3 ms·

Maybe people should be more careful about what to post online, especially things that could reveal personal identities without the person's permission. In this

by jd007 14y ago

Maybe people should be more careful about what to post online, especially things that could reveal personal identities without the person's permission. In this case the customer's signature is partially visible, which is not only considered personal but can potentially also be forged to sign for credit card receipts and legal documents. Sure the life of a waitress is not easy but from the perspective of the restaurant owner, I think the firing was justified. If she disagrees, she can always sue for wrongful termination and let the court decide (which will cost her money that potentially cannot be recovered should she lose).

pdonis 14y ago
the customer's signature is partially visible You're kidding, right? How could anyone possibly get any identifying information from a few squiggles at the edge of a photo--much less enough to perpetrate identity theft?
- droithomme 14y ago
  She originally posted the full image of the receipt and the signature was completely visible.
- jd007 14y ago
  The point is not whether enough identifying information could be obtained this time, but rather the fact that she (arguably) did not really consider that when posting the image, and that she could do it again (and this time reveal enough identifying information). Had she tilted the camera a bit further down the whole signature would've been visible. Imagine an employee in a company accidentally leaks some user data, which does not really contain personally identifying information. I don't think it's completely unjustifiable to fire this person even though no damage was done. Of course the owners of the restaurant could've dealt with the situation a lot nicer (warning her about the potential danger instead of firing her). But I don't blame them for taking the more drastic measure that they did (not saying that I would've done the same).

by jd007 14y ago

pdonis 14y ago

the customer's signature is partially visible You're kidding, right? How could anyone possibly get any identifying information from a few squiggles at the edge of a photo--much less enough to perpetrate identity theft?

droithomme 14y ago
She originally posted the full image of the receipt and the signature was completely visible.
jd007 14y ago
The point is not whether enough identifying information could be obtained this time, but rather the fact that she (arguably) did not really consider that when posting the image, and that she could do it again (and this time reveal enough identifying information). Had she tilted the camera a bit further down the whole signature would've been visible. Imagine an employee in a company accidentally leaks some user data, which does not really contain personally identifying information. I don't think it's completely unjustifiable to fire this person even though no damage was done. Of course the owners of the restaurant could've dealt with the situation a lot nicer (warning her about the potential danger instead of firing her). But I don't blame them for taking the more drastic measure that they did (not saying that I would've done the same).