4 ms·
"but in a tech company there's always going to be a significant number of people with direct access to the raw data" This is absolutely not true. This number c
by CydeWeys 7y ago
"but in a tech company there's always going to be a significant number of people with direct access to the raw data"
This is absolutely not true. This number can and should be reduced to an absolute minimum number of people.
- bmiller2 7y agoThe absolute minimum number of people may still be significant
- tristanstcyr 7y agoSure, but it comes at a cost. Companies rarely push the limits of these kinds of policies because customers are not willing to pay for them.
- verletx64 7y agoTwitter has a lot of staff. Even 1% is a relatively large amount of people.
- RhysU 7y agoMoreover, anyone seeking privileged access will percolate into such roles.
- ComputerGuru 7y ago(Just as an FYI, the last time I checked that number was staggeringly skewed towards sales/marketing/evangelism teams rather than coders. Not that your point is diminished.)
- jacobsenscott 7y agoThose people probably have more access to PII than staff engineers - that's who the data is for.
- ComputerGuru 7y agoHardly. They get the filtered data that SEs designed for them to get, probably on an account-by-account basis. It’s the raw data SEs have access to that we are mainly talking about here.
- CydeWeys 7y agoIt doesn't need to be 1% of staff, it just needs to be a few dozen people (distributed geographically across the globe) who have root access.