It’s anecdotal, but back when I was on Reddit, I saw someone say that a prospective employer actually required your full credentials so that they could check your private information as well.
That makes sense, because any government agencies that actually have a need for intimate knowledge of your social media footprint don’t actually need your password to harvest ALL the data that network has on you public and private.
I mean maybe if they have an investigation and they want to use that information as evidence sure that would be illegal to use but for background checks any of that information is fair game if they are able to get it. Like if your terms of service specifically say they wont give any information out for any reason, maybe you can sue them if you can prove they got the information with your name attached directly instead of it being sold after being anonymized in aggregate then another company/data broker aggregating other data on you to infer who’s data belongs to who with device footprints then selling that to the government as a service which i mean good luck. But most likely the terms you sign say they will hand over data for criminal investigations or matters of national security to government entities which they can state background checks for high level clearance positions is a matter of national security.
No country is publicizing what checks they do for a high level security clearance check unless they want to give bad actors and easy way to beat their checks. What country is this and whats the exact law you are referencing? If you can provide me direct evidence for that I’ll eat my words but I think you are misunderstanding something if im honest.
There’s no need to involve the courts when the social media networks are complicit. It’s not as if “how” they obtained the data will ever be tested in court, they only need the data for their own internal investigations. Courts and spy agencies don’t have anything to do with it.
My boss worked at IBM before his current role. He said a former colleague of his listed him as a reference for his security clearance and he “got to meet with some men in suits with no sense of humor” as part of it.
Honestly I’ll probably never go for any jobs that require a security clearance because honestly that’s just a level of stress that I don’t need
It’s anecdotal, but back when I was on Reddit, I saw someone say that a prospective employer actually required your full credentials so that they could check your private information as well.
That not only sounds illegal and shady, it would be the dumbest thing you could do.
Now somebody else has your account, uploads some Epstein material for shits and giggles and you can go to jail
That is an immediate “Nope the fuck out of there, you do NOT want to work in het place”
You slipped out a bit of Dutch at the end there.
Could be, but what part, exactly?
“het place”
Strongly agreed!
Doesn’t sound illegal at all. Immoral sure. But there’s no way governments have created a law to make asking for social logins illegal
Small company overreach.
They probably also ask you a bunch of illegal questions in the screening
deleted by creator
That makes sense, because any government agencies that actually have a need for intimate knowledge of your social media footprint don’t actually need your password to harvest ALL the data that network has on you public and private.
deleted by creator
I mean maybe if they have an investigation and they want to use that information as evidence sure that would be illegal to use but for background checks any of that information is fair game if they are able to get it. Like if your terms of service specifically say they wont give any information out for any reason, maybe you can sue them if you can prove they got the information with your name attached directly instead of it being sold after being anonymized in aggregate then another company/data broker aggregating other data on you to infer who’s data belongs to who with device footprints then selling that to the government as a service which i mean good luck. But most likely the terms you sign say they will hand over data for criminal investigations or matters of national security to government entities which they can state background checks for high level clearance positions is a matter of national security.
deleted by creator
No country is publicizing what checks they do for a high level security clearance check unless they want to give bad actors and easy way to beat their checks. What country is this and whats the exact law you are referencing? If you can provide me direct evidence for that I’ll eat my words but I think you are misunderstanding something if im honest.
deleted by creator
There’s no need to involve the courts when the social media networks are complicit. It’s not as if “how” they obtained the data will ever be tested in court, they only need the data for their own internal investigations. Courts and spy agencies don’t have anything to do with it.
deleted by creator
If that illusion makes you feel safer, then I don’t care enough to argue with you about it.
deleted by creator
They just buy the data en masse from data brokers. All of the process is civil rights theater.
deleted by creator
My boss worked at IBM before his current role. He said a former colleague of his listed him as a reference for his security clearance and he “got to meet with some men in suits with no sense of humor” as part of it.
Honestly I’ll probably never go for any jobs that require a security clearance because honestly that’s just a level of stress that I don’t need
Yeah but this is asking for their credentials which is an absolute direct NO, as that would be extremely risky for me
Probrally a scammer