8 ms·
I figure others would be curious about Google's side of it. Who is right or wrong doesn't seem obvious to me. Apparently this is a memo about why these workers
by 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
I figure others would be curious about Google's side of it. Who is right or wrong doesn't seem obvious to me. Apparently this is a memo about why these workers were fired[0]:
> We’ve seen a recent increase in information being shared outside the company, including the names and details of our employees. Our teams are committed to investigating these issues, and today we’ve dismissed four employees for clear and repeated violations of our data security policies.
> There’s been some misinformation circulating about this investigation, both internally and externally. We want to be clear that none of these individuals were fired for simply looking at documents or calendars during the ordinary course of their work.
> To the contrary, our thorough investigation found the individuals were involved in systematic searches for other employees’ materials and work. This includes searching for, accessing, and distributing business information outside the scope of their jobs — repeating this conduct even after they were met with and reminded about our data security policies. This information, along with details of internal emails and inaccurate descriptions about Googlers’ work, was subsequently shared externally.
> In one case, among other information they accessed and copied, an individual subscribed to the calendars of a wide range of employees outside of their work group. The individual set up notifications so that they received emails detailing the work and whereabouts of those employees, including personal matters such as 1:1s, medical appointments and family activities — all without those employees’ knowledge or consent. When the affected Googlers discovered this, many reported that they felt scared or unsafe, and requested to work from another location. Screenshots of some of their calendars, including their names and details, subsequently made their way outside the company.
> We have always taken information security very seriously, and will not tolerate efforts to intimidate Googlers or undermine their work, nor actions that lead to the leak of sensitive business or customer information. This is not how Google’s open culture works or was ever intended to work. We expect every member of our community to abide by our data security policies.
> Fortunately, these types of activities are rare. Thank you to everyone who does the right thing every day — doing amazing work, while inspiring and maintaining the trust of our users, partners, and each other.
[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-25/google-fires-four-employees-citing-data-security-violations https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-25/google-fi...
- itronitron 7y agoWell, if an employee can access that data then they can access it. The whole point of Google calendars is that they are wide open, so I find it hard to believe that Google has always taken information security very seriously.
- fredgrott 7y agoI would think calendar impl is a separate issue from monitoring data access security and than responding to violations by informing the employee that they are violations you are conflating the two issues
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoGoogle takes the view that its employees are all responsible adults, who can be trusted to handle information responsibly without using it to harass people or leaking it to journalists. Activists have made a concentrated effort to subvert this, and it may well be that it's not true anymore, but up until a few years ago it worked pretty well.
- NovemberWhiskey 7y ago>Well, if an employee can access that data then they can access it. Yes; but just because an employee can access data doesn't mean that they can just do anything they like with it, does it? The complaint from Google seems to be that access was used to harass, leak personal information and surveil the actions of other employees. If that's true, then "well, you gave me access" doesn't seem like a strong defense.
- itronitron 7y agoYes, the memo from Google makes it seem that, however they don't just come out and say it clearly... probably because they can't, or can't yet, confirm who leaked what if anything. An interesting question for Google to answer would be how many Google employees have accessed/crawled all the internal data. Considering the sort of talent, curiosity, and technical skills that Google hires I would expect that the four fired workers are not unique in that regard.