3 ms·

Honestly, it wouldn't be a terrible move to ban all social media apps (or other apps that track movement or activity) from government phones. I'm surprised gov

by cj 3y ago

Honestly, it wouldn't be a terrible move to ban all social media apps (or other apps that track movement or activity) from government phones. I'm surprised government-owned devices are allowed any non-essential apps at all. E.g. the story about government / military facilities being exposed via army using Strava to track running routes (effectively creating a map of the facility)

elicash 3y ago
I agree with you. However, one thought I had is that you want to make sure government business happens on government phones, and maybe people are less likely to do that if they habitually using their personal phones during the work day? I'm not saying that was the calculation, just thinking this through.
- cj 3y ago
  Yea, the ban would be ineffective if it resulted in gov employees simply carrying 2 phones everywhere, 1 tightly restricted and 1 unrestricted. Probably better to have 1 phone that’s semi-restricted.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    No sandbox is ever going to be truly secure. An enemy nation's app on a work phone with access to sensitive, maybe even classified data? No no no.
- unsignedint 3y ago
  MDM can be set up to allow access to government resources solely through employer-owned devices, reducing the utility of personal phones for work tasks. If employees intentionally bypass this, they may warrant disciplinary actions, just like any other breach of workplace policies.
- adolph 3y ago
  It seems like once a government employee attains a certain rank they create a set of alt email and social accounts to conduct off the record business, so two phones is required. Maybe phones should have a hypervisor and multiple VMs (or VPs?) to support this without having to cart around additional hardware.
barbazoo 3y ago
Same, I used to work for a large aerospace company and I wasn't allowed to install anything that wasn't approved and it had to be work related in an obvious way. I was surprised it even had a browser.
hedora 3y ago
If you ban too much stuff, people will just carry a second device. (The strava thing could have or maybe did happen that way). Regardless, as an employee, putting social media on your subpoena-able and hopefully defeatured work device is a bad idea.
- TuringNYC 3y ago
  >> If you ban too much stuff, people will just carry a second device. Good! People are free to purchase a personal phone and do whatever they want on their personal device.
  - TylerE 3y ago
    Not good if the 2nd device is always carried, and exposes tons of stuff the first doesn't.
    - TuringNYC 3y ago
      > Not good if the 2nd device is always carried, and exposes tons of stuff the first doesn't. There are three concerns here: Concern 1: Government employees being paid to do work, but instead spending time on TikTok. -- yes, a 2nd device makes this worse, but certainly banning government devices are a necessary (though not sufficient) step here. Concern 2: Confidential government data obtained by apps with broad permissions -- solved by moving TikTok off government device and onto personal device, as the personal device shouldnt have government data on it (e.g., tax records, health records, personal records of citizens) Concern 3: ALL data exposed to foreign governments via TikTok and other apps - still, banning government devices are a necessary (though not sufficient) step here. NYC doesnt have jurisdiction over all citizen behaviors, and this needs to be decided federally realistically. Now, if the 2nd decide is a government device also, then no problem! TikTok is already banned on the 2nd device also. As will be for the 3rd and 4th government device. If the 2nd device is a personal device with government documents, you have a much different problem of why that is the case.
      - 3y ago
nonameiguess 3y ago
Not all that many government employees even have government-issued devices. Almost no one in the military does. The Strava thing was from letting people run around with it on their personal devices that they happened to use on military facilities. Typically, this kind of usage is forbidden, but it's kind of playing whack-a-mole to even know what apps are out there tracking and mapping location in the first place without simply banning military personnel from having smart phones at all, at least on site, which is exactly what happens at sufficiently sensitive facilities. I actually recall a reminder going out that no augmented reality or mapping applications were allowed on company property when Pokemon Go first came out and I was working for Raytheon, though even that only applied to the parking lots and lobbies as you couldn't bring a phone into the actual workspaces anyway. For what it's worth, as far as I recall from when I was in the military, which is getting to be a while ago but at least Facebook existed, social media apps were definitely not allowed on government-issued mobile devices. Unit PR offices did maintain Facebook pages, but those were updated from PCs using the web interface, not via app. I guess it's a small consideration, but something to consider for companies that decide to release some web service only as an app.
pugworthy 3y ago
The Strava example isn't the best, but point well taken. This is more like people with fitbits or other activity tracking devices, not their government-provided devices. I mean the only way to make it not show up is to ban ALL devices (personal and otherwise).

by cj 3y ago

elicash 3y ago

I agree with you. However, one thought I had is that you want to make sure government business happens on government phones, and maybe people are less likely to do that if they habitually using their personal phones during the work day? I'm not saying that was the calculation, just thinking this through.

cj 3y ago
Yea, the ban would be ineffective if it resulted in gov employees simply carrying 2 phones everywhere, 1 tightly restricted and 1 unrestricted. Probably better to have 1 phone that’s semi-restricted.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  No sandbox is ever going to be truly secure. An enemy nation's app on a work phone with access to sensitive, maybe even classified data? No no no.
unsignedint 3y ago
MDM can be set up to allow access to government resources solely through employer-owned devices, reducing the utility of personal phones for work tasks. If employees intentionally bypass this, they may warrant disciplinary actions, just like any other breach of workplace policies.
adolph 3y ago
It seems like once a government employee attains a certain rank they create a set of alt email and social accounts to conduct off the record business, so two phones is required. Maybe phones should have a hypervisor and multiple VMs (or VPs?) to support this without having to cart around additional hardware.

barbazoo 3y ago

Same, I used to work for a large aerospace company and I wasn't allowed to install anything that wasn't approved and it had to be work related in an obvious way. I was surprised it even had a browser.

hedora 3y ago

If you ban too much stuff, people will just carry a second device. (The strava thing could have or maybe did happen that way). Regardless, as an employee, putting social media on your subpoena-able and hopefully defeatured work device is a bad idea.

TuringNYC 3y ago
>> If you ban too much stuff, people will just carry a second device. Good! People are free to purchase a personal phone and do whatever they want on their personal device.
- TylerE 3y ago
  Not good if the 2nd device is always carried, and exposes tons of stuff the first doesn't.
  - TuringNYC 3y ago
    > Not good if the 2nd device is always carried, and exposes tons of stuff the first doesn't. There are three concerns here: Concern 1: Government employees being paid to do work, but instead spending time on TikTok. -- yes, a 2nd device makes this worse, but certainly banning government devices are a necessary (though not sufficient) step here. Concern 2: Confidential government data obtained by apps with broad permissions -- solved by moving TikTok off government device and onto personal device, as the personal device shouldnt have government data on it (e.g., tax records, health records, personal records of citizens) Concern 3: ALL data exposed to foreign governments via TikTok and other apps - still, banning government devices are a necessary (though not sufficient) step here. NYC doesnt have jurisdiction over all citizen behaviors, and this needs to be decided federally realistically. Now, if the 2nd decide is a government device also, then no problem! TikTok is already banned on the 2nd device also. As will be for the 3rd and 4th government device. If the 2nd device is a personal device with government documents, you have a much different problem of why that is the case.
    - 3y ago

nonameiguess 3y ago

Not all that many government employees even have government-issued devices. Almost no one in the military does. The Strava thing was from letting people run around with it on their personal devices that they happened to use on military facilities. Typically, this kind of usage is forbidden, but it's kind of playing whack-a-mole to even know what apps are out there tracking and mapping location in the first place without simply banning military personnel from having smart phones at all, at least on site, which is exactly what happens at sufficiently sensitive facilities. I actually recall a reminder going out that no augmented reality or mapping applications were allowed on company property when Pokemon Go first came out and I was working for Raytheon, though even that only applied to the parking lots and lobbies as you couldn't bring a phone into the actual workspaces anyway. For what it's worth, as far as I recall from when I was in the military, which is getting to be a while ago but at least Facebook existed, social media apps were definitely not allowed on government-issued mobile devices. Unit PR offices did maintain Facebook pages, but those were updated from PCs using the web interface, not via app. I guess it's a small consideration, but something to consider for companies that decide to release some web service only as an app.

pugworthy 3y ago

The Strava example isn't the best, but point well taken. This is more like people with fitbits or other activity tracking devices, not their government-provided devices. I mean the only way to make it not show up is to ban ALL devices (personal and otherwise).