7 ms·

There is a YC company that makes a coding interview tool. They want you to run their CLI on your machine and trust that it won't do anything malicious, when in

by dprkh 1mo ago

There is a YC company that makes a coding interview tool. They want you to run their CLI on your machine and trust that it won't do anything malicious, when in fact it installs a bunch of things onto your machine without consent, scans processes, and intercepts requests from AI tools. It's crazy that people think this is acceptable.

delichon 1mo ago
Maybe it's a pen test such that if the CLI can phone home you fail, to weed out candidates with weak security fu.
- bryanrasmussen 1mo ago
  if that was the purpose it should weed out candidates who agreed to install the app for a job interview.
stronglikedan 1mo ago
Just that fact that the company expects a candidate to even have their own machine is egregious.
- phendrenad2 1mo ago
  For all its talk of 'meritoctacy', the bay area really runs on looking the part.
  - shimman 1mo ago
    Because meritocracy isn't a real thing. It's just another form of authoritarianism, despotism, and oligarchy. Who decides what work is worth rewarding? What about the type of work? It was always an antidemocratic idea sold to tech workers to stop the idea of questioning the system. The idea that simply "talented" workers should rule just seems to speed run towards fascist aims. How do you consider which workers are worth more than others? If you do to the wrong school are you suddenly worth less? Do you think society will have certain preferences? What about in our neoliberal society where money is the only purpose to life?
    - antisthenes 1mo ago
      > Because meritocracy isn't a real thing. It absolutely is a real thing. You don't get to declare that an existing word with more than 2000 years of history doesn't exist. It may not exist in the Bay Area or in whatever subset of parameters you invented, but it absolutely exists and is something to strive towards. > The idea that simply "talented" workers should rule just seems to speed run towards fascist aims. Complete non-sequitur with 0 evidence. > How do you consider which workers are worth more than others? If you do to the wrong school are you suddenly worth less? Do you think society will have certain preferences? You decide just like everything else. Based on context and some objective measurements. It's not a perfect system, because sometimes measurements can become the goal, rather than the underlying objective, but it's the best system we have.
      - jltsiren 1mo ago
        You may have heard the joke that polyamory is wrong, because it should be multiamory or polyphilia. Meritocracy is a similar case. Because the word mixes Latin and Greek roots, it's unlikely to be old. The first recorded uses of "meritocracy" are apparently by Marxist sociologists in the 1950s. They used it to describe a dystopian society, where merit serves as a moral justification for social classes, and social class determines the opportunities available to gain and demonstrate merit. Of course the idea that career success and influence should be based on demonstrated ability and effort is ancient. But once you start building a society based on that idea, you run into Goodhart's law.
        antisthenes 1mo ago
        > Of course the idea that career success and influence should be based on demonstrated ability and effort is ancient. But once you start building a society based on that idea, you run into Goodhart's law. Do you have any evidence for that? Aside from the thought-terminating cliché "it was used by Marxists once" ?
        jltsiren 1mo ago
- morkalork 1mo ago
  What, you can't expect a candidate at least have a laptop?
  - thih9 1mo ago
    Some people share laptops, others don’t have one at all and are fine with a tablet or smartphone.
    - leoedin 1mo ago
      Are those the people you want to hire for software development jobs though? Honestly I would see that as a huge red flag. In western countries a used laptop costs almost nothing.
      - metalforever 1mo ago
        I’ve personally run into this issue of not having a working laptop in an interview setting. It’s not always money . I just don’t like getting work done on a laptop. I use a desktop. I’ve been staff+ for more than 5 years .
      - marcosdumay 1mo ago
        How dare those unemployed people don't manage to get an exclusive laptop for themselves!
        leoedin 1mo ago
        I'm talking about hiring a software engineer for a software development job. I have not met a good software engineer who wasn't also some level of geek. I'm thinking of all the great colleagues I've had over the years, and I would be really, really surprised if any of them didn't have some sort of computer at home. These are not "I just use my phone for everything" people. I'm sure there are outliers, but given the low cost of used ex-corporate laptops in the western world, and presumably the candidate's interest in computers and software development, it's a fairly low bar to expect a candidate to have some sort of PC (laptop, desktop, Linux, Windows, Mac - whatever). I wouldn't expect it to be modern or expensive (I do this for a job and barely spend any money on computers these days), but I'd be really surprised if a candidate had nothing available.
- mistersquid 1mo ago
  > Just that fact that the company expects a candidate to even have their own machine is egregious. In the company where I work (in recent history, the most valuable company on the planet), there are younger employees who do not own personal computers. One of them was (with different company now) a Gen Z developer who did not personally own a computer (besides a phone). I was floored. Still am.
  - Xirdus 1mo ago
    Why? There were a lot of people who didn't own a personal computer before 2000 too. It just wasn't needed. And nowadays, it also isn't needed, albeit for different reasons. The time window where it was actually a reasonable assumption that someone has a computer at home was relatively short.
    - fakedang 1mo ago
      Exactly - personal computers are really just a very "millennial" thing. Only (very) late GenX and millennials grew up with, learned on and interacted with PCs on an hourly basis. By the time GenZs came knocking around, consoles and mobile phones took up the slack, while shitty Chromebooks at school and Google Drive mostly filled in for office-related software.
      - ghaff 1mo ago
        Of course you can, used my own computer for work purposes for the last 14 years I was employed.
  - happymellon 1mo ago
    Why? It's not like you have the option of using a personal computer for work. Most things I use a laptop for could be replaced with an iPad. The experience for me would be worse, so I don't, but I could see other people not minding it.
    - mistersquid 1mo ago
MajorTakeaway 1mo ago
Even more reason to use VMs.
- tamimio 1mo ago
  They (not what OP is talking about but usually these software) detect if a VM exists and abort, to prevent “cheating”.
- bitwize 1mo ago
  How about no. If you want me to run a particular piece of software, send me a fucking computer. If you want me to be on call on a company-managed cellphone, send me a phone that you can own and manage all you want. Do not ask me to download, install, or run malware on MY computer or phone as part of the APPLICATION process. If you are the sort of company that thinks this is appropriate, then I do not want to work for you. I've actually turned down work because of this. "Oh, they just want you to install this Chrome extension to make sure you're not cheating during the video interview." No. Fuck you. Don't touch my fucking equipment.
  - exe34 1mo ago
    I have a desktop that I use as a remote server for the GPU, so I'd be happy to disconnect the ssd and boot off a usb stick.
  - fsckboy 1mo ago
    how about they do what they want, and you do what you want, and you don't collaborate with each other if you can't get along? no reason to be angry. if one of my hiring practices would reliably generate that many f-bombs, i'd consider it a success and stick with it!
    - deleted 1mo ago
      [deleted]
    - preg_match 1mo ago
      You're allowed to be angry when people do dumb things. Expecting your interviewees to install malware on their computer just to do an interview is dumb. Not only is it asking for trouble, it's also completely unnecessary. We have platforms specifically built for coding interviews, you just don't need to do that. I guess, sure, companies are technically allowed to request you install malware on your computer. It's probably a CFAA violation, but nobody gives a rat's ass about the CFAA unless you're hacking the FBI, so who cares. Also, make no mistake: a piece of software that is designed to record your screen, keypresses, etc is malware. It is spyware. You have absolutely zero guarantee it isn't install hooks into your system that will exist long after the application is gone. Just do the interview in a browser sandbox like a normal person, and share your screen. Boom, problem solved, we figured this out 10 years ago. Really that paranoid about cheating? Then pay up and do an in-person interview, paper code test and all. I've had it done to me multiple times.
htrp 1mo ago
Name the company
- dprkh 1mo ago
  Litmus
  - sakjur 1mo ago
    I first thought this was a tongue in cheek joke before I realized you were the original commenter and looked them up. I've described some prior experiences with some interviews as failing my litmus test and have cancelled further interviews when people start demand much too much from me before I'm on a payroll.

by dprkh 1mo ago

delichon 1mo ago

Maybe it's a pen test such that if the CLI can phone home you fail, to weed out candidates with weak security fu.

bryanrasmussen 1mo ago
if that was the purpose it should weed out candidates who agreed to install the app for a job interview.

stronglikedan 1mo ago

Just that fact that the company expects a candidate to even have their own machine is egregious.

phendrenad2 1mo ago
For all its talk of 'meritoctacy', the bay area really runs on looking the part.
- shimman 1mo ago
  Because meritocracy isn't a real thing. It's just another form of authoritarianism, despotism, and oligarchy. Who decides what work is worth rewarding? What about the type of work? It was always an antidemocratic idea sold to tech workers to stop the idea of questioning the system. The idea that simply "talented" workers should rule just seems to speed run towards fascist aims. How do you consider which workers are worth more than others? If you do to the wrong school are you suddenly worth less? Do you think society will have certain preferences? What about in our neoliberal society where money is the only purpose to life?
  - antisthenes 1mo ago
    > Because meritocracy isn't a real thing. It absolutely is a real thing. You don't get to declare that an existing word with more than 2000 years of history doesn't exist. It may not exist in the Bay Area or in whatever subset of parameters you invented, but it absolutely exists and is something to strive towards. > The idea that simply "talented" workers should rule just seems to speed run towards fascist aims. Complete non-sequitur with 0 evidence. > How do you consider which workers are worth more than others? If you do to the wrong school are you suddenly worth less? Do you think society will have certain preferences? You decide just like everything else. Based on context and some objective measurements. It's not a perfect system, because sometimes measurements can become the goal, rather than the underlying objective, but it's the best system we have.
    - jltsiren 1mo ago
      You may have heard the joke that polyamory is wrong, because it should be multiamory or polyphilia. Meritocracy is a similar case. Because the word mixes Latin and Greek roots, it's unlikely to be old. The first recorded uses of "meritocracy" are apparently by Marxist sociologists in the 1950s. They used it to describe a dystopian society, where merit serves as a moral justification for social classes, and social class determines the opportunities available to gain and demonstrate merit. Of course the idea that career success and influence should be based on demonstrated ability and effort is ancient. But once you start building a society based on that idea, you run into Goodhart's law.
      - antisthenes 1mo ago
        > Of course the idea that career success and influence should be based on demonstrated ability and effort is ancient. But once you start building a society based on that idea, you run into Goodhart's law. Do you have any evidence for that? Aside from the thought-terminating cliché "it was used by Marxists once" ?
        jltsiren 1mo ago
morkalork 1mo ago
What, you can't expect a candidate at least have a laptop?
- thih9 1mo ago
  Some people share laptops, others don’t have one at all and are fine with a tablet or smartphone.
  - leoedin 1mo ago
    Are those the people you want to hire for software development jobs though? Honestly I would see that as a huge red flag. In western countries a used laptop costs almost nothing.
    - metalforever 1mo ago
      I’ve personally run into this issue of not having a working laptop in an interview setting. It’s not always money . I just don’t like getting work done on a laptop. I use a desktop. I’ve been staff+ for more than 5 years .
    - marcosdumay 1mo ago
      How dare those unemployed people don't manage to get an exclusive laptop for themselves!
      - leoedin 1mo ago
        I'm talking about hiring a software engineer for a software development job. I have not met a good software engineer who wasn't also some level of geek. I'm thinking of all the great colleagues I've had over the years, and I would be really, really surprised if any of them didn't have some sort of computer at home. These are not "I just use my phone for everything" people. I'm sure there are outliers, but given the low cost of used ex-corporate laptops in the western world, and presumably the candidate's interest in computers and software development, it's a fairly low bar to expect a candidate to have some sort of PC (laptop, desktop, Linux, Windows, Mac - whatever). I wouldn't expect it to be modern or expensive (I do this for a job and barely spend any money on computers these days), but I'd be really surprised if a candidate had nothing available.
mistersquid 1mo ago
> Just that fact that the company expects a candidate to even have their own machine is egregious. In the company where I work (in recent history, the most valuable company on the planet), there are younger employees who do not own personal computers. One of them was (with different company now) a Gen Z developer who did not personally own a computer (besides a phone). I was floored. Still am.
- Xirdus 1mo ago
  Why? There were a lot of people who didn't own a personal computer before 2000 too. It just wasn't needed. And nowadays, it also isn't needed, albeit for different reasons. The time window where it was actually a reasonable assumption that someone has a computer at home was relatively short.
  - fakedang 1mo ago
    Exactly - personal computers are really just a very "millennial" thing. Only (very) late GenX and millennials grew up with, learned on and interacted with PCs on an hourly basis. By the time GenZs came knocking around, consoles and mobile phones took up the slack, while shitty Chromebooks at school and Google Drive mostly filled in for office-related software.
    - ghaff 1mo ago
      Of course you can, used my own computer for work purposes for the last 14 years I was employed.
- happymellon 1mo ago
  Why? It's not like you have the option of using a personal computer for work. Most things I use a laptop for could be replaced with an iPad. The experience for me would be worse, so I don't, but I could see other people not minding it.
  - mistersquid 1mo ago

MajorTakeaway 1mo ago

Even more reason to use VMs.

tamimio 1mo ago
They (not what OP is talking about but usually these software) detect if a VM exists and abort, to prevent “cheating”.
bitwize 1mo ago
How about no. If you want me to run a particular piece of software, send me a fucking computer. If you want me to be on call on a company-managed cellphone, send me a phone that you can own and manage all you want. Do not ask me to download, install, or run malware on MY computer or phone as part of the APPLICATION process. If you are the sort of company that thinks this is appropriate, then I do not want to work for you. I've actually turned down work because of this. "Oh, they just want you to install this Chrome extension to make sure you're not cheating during the video interview." No. Fuck you. Don't touch my fucking equipment.
- exe34 1mo ago
  I have a desktop that I use as a remote server for the GPU, so I'd be happy to disconnect the ssd and boot off a usb stick.
- fsckboy 1mo ago
  how about they do what they want, and you do what you want, and you don't collaborate with each other if you can't get along? no reason to be angry. if one of my hiring practices would reliably generate that many f-bombs, i'd consider it a success and stick with it!
  - deleted 1mo ago
    [deleted]
  - preg_match 1mo ago
    You're allowed to be angry when people do dumb things. Expecting your interviewees to install malware on their computer just to do an interview is dumb. Not only is it asking for trouble, it's also completely unnecessary. We have platforms specifically built for coding interviews, you just don't need to do that. I guess, sure, companies are technically allowed to request you install malware on your computer. It's probably a CFAA violation, but nobody gives a rat's ass about the CFAA unless you're hacking the FBI, so who cares. Also, make no mistake: a piece of software that is designed to record your screen, keypresses, etc is malware. It is spyware. You have absolutely zero guarantee it isn't install hooks into your system that will exist long after the application is gone. Just do the interview in a browser sandbox like a normal person, and share your screen. Boom, problem solved, we figured this out 10 years ago. Really that paranoid about cheating? Then pay up and do an in-person interview, paper code test and all. I've had it done to me multiple times.

htrp 1mo ago

Name the company

dprkh 1mo ago
Litmus
- sakjur 1mo ago
  I first thought this was a tongue in cheek joke before I realized you were the original commenter and looked them up. I've described some prior experiences with some interviews as failing my litmus test and have cancelled further interviews when people start demand much too much from me before I'm on a payroll.