4 ms·
Never BYOD. Doing business work on a personal machine is a liability both for the employee and for the employer. In general, if an employer provides a machine
by oldbbsnickname 3y ago
Never BYOD. Doing business work on a personal machine is a liability both for the employee and for the employer.
In general, if an employer provides a machine (or multiple machines), I'm happy to run Windows if it were absolutely required because being a religious zealot about it would signal immaturity, unprofessionalism, and possibly unmanageability as employee. As an example, a previous employer issued me 3 devices for testing: MBP m1 Pro, Thinkpad X1 Carbon for Linux, and Thinkpad P51s for Windows.
I think balking in this instance is appropriate and they ought to find another job where the business understands the fundamentals of intellectual property.
- sys_64738 3y ago> Never BYOD. Doing business work on a personal machine is a liability both for the employee and for the employer. Why?
- belltaco 3y agoDownloaded files will be on your local drive, and also business emails if you use a mail client like Outlook to access business email. I heard of cases where lawsuit discovery requests needed legal to sweep employee laptops to respond. It's a liability for the company because they cannot ensure basic security is in place, like the OS is being updated or a competent antivirus is running. Or Bitlocker enabled on all drives. It'd put business data at risk and open up liability. Some companies may turn around and sue the employees claiming they didn't follow basic security practices. Not to mention cases in the past like personal phones being wiped by MDM from ActiveSync when the employee leaves or is fired. https://www.fastcompany.com/90440073/if-you-use-your-personal-phone-for-work-say-goodbye-to-your-privacy https://www.fastcompany.com/90440073/if-you-use-your-persona...
- sys_64738 3y agoOracle lets employees use their own laptops for business purposes if they administer it themselves. So clearly there are no legal issues to it.
- belltaco 3y agohttps://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/85929-coca-cola-sued-faces-lawsuit-over-unencrypted-laptop-data-theft https://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/85929-coca-cola-su... The notorious Oracle lawyers must've put a bunch of legalese in the employment agreement that any failures to secure the laptop can result in liability to Oracle.
- sys_64738 3y agoYou'd think but you'd be wrong. Oracle isn't nearly as oppressive as people on the outside are desperate to believe.
- belltaco 3y agoYeah no, they contacted us for an audit because a few people had the previously free and confusingly licensed JVM installed, and wanted us to pay for licenses for all thousands of employees. Just dealing with them cost us significant resources. The reputation is well deserved, I will never touch an Oracle product and will try to stay away from Java as well. Don't believe me? Here's another example https://old.reddit.com//r/sysadmin/comments/165kzxg/oraclejava_is_knocking_at_my_companys_door_and/ https://old.reddit.com//r/sysadmin/comments/165kzxg/oracleja... > Oracle isn't nearly as oppressive as people on the outside are desperate to believe. Why are you so desperate to believe this is normal? I dealt with dozens of software vendors and even Microsoft was nowhere near as bad even when they found actual widespread piracy of their products in an overseas sister company that we don't control. They made sure the used products got paid for and went away.