3 ms·
Is there a protection that prevents the government from requiring an employee take an action that may be discovered? Or even a reason? I mean, unless the back
by _Nat_ 8y ago
Is there a protection that prevents the government from requiring an employee take an action that may be discovered?
Or even a reason? I mean, unless the backdoor has a hard-coded URL like `www.ThisIsAGovernmentBackdoor.gov.au`, then a backdoor wouldn't seem to automatically implicate the government. Then an employer might well assume that the employee is just doing their own hacking. And presumably the employee can't say otherwise, right?
Or does the law say that employees can refuse if they fear discovery? And if so, couldn't employees always just refuse on that basis?
- bryanrasmussen 8y agoI'm not saying the employees can refuse, I'm saying the employees can say I will be discovered because of this reason. I naively suppose the police are like me in that they do things with a purpose in mind, and if they cannot achieve their purpose by an action they refrain from it as a waste of energy. If their purpose is to hack company X, are informed that the way they intend to do it will be discovered and expose the tool they were going to use, then I expect they would refrain from doing that and try to find some other way. If they do not refrain then their purpose must not be to hack company X but really just to expose the tool for some reason. However if they just say I will likely be discovered because of this reason, the police will probably just say "that's a risk we're willing to take!" and go for it.