US city ends FaceSpaceGooHoo log-in grab
After a virtual avalanche of news coverage, the City of Bozeman, Montana has decided it will no longer ask job applicants for their FaceSpaceGooHoo log-ins. As we explained last week, the mid-sized American burg was requiring City job seekers to surrender usernames and passwords for all "social networking" sites they used, …
It was never going to last, was it?
I have to wonder what would have been their response to anyone under the age of 70 who answered the demand with "None."
I hadn't heard about this one... But if I'd been asked for that, I suspect I would have written a great big "No" in the box and handed it back.
Either that or asked for more paper because the space wasn't big enough to list all the social sites I belong to. Then list each and every one, with usernames, but put down "**************" as the password for them all.
Well, no way would I ever consent to handing over all my personal passwords to a prospective employer, particularly to a local government office (who are, of course, well known for their levels of security).
Having job conditions that mandate no posting of restricted information or blogging about your work would probably be acceptable but just giving them full access?
Of course, you could give them the info, and change the passwords the moment you lef tthe offices...
Would have been to list all social media sites and a username of nunyabiznaz and password of smegoff. Then when you are denied employment, take it straight to court for invasion of privacy and termination without cause...
Most employee manuals these days seem to regard using (or attempting to use) another's account credentials as a big no-no. Would the hiring managers be subject to firing if they used the info? Shouldn't they be at least suspended for asking?
Actually, this is probably a brilliant way to make life easier for their resident BOFH: Ask for usernames and passwords on the application, then immediately disqualify anyone who actually provides them. That should weed out a lot of workers who will fall for the "click here for ___" emails.
Why even give them valid names? Why not make some up instead? Isn't that what Gmail and Y!Mail are for?
Mines the one with the label, "Property of Preston Munchensenton"....
I've heard of checking out prospective employees on social sites, but demanding their login info when they accept a job? Hello, human rights?
Obviously local government in Bozeman just goes ahead and does stuff without actually stopping and working out whether their schemes are legal, responsible or useful.
What were they going to do with all those details (apart from probably not keep them secure)? Spam social networks with Bozeman tourism ads? Or just invade their employees privacy whenever they choose?
I hope they get a good slapping for even thinking of doing this, never mind putting it into practice. They'll probably just get nice jobs at MiniTrue.
"He also said that Bozeman has suspended the practice of viewing online information that sits behind the collected passwords and that the log-in info will remain the confidential property of the City."
Now what I want to know is this:
Why keep them at all? Destroy them and that way there is no temptation to view by anyone. Granted they could say they destroyed them while keeping a copy but still means something.
Course one of my entries would read:
theregister.co.uk
<INSERT EMAIL HERE>
User name: Anonymous coward
Good luck with figuring out which posts were from me assholes.
/big brother is watching and its only a matter of time before this becomes the norm.
How anybody could possibly think this was acceptable in the first place beats me. What kind of moron thinks I'm going to hand over passwords to anything or that they even have the right to ask for them?
Presumably the ACLU are having strong words about the information still held.
My answer to the question would have probably been "None", though the temptation to write "Mind your own fucking business" would have been strong.
Your plan is cunning, although I think I can spy one teensy drawback in the whole "forgetting to tick the post anonymously box" area
It was all probably a "make sure the person we have supporting the opening of the new gay/lesbian/furry/homeless/vegetarian/etc library doesn't show up on the interwebs dressed as a Nazi/KKK/phobe/furry/priest/etc and embarrass the living hell out of us as has happened before to several organisations" type of policy taken to extremes by people who didn't really understand the law regarding this.
You know, privacy is all well and good, but when you are taking a job as a civil servant there is a reasonable expectation that you're "clean" (by their standards, I'm not judging anyone). Having an invite-only facebook profile or whatever is not necessarily making that page private.
... Bozeman looks a little bit better than Tuttle ....
http://www.centos.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=127
- Your personal diaries
- Your address book
- 12 months of phone bills, itemised
- Any letters you have received from family, friends and lovers in the last three years
- Receipts for everything you have purchased in the last three years
- Your house keys
- Your alarm code
Imagine the uproar!
Why bother to destroy them? Anyone who is that bothered about their privacy can simply change their passwords and lock them out.
Is this not just a eleaborate phising scam?
Seeing as how phising is illegal. Shouldnt this be classed the same?
"User name: Anonymous coward
Good luck with figuring out which posts were from me assholes."
Problem is, that most people on first reading these comments pages jump to the conclusion that Anonymous Coward is actually a handle/username - so they'd attribute them all to you. You really want that? :-)
"Course one of my entries would read:
theregister.co.uk
<INSERT EMAIL HERE>
User name: Anonymous coward
Good luck with figuring out which posts were from me assholes."
The once by James O´Brien?
(Ano cause i remembered to cross out the box)
Since when did Bozeman decide to model itself after Myanmar? And anyone that provided these in response to the request should be sheltered from society, as they are ill-equipped to handle the rigors of daily existence.
Nah that was intentional. But definately made for some good laughs at the replies :)
If the burghers of Bozeman treat their potential employees like that, what do they to to their actual populace?
Control freaks like that will probably end up spying on everything the people do, putting spy cameras everywhere, logging all their telephone calls and emails, and every web site they visit, bottling up anyone who tries to protest in a mass of police, demanding lists of every person who frequents a nightclub and advance details of every performer who plays there, introducing ludicrous numbers of new laws to control every tiniest thing the people might possibly want to do ...
Thank god nothing like that could ever happen here!
So the city decides they don't want you working for them any more, and uses the information they made you give them to log on as you and put in some stuff about how bad they are - thus giving them the perfect excuse to get rid of you.
Of course, they will have taken their inspiration from the UK Parliament and made sure that, although they have your details, you cannot possibly be allowed to have theirs...
Sign up, sign up for The Register's weekly IT security newsletter - click here
