7 ms·

> With android work profiles I don't think it's that big a deal. It's not a big deal... until it is. Like when your boss/coworker gets involved in a work dispu

> With android work profiles I don't think it's that big a deal. It's not a big deal... until it is. Like when your boss/coworker gets involved in a work dispute and you get dragged into a deposition.

izacus 6y ago
You misunderstood - Android Work profile doesn't allow the employer to access any of your personal information. It keeps work and personal things separate by a wall. iOS doesn't allow that however - there the Apple will give everything over to employer if they so ask.
- inetknght 6y ago
  No, I don't misunderstand. A deposition won't care whether things are separated by a software wall. A deposition will want everything on the device. So it's better to just not mix the two at all.
  - playcache 6y ago
    The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. The 'work profile' feature uses app-sandbox which in effects means every app runs as a Linux type isolated UID (not to differnt to a container), there is no breach around that unless some zero day attack comes to light, which would bw patched way before acme corps IT department picks it up. They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it.
    - icelancer 6y ago
      >> They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. That's not how a subpoena works if it's on the same physical device. Good luck finding a judge who understands the concept of a "software wall."
      - izacus 6y ago
        So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? That's a tall order. Also, the title says that GOOGLE spied on someone - which is not a deposition, is it?
        bee_rider 6y ago
        I'm not sure how these subpoenas usually are worded specifically, but it doesn't seem like that contrived of a situation. Like, if you aren't the suspect and are ordered to hand over all devices used to communicate to <suspicious co-worker X>, if you have a separate device you just hand the thing over. If you hand over a personal phone, they are presumably going to bump into your walled off section and have some questions. Plus, you don't have a phone, while they are working on the thing, which seems like a pain. This is assuming you aren't in a "hand over all electronic devices" kind of situation.
        icelancer 6y ago
        >> So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? Yes. Source: Been subpoenaed three times and my attorneys have had restrictions placed on what can/cannot be searched... like I am assuming most competent attorneys can provide. The party has to have reasonable indication that relevant data is on personal devices so the opposing counsel doesn't go goldfishing through a bunch of stuff to turn up potentially unrelated dirt in discovery.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      US centric, but courtrooms don’t have time to hear about the technicalities that show something isn’t possible. They only care that they think it’s possible. Judges aren’t programmers and the law isn’t black and white like code. Also, you can’t just not respond to a deposition or refuse to hand over your phone as evidence in a crime. That’s obstruction of justice and possibly contempt of court. Basically, you can sit there for hours on end explaining that it’s impossible to break the “wall”, but that’s time and time in money in the court system (literally), or you can just fork over the phone because it’s not your personal one.
      - izacus 6y ago
        What does that have to do with accusation that Google read the messages? From the topic?
        colejohnson66 6y ago
        This far into the thread, it changed to justifying two phones for reasons of possible deposition. I was explaining why it’s a good idea to do that.
        lern_too_spel 6y ago
        That doesn't make sense. They can request both of your phones just as easily as they can request access to your personal profile on an Android phone.
        colejohnson66 6y ago
        The idea is based on the idea (heh) that warrants must be tailored to the crime. I can’t get a warrant for your dining room then go upstairs into your bedroom to explore. Now, if a cop saw, say, drug paraphernalia in the kitchen while looking for something else, that’s fine, but they can’t go on random searches (also why they can’t search your car for no reason). That idea extended to civil procedure and phones is that the discovery process for a civil case would be for things related to the lawsuit of which your personal phone might not be. They could certainly request it, but a good lawyer would argue that your personal phone has no connection to the work phone (of which the lawsuit is about) as evidenced by the fact that you have two phones (you intend to separate the two matters). Separate profiles on the same computer (phone) would be harder to argue. It’s not a clear cut matter and would certainly depend on how the judge is feeling, but if there’s a possibility of keeping your personal and work life separate, why not do so? Don’t put all your eggs (data) in one basket (phone) and the like.
    - BeetleB 6y ago
      > The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. Which is likely legally allowed for a deposition. > They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. Telling the courts/lawyers to piss off is not a viable option. That's not how depositions work. You might be able to get a lawyer to file legal motions with expert testimony attached pointing out they shouldn't need access to the whole phone for the reasons you said, but 99% of people will not bother getting a lawyer for something like this.
      - suifbwish 6y ago
        Or you could just get really drunk and lose your phone. Happens all the time. The phone company will verify you called for a replacement and the bar will verify you got trashed.
        jakelazaroff 6y ago
        IANAL but this strikes me as bad advice.
        outworlder 6y ago
        IANAL, but isn't that obstruction of justice and/or contempt of court?
        shkkmo 6y ago
        Yes, probably. That would presumably be why this suggestion includes details that would make proving your intent difficult.
      - dylan604 6y ago
        Is that how depositions work though? Being deposed means being asked questions in a very official manner by opposing counsel. During discovery, they can issue a subpoena/warrant which gives them permission to take your possessions.
      - 6y ago
  - jayd16 6y ago
    Does a deposition care when you say you didn't use your personal phone for work? Why wouldn't they ask for your so-called personal phone?
    - inetknght 6y ago
      IANAL. I just have some knowledge/experience. A deposition about a work related issue may ask to see all devices that you use in connection with your employer. So yes, a deposition will care when you say you didn't use your personal phone for work if you can prove it by it not being on any device list found with work-related services. A device list can be obtained (usually easily, sometimes with a court order) through many services you use. G Suite, Github, Microsoft Account, Slack, Reddit, etc... these all track what devices have logged into them with your account. Signal and Telegram have your phone number. And of course any email sent has a list of addresses to which it was sent. So make sure your personal devices aren't found to be communicating with coworkers or vendors and you'll have a valid argument for "I didn't use my personal device for work". Whether it will stick will largely depend on how good the lawyers are because that's just one way your device can be in scope for a deposition. Another way would be if any messages from coworkers are sent to/from your personal email or phone number then that can also bring your devices into the scope of a deposition. It might depend on whether the content or context of the messages suggests that they're related to the subject of the deposition and that the conversation had been moved (eg, an attempt to hide it). Again, it largely depends on the quality of the lawyers involved.
    - gowld 6y ago
      Depositions don't assume you are honest.
- teeray 6y ago
  I would still be concerned that laws are still focused on physical things. Even if there’s a personal / work virtual barrier, I wouldn’t want the presence of work information anywhere on a personal device transmuting that device into a work device in the eyes of the law.
  - inetknght 6y ago
    When vulnerabilities are found which meltdown (pun intended) those barriers perhaps it's not such a bad idea that the law is oldschool here. It's a sobering reminder that those walls are indeed only imaginary.
- judge2020 6y ago
  > iOS doesn't allow that however - there the Apple will give everything over to employer if they so ask. Regular MDM used to do that (just as Android used to do that), but Apple has been working on the same "wall" to separate work and personal info. https://www.apple.com/business/docs/resources/Managing_Devices_and_Corporate_Data_on_iOS.pdf#page=4 https://www.apple.com/business/docs/resources/Managing_Devic... https://simplemdm.com/apple-user-enrollment/ https://simplemdm.com/apple-user-enrollment/
an_opabinia 6y ago
It is utterly insane to me how confused people are in the rest of this thread. There are people getting paid like $200,000 a year, and they can't be bothered to pay a lawyer $3,000 to read their employment contract once and explain any of this to them?
- shemnon42 6y ago
  What's the point of a $3000 contract review if the employer's response will be "Not changing it, sign or walk."
  - quesera 6y ago
    Well, it helps you decide whether to sign, or to walk, right? But who would pay $3K for a contract review??
    - an_opabinia 6y ago
      ...someone whom Google is about to make a millionaire?
      - quesera 6y ago
        Employment contracts are fairly uniform, and just not that complicated. A simple contract review is not expensive. One or two hours, a few hundred dollars per -- if you're feeling fancy. Special cases are special. But most cases are not special.
  - lokar 6y ago
    What we know is one person said that's what happened. I certainly know of people who have suggested and gotten changes to agreements like this. But you need to be professional about it.
    - bonoboTP 6y ago
      What do you mean by professional here? My guess is some mix of emotional detachment, serious tone and use of the right jargon and vocabulary?

izacus 6y ago

You misunderstood - Android Work profile doesn't allow the employer to access any of your personal information. It keeps work and personal things separate by a wall. iOS doesn't allow that however - there the Apple will give everything over to employer if they so ask.

inetknght 6y ago
No, I don't misunderstand. A deposition won't care whether things are separated by a software wall. A deposition will want everything on the device. So it's better to just not mix the two at all.
- playcache 6y ago
  The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. The 'work profile' feature uses app-sandbox which in effects means every app runs as a Linux type isolated UID (not to differnt to a container), there is no breach around that unless some zero day attack comes to light, which would bw patched way before acme corps IT department picks it up. They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it.
  - icelancer 6y ago
    >> They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. That's not how a subpoena works if it's on the same physical device. Good luck finding a judge who understands the concept of a "software wall."
    - izacus 6y ago
      So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? That's a tall order. Also, the title says that GOOGLE spied on someone - which is not a deposition, is it?
      - bee_rider 6y ago
        I'm not sure how these subpoenas usually are worded specifically, but it doesn't seem like that contrived of a situation. Like, if you aren't the suspect and are ordered to hand over all devices used to communicate to <suspicious co-worker X>, if you have a separate device you just hand the thing over. If you hand over a personal phone, they are presumably going to bump into your walled off section and have some questions. Plus, you don't have a phone, while they are working on the thing, which seems like a pain. This is assuming you aren't in a "hand over all electronic devices" kind of situation.
      - icelancer 6y ago
        >> So you're saying that judge will ignore the separate profiles but it'll magically stop from depositioning all your phones that might contain work conversations? Yes. Source: Been subpoenaed three times and my attorneys have had restrictions placed on what can/cannot be searched... like I am assuming most competent attorneys can provide. The party has to have reasonable indication that relevant data is on personal devices so the opposing counsel doesn't go goldfishing through a bunch of stuff to turn up potentially unrelated dirt in discovery.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    US centric, but courtrooms don’t have time to hear about the technicalities that show something isn’t possible. They only care that they think it’s possible. Judges aren’t programmers and the law isn’t black and white like code. Also, you can’t just not respond to a deposition or refuse to hand over your phone as evidence in a crime. That’s obstruction of justice and possibly contempt of court. Basically, you can sit there for hours on end explaining that it’s impossible to break the “wall”, but that’s time and time in money in the court system (literally), or you can just fork over the phone because it’s not your personal one.
    - izacus 6y ago
      What does that have to do with accusation that Google read the messages? From the topic?
      - colejohnson66 6y ago
        This far into the thread, it changed to justifying two phones for reasons of possible deposition. I was explaining why it’s a good idea to do that.
        lern_too_spel 6y ago
        That doesn't make sense. They can request both of your phones just as easily as they can request access to your personal profile on an Android phone.
        colejohnson66 6y ago
        The idea is based on the idea (heh) that warrants must be tailored to the crime. I can’t get a warrant for your dining room then go upstairs into your bedroom to explore. Now, if a cop saw, say, drug paraphernalia in the kitchen while looking for something else, that’s fine, but they can’t go on random searches (also why they can’t search your car for no reason). That idea extended to civil procedure and phones is that the discovery process for a civil case would be for things related to the lawsuit of which your personal phone might not be. They could certainly request it, but a good lawyer would argue that your personal phone has no connection to the work phone (of which the lawsuit is about) as evidenced by the fact that you have two phones (you intend to separate the two matters). Separate profiles on the same computer (phone) would be harder to argue. It’s not a clear cut matter and would certainly depend on how the judge is feeling, but if there’s a possibility of keeping your personal and work life separate, why not do so? Don’t put all your eggs (data) in one basket (phone) and the like.
  - BeetleB 6y ago
    > The ony way that would be possible is by them physically taking the device off you and asking for all your pin codes / passwords. Which is likely legally allowed for a deposition. > They need you to hand it over. If its your personal device, you just say piss off, no you can't have it. Telling the courts/lawyers to piss off is not a viable option. That's not how depositions work. You might be able to get a lawyer to file legal motions with expert testimony attached pointing out they shouldn't need access to the whole phone for the reasons you said, but 99% of people will not bother getting a lawyer for something like this.
    - suifbwish 6y ago
      Or you could just get really drunk and lose your phone. Happens all the time. The phone company will verify you called for a replacement and the bar will verify you got trashed.
      - jakelazaroff 6y ago
        IANAL but this strikes me as bad advice.
      - outworlder 6y ago
        IANAL, but isn't that obstruction of justice and/or contempt of court?
        shkkmo 6y ago
        Yes, probably. That would presumably be why this suggestion includes details that would make proving your intent difficult.
    - dylan604 6y ago
      Is that how depositions work though? Being deposed means being asked questions in a very official manner by opposing counsel. During discovery, they can issue a subpoena/warrant which gives them permission to take your possessions.
    - 6y ago
- jayd16 6y ago
  Does a deposition care when you say you didn't use your personal phone for work? Why wouldn't they ask for your so-called personal phone?
  - inetknght 6y ago
    IANAL. I just have some knowledge/experience. A deposition about a work related issue may ask to see all devices that you use in connection with your employer. So yes, a deposition will care when you say you didn't use your personal phone for work if you can prove it by it not being on any device list found with work-related services. A device list can be obtained (usually easily, sometimes with a court order) through many services you use. G Suite, Github, Microsoft Account, Slack, Reddit, etc... these all track what devices have logged into them with your account. Signal and Telegram have your phone number. And of course any email sent has a list of addresses to which it was sent. So make sure your personal devices aren't found to be communicating with coworkers or vendors and you'll have a valid argument for "I didn't use my personal device for work". Whether it will stick will largely depend on how good the lawyers are because that's just one way your device can be in scope for a deposition. Another way would be if any messages from coworkers are sent to/from your personal email or phone number then that can also bring your devices into the scope of a deposition. It might depend on whether the content or context of the messages suggests that they're related to the subject of the deposition and that the conversation had been moved (eg, an attempt to hide it). Again, it largely depends on the quality of the lawyers involved.
  - gowld 6y ago
    Depositions don't assume you are honest.
teeray 6y ago
I would still be concerned that laws are still focused on physical things. Even if there’s a personal / work virtual barrier, I wouldn’t want the presence of work information anywhere on a personal device transmuting that device into a work device in the eyes of the law.
- inetknght 6y ago
  When vulnerabilities are found which meltdown (pun intended) those barriers perhaps it's not such a bad idea that the law is oldschool here. It's a sobering reminder that those walls are indeed only imaginary.
judge2020 6y ago
> iOS doesn't allow that however - there the Apple will give everything over to employer if they so ask. Regular MDM used to do that (just as Android used to do that), but Apple has been working on the same "wall" to separate work and personal info. https://www.apple.com/business/docs/resources/Managing_Devices_and_Corporate_Data_on_iOS.pdf#page=4 https://www.apple.com/business/docs/resources/Managing_Devic... https://simplemdm.com/apple-user-enrollment/ https://simplemdm.com/apple-user-enrollment/

an_opabinia 6y ago

It is utterly insane to me how confused people are in the rest of this thread. There are people getting paid like $200,000 a year, and they can't be bothered to pay a lawyer $3,000 to read their employment contract once and explain any of this to them?

shemnon42 6y ago
What's the point of a $3000 contract review if the employer's response will be "Not changing it, sign or walk."
- quesera 6y ago
  Well, it helps you decide whether to sign, or to walk, right? But who would pay $3K for a contract review??
  - an_opabinia 6y ago
    ...someone whom Google is about to make a millionaire?
    - quesera 6y ago
      Employment contracts are fairly uniform, and just not that complicated. A simple contract review is not expensive. One or two hours, a few hundred dollars per -- if you're feeling fancy. Special cases are special. But most cases are not special.
- lokar 6y ago
  What we know is one person said that's what happened. I certainly know of people who have suggested and gotten changes to agreements like this. But you need to be professional about it.
  - bonoboTP 6y ago
    What do you mean by professional here? My guess is some mix of emotional detachment, serious tone and use of the right jargon and vocabulary?