.

chasd00 9y ago

It should cost Best Buy a $100 processing fee to report child porn. That's a small price to pay to catch a criminal but too high to go actively snooping through hard drives.

throwawaymanbot 9y ago

Although its an older story, its important, because in the future with the erosion of privacy by design, and ubiquitous surveillance you can be damn sure that the FBI and others will be paying/coercing more companies to proactively Report "Crime" - Best Buy Style.

SirFatty 9y ago

As if I needed another reason not to shop as Best buy.

sathackr 9y ago

Previous discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16533403

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

JohnStudio 9y ago

define "illegal" imagery .. two steps to avoid 1337 h@x0rs is to not send in a personal hard drive in the first place. Ethics at the $10/h counter is about as transparent as this glass of water I'm drinking. Morality, especially when a smart 18 year old, sees cash -> a few bits of planted evidence -> huge pay day (relative to what they know as such) can be a lot easier to overcome thanks to money. I replace the storage device on my Apple laptops immediately, and store it in case a unit dies. Warranty services outside of the care of a local shop - mail in stuff - is also a big no-no. Nobody looking at my 4th Amendment rights. Call me paranoid, but if you are remotely ignorant to the fact that snooping teenagers aren't looking through your stuff ... think again. It's just common sense to just replace the drive as a matter of privacy.

Sevii 9y ago

Would you hire geek squad if you knew they were paid to look through your photos for the FBI?

dragonwriter 9y ago
I wouldn't hire Geek Squad even if I didn't know that. (And even if I didn't know about the stories of their staff trolling through private data long before the FBI started paying them to.)