4 ms·

Your work does this. This is incredibly common on basically every corporate device issued today. The real issue is the NUX, which doesn't look like it made the

Your work does this. This is incredibly common on basically every corporate device issued today. The real issue is the NUX, which doesn't look like it made the data collection clear to users.

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
My work puts a big banner on the login screen that says up front that they can and will record and monitor everything on this machine. And IMO that's fine, because it's their machine. If they wanted to do that to my machine it would be a problem.
- mr_toad 2y ago
  No place I’ve worked has ever told their employees that they do this, but most of them do. Some employees I’ve spoken to are quite surprised that their “encrypted” connections are being monitored.
  - suprjami 2y ago
    People should probably read their employment agreements and IT usage policy. I'd be surprised if it's not written somewhere. Besides which, using someone else's computer with an expectation of privacy is the wrong expectation.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  I agree it's legally fine, but morally/socially there are ways to go-too-far.
  - knome 2y ago
    there's nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware. they have to watch for data exfiltration and attempts to download malware, etc. don't use a corporate device for anything you don't want work to see. use your own. that's not a hard ask.
    - Terr_ 2y ago
      > there's nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware. As written, that means they can secretly enable the camera and microphone to surveil my house, supposedly to check the usage (or non-usage) of the hardware. Surely that's very "wrong", if not also illegal in most places. Not everything about or near the hardware is fair game.
      - pigeonhole123 2y ago
        That's clearly not what was meant
        Terr_ 2y ago
        No, read what they're replying-to. I wrote one sentence about how "there are ways for companies to go too far", which I think is pretty dang uncontroversial and trivially-true. However that user replied with what is clearly a disagreement, with corporate justifications and placing sole responsibility on employees to avoid the hardware. This leads to two competing options: (A) They simply can't imagine any scenario where a company might "go too far" and be at fault. (B) Their stance is much milder, but for some reason they are replying to a straw-man argument that isn't what I actually wrote. Of those two ambiguities, I went with (A), but if you think (B) is a more-charitable reading...
        knome 2y ago
        Or that the discussion was about information on and being transmitted through the devices and I was limiting my opinion on "there being nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware" to that scope, and not extending it to include spying on people in their homes using the device peripherals. No, they shouldn't be flicking on your laptop camera or mic remotely, as these are pretty obviously violations of your privacy.
    - lukeschlather 2y ago
      My rights are not subordinate to my company's, if anything it should be the reverse. My employment contract is intended for mutual benefit and the company also reserves the right to privacy from me in some things, even things in the scope of my employment. It should be acceptable to do things outside the scope of your employment using corporate devices, and you should retain a reasonable expectation of privacy when doing so.
- Scarblac 2y ago
  It's "fine" in the way that I would leave that company at the first opportunity.
suprjami 2y ago
I signed a contract with my employer that when I'm using the computer they give me to conduct their business on their behalf, they have the right to observe my usage of that computer. The situation in this article is completely different.
saagarjha 2y ago
None of my employers have done this to my knowledge. Some of them have had the ability to run commands on my computer, so they could in theory install such a thing without me noticing, but the default OOTB experience was not that.

Your work does this. This is incredibly common on basically every corporate device issued today. The real issue is the NUX, which doesn't look like it made the data collection clear to users.

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago

My work puts a big banner on the login screen that says up front that they can and will record and monitor everything on this machine. And IMO that's fine, because it's their machine. If they wanted to do that to my machine it would be a problem.

mr_toad 2y ago
No place I’ve worked has ever told their employees that they do this, but most of them do. Some employees I’ve spoken to are quite surprised that their “encrypted” connections are being monitored.
- suprjami 2y ago
  People should probably read their employment agreements and IT usage policy. I'd be surprised if it's not written somewhere. Besides which, using someone else's computer with an expectation of privacy is the wrong expectation.
Terr_ 2y ago
I agree it's legally fine, but morally/socially there are ways to go-too-far.
- knome 2y ago
  there's nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware. they have to watch for data exfiltration and attempts to download malware, etc. don't use a corporate device for anything you don't want work to see. use your own. that's not a hard ask.
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    > there's nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware. As written, that means they can secretly enable the camera and microphone to surveil my house, supposedly to check the usage (or non-usage) of the hardware. Surely that's very "wrong", if not also illegal in most places. Not everything about or near the hardware is fair game.
    - pigeonhole123 2y ago
      That's clearly not what was meant
      - Terr_ 2y ago
        No, read what they're replying-to. I wrote one sentence about how "there are ways for companies to go too far", which I think is pretty dang uncontroversial and trivially-true. However that user replied with what is clearly a disagreement, with corporate justifications and placing sole responsibility on employees to avoid the hardware. This leads to two competing options: (A) They simply can't imagine any scenario where a company might "go too far" and be at fault. (B) Their stance is much milder, but for some reason they are replying to a straw-man argument that isn't what I actually wrote. Of those two ambiguities, I went with (A), but if you think (B) is a more-charitable reading...
        knome 2y ago
        Or that the discussion was about information on and being transmitted through the devices and I was limiting my opinion on "there being nothing wrong with corporations tracking use of their hardware" to that scope, and not extending it to include spying on people in their homes using the device peripherals. No, they shouldn't be flicking on your laptop camera or mic remotely, as these are pretty obviously violations of your privacy.
  - lukeschlather 2y ago
    My rights are not subordinate to my company's, if anything it should be the reverse. My employment contract is intended for mutual benefit and the company also reserves the right to privacy from me in some things, even things in the scope of my employment. It should be acceptable to do things outside the scope of your employment using corporate devices, and you should retain a reasonable expectation of privacy when doing so.
Scarblac 2y ago
It's "fine" in the way that I would leave that company at the first opportunity.

suprjami 2y ago

I signed a contract with my employer that when I'm using the computer they give me to conduct their business on their behalf, they have the right to observe my usage of that computer. The situation in this article is completely different.

saagarjha 2y ago

None of my employers have done this to my knowledge. Some of them have had the ability to run commands on my computer, so they could in theory install such a thing without me noticing, but the default OOTB experience was not that.