5 ms·

I think the keyword is “can”. It is allowed, contrary to eg the EU, where this is not allowed.

caymanjim 5mo ago
Yeah, I know they can. I just can't believe it's normalized and that people simply accept it. Good on the EU for pushing back.
- 3form 5mo ago
  I guess from my perspective there are even more dire problems in the US that I'm surprised people accept. But it seems they don't know, or care, or know that they should care. Perhaps it's the lack of proper authoritarian regime in the US' past that drives this. I believe the temporal proximity of such makes people aware of, and angry against, the many traps that such systems leave in their "law", so you can be imprisoned anytime for anything. EU has a bunch of countries with varying degree of such past.
  - mrhottakes 5mo ago
    Most people need to work to support themselves so it's quite inconvenient to single-handedly solve all of the problems in the US. Suggesting people simply don't know or care is very naive.
    - bigfudge 5mo ago
      I’m sympathetic to this view, butI don’t see any evidence they actually do know or care though. This (workers rights) gains no traction in US elections. You have this weird macho culture around it, almost like complaining about this abuse would be a sign of personal weakness.
    - johannes1234321 5mo ago
      On the time where Europeans fought for their worker rights they had to work, too. Often even not yet having other civil liberties. However a thing that changed is impact: A handful coal workers could interrupt work in significant ways.
- mhurron 5mo ago
  You should expect it because it's the safest position to work from. Don't use your work device for non-work, they may be tracking something or everything and do you want that in that record. Additionally, don't use personal devices for work, but that is because of other reasons.
- jlarocco 5mo ago
  I'm surprised you can't believe it. Most companies large enough to have their own IT have monitoring and know what's going through their network. The larger the company, the more likely they're watching. I've personally never seen that information used against anybody unless they were looking at shady stuff (porn, hacking websites, etc.), but I'm sure they're monitoring. Even outsourced IT for small companies will often put "security" software like Sentinel One or Sophos on machines they manage, and those can track and block web traffic, report everything being installed, and even MITM HTTPS traffic. Personally I don't see the big deal. If I don't want my employer watching something, I don't do it on their network. I monitor what's going on in my tiny home network, and I expect anybody administrating larger networks does the same thing.
  - Avicebron 5mo ago
    Why the scare quotes around security?
throw1234567891 5mo ago
It is allowed under certain circumstances.
- prerok 5mo ago
  I am pretty sure there would have to be a court order, i.e. a severe violation would have to have good ground to be suspected.
  - throw1234567891 5mo ago
    No court order. Just a suspicion against an individual, and a process to follow. Plus, you have to tell them. There is no mass surveillance without notice, correct.
KaiserPro 5mo ago
> It is allowed, contrary to eg the EU, where this is not allowed. Its allows in most of the EU apart from germany where there are strict limits. however you can still record what your users are doing for purposes of detecting fraud. This is where it differs from the USA, where they can do anything because they have no data protection laws.
- LtWorf 5mo ago
  Would it be too much to ask to not make stuff up?
  - KaiserPro 5mo ago
    WOuld it be too much to ask for you to dig a little deeper in to what the law allows? An employer am allowed to record all your actions for the purposes of detecting fraud and or illegal activity. The method or recording and the way the employer stores and allows access to that recording must be "reasonable" For example if you are using slack, gchat or teams, all your conversations are logged in the compliance system. Every action you make in m365 is also logged. AWS actions are also logged if you have cloud trail enabled All you emails are also recorded and stored for n years. If you have zscaler or some other threat detection system every site that you visit will be recorded. The anti phishing plugin you have will also log what sites you are looking at. Theses are not automatically illegal, its how the data is stored and processed that determines the illegality. Now, lets get to meta. As part of their leaking detection system, in about 2024 they started routinely taking screenshots of all users every n minutes. One could argue that it wasn't proportionate. However for holland, france and germany, the workers councils should have been informed. The thing that was illegal was the covert nature, or at least not explicitly telling employees that they were taking screenshots. not the screenshots themselves. For the AAI bullshit that meta are pushing, again depending on how its done its not necessarily against the various EU/UK data protection laws to record the data. Where it gets interesting is how and where the data is processed later on. To blindly say that "EU says it can't happen" is far too simplistic and not accurate to say the least.
    - 5mo ago
d1sxeyes 5mo ago
It’s not true that it’s not allowed in the EU. There’s the Barbalescu ruling which is case law that says employers must fulfill a bunch of criteria around informing employees, the necessity of the monitoring, and they are not allowed to impose blanket bans on private use, but it is still legal to monitor employees in the EU.
- layer8 5mo ago
  It can be legal, but demonstrating the necessity is a significant bar.

Yeah, I know they can. I just can't believe it's normalized and that people simply accept it. Good on the EU for pushing back.

3form 5mo ago
I guess from my perspective there are even more dire problems in the US that I'm surprised people accept. But it seems they don't know, or care, or know that they should care. Perhaps it's the lack of proper authoritarian regime in the US' past that drives this. I believe the temporal proximity of such makes people aware of, and angry against, the many traps that such systems leave in their "law", so you can be imprisoned anytime for anything. EU has a bunch of countries with varying degree of such past.
- mrhottakes 5mo ago
  Most people need to work to support themselves so it's quite inconvenient to single-handedly solve all of the problems in the US. Suggesting people simply don't know or care is very naive.
  - bigfudge 5mo ago
    I’m sympathetic to this view, butI don’t see any evidence they actually do know or care though. This (workers rights) gains no traction in US elections. You have this weird macho culture around it, almost like complaining about this abuse would be a sign of personal weakness.
  - johannes1234321 5mo ago
    On the time where Europeans fought for their worker rights they had to work, too. Often even not yet having other civil liberties. However a thing that changed is impact: A handful coal workers could interrupt work in significant ways.
mhurron 5mo ago
You should expect it because it's the safest position to work from. Don't use your work device for non-work, they may be tracking something or everything and do you want that in that record. Additionally, don't use personal devices for work, but that is because of other reasons.
jlarocco 5mo ago
I'm surprised you can't believe it. Most companies large enough to have their own IT have monitoring and know what's going through their network. The larger the company, the more likely they're watching. I've personally never seen that information used against anybody unless they were looking at shady stuff (porn, hacking websites, etc.), but I'm sure they're monitoring. Even outsourced IT for small companies will often put "security" software like Sentinel One or Sophos on machines they manage, and those can track and block web traffic, report everything being installed, and even MITM HTTPS traffic. Personally I don't see the big deal. If I don't want my employer watching something, I don't do it on their network. I monitor what's going on in my tiny home network, and I expect anybody administrating larger networks does the same thing.
- Avicebron 5mo ago
  Why the scare quotes around security?

throw1234567891 5mo ago

It is allowed under certain circumstances.

prerok 5mo ago
I am pretty sure there would have to be a court order, i.e. a severe violation would have to have good ground to be suspected.
- throw1234567891 5mo ago
  No court order. Just a suspicion against an individual, and a process to follow. Plus, you have to tell them. There is no mass surveillance without notice, correct.

KaiserPro 5mo ago

> It is allowed, contrary to eg the EU, where this is not allowed. Its allows in most of the EU apart from germany where there are strict limits. however you can still record what your users are doing for purposes of detecting fraud. This is where it differs from the USA, where they can do anything because they have no data protection laws.

LtWorf 5mo ago
Would it be too much to ask to not make stuff up?
- KaiserPro 5mo ago
  WOuld it be too much to ask for you to dig a little deeper in to what the law allows? An employer am allowed to record all your actions for the purposes of detecting fraud and or illegal activity. The method or recording and the way the employer stores and allows access to that recording must be "reasonable" For example if you are using slack, gchat or teams, all your conversations are logged in the compliance system. Every action you make in m365 is also logged. AWS actions are also logged if you have cloud trail enabled All you emails are also recorded and stored for n years. If you have zscaler or some other threat detection system every site that you visit will be recorded. The anti phishing plugin you have will also log what sites you are looking at. Theses are not automatically illegal, its how the data is stored and processed that determines the illegality. Now, lets get to meta. As part of their leaking detection system, in about 2024 they started routinely taking screenshots of all users every n minutes. One could argue that it wasn't proportionate. However for holland, france and germany, the workers councils should have been informed. The thing that was illegal was the covert nature, or at least not explicitly telling employees that they were taking screenshots. not the screenshots themselves. For the AAI bullshit that meta are pushing, again depending on how its done its not necessarily against the various EU/UK data protection laws to record the data. Where it gets interesting is how and where the data is processed later on. To blindly say that "EU says it can't happen" is far too simplistic and not accurate to say the least.
  - 5mo ago

d1sxeyes 5mo ago

It’s not true that it’s not allowed in the EU. There’s the Barbalescu ruling which is case law that says employers must fulfill a bunch of criteria around informing employees, the necessity of the monitoring, and they are not allowed to impose blanket bans on private use, but it is still legal to monitor employees in the EU.

layer8 5mo ago
It can be legal, but demonstrating the necessity is a significant bar.