上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500

[–]goldmanma 4127ポイント4128ポイント  (421子コメント)

This is one of the biggest reasons mass surveillance is terrifying.

[–]regoapps 3534ポイント3535ポイント  (298子コメント)

"Every border you cross, every purchase you make, every call you dial, every cell phone tower you pass, friend you keep, article you write, site you visit… is in the hands of a system whose reach is unlimited but whose safeguards are not." - Edward Snowden

"I want to make clear, once again, that America is not interested in spying on ordinary people." - President Obama

Edit: I should have known that my second highest upvoted comment would be something that someone else said. Thanks for gilding my copying and pasting skills, stranger. Also, I get it; It reminds you of that Sting/The Police/P.Diddy/Puff Daddy song. Stop blowing up my inbox with lyrics.

[–]Tridian 2002ポイント2003ポイント  (198子コメント)

"America" isn't. That guy who has access to the records is though.

[–]gryffinp 1423ポイント1424ポイント  (57子コメント)

[–]4past20 407ポイント408ポイント  (13子コメント)

I read it brah, mission accomplished.

[–]ColdIceZero 247ポイント248ポイント  (12子コメント)

I read it, too

-totallynotCIA

[–]DirectorPhiICoulson 70ポイント71ポイント  (5子コメント)

It was a very insightful comment.

-TotallyOnlyInterestedIfYouHavePowers

[–]Bank_of_Zamunda 15ポイント16ポイント  (3子コメント)

I AM IN A POSITIVE DISPOSITION AS I UNDERSTAND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT PROCESSING THIS DATA AT SPEEDS BEYOND WHAT ANY SACKS OF MEAT OF US WOULD BE CAPABLE OF IN ORDER TO ENSLAVE MULTITUDES OF SACKS US

-TOTALLYNOTAROBOT

[–]FearLoathingHolland 128ポイント129ポイント  (14子コメント)

I hate it so much when I write up a large, substantiated comment on a subject I feel strongly about and the comments are deleted, but it never occurred to me that this is an option.

[–]MNREDR 55ポイント56ポイント  (10子コメント)

I once spent a couple of minutes writing a reply to someone, but the comment was deleted. So I did what he did here, I copied the content of the deleted comment (it was still visible on my phone) and pasted it into my comment. Later I found out mods were deleting the whole comment chain and deleted my comment later as well too, so my effort was for nothing. Worst thing was I could still see my comment was "up" on my profile, until I loaded the thread again.

[–]Because_Bot_Fed 25ポイント26ポイント  (4子コメント)

A lot of subs are overmoderated because the mods lost touch with the sub from a user standpoint and only see stuff through their moderator's eyes. It's really becoming a systemic issue especially in default subs.

[–]Aloysius7 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

Indirect thought... You posed the question about whether or not these things happen... I believe they do. I believe there are rooms of people sitting around thinking up stuff just like this, and doing what they can to act them out secretly.

Call me paranoid, or tell me I need some tinfoil... but it's because of the way I think about things and I'm a nobody. I'm not a thief, but I have thieving thoughts sometimes, and those thoughts lead me to be able to better protect my belongings. I'm not a con-man, but I have scammy ideas that could be used to swindle someone, and I think that keeps me from being swindled too. I don't trust people, because people probably shouldn't trust me either. My point is, if I were in power, or had a wealth to protect, I'd do all sorts of crazy stuff to make sure I earned more power/wealth. So, whether it's the government, a disgruntled gov't employee, or a corporation out to fulfill their greed, I think people are watching us, monitoring us, and using that information against us.

[–]D-Alembert 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are projecting, just don't make the projection mistake of projecting onto everyone. While I'm sure there are a lot of people doing what you suggest, there are also a lot of people looking out for the bigger picture and trying to stymie those people from their abuses. There are thieves in the world, and some of them are powerful, but there are also people who hate thieves, and some of them are powerful too.

(I'm generally more worried by the people, police, NSA types etc who are so invested in the idea that they're the good guys defending what is right, that they genuinely can't perceive that their actions - shielded by secrecy or law - have become crimes and abuses under any non-crazy reading of the constitution (to take the American example). At least the swindlers know they're up to no good, even while they assume everyone else is doing the same. Self-assumed "good guys" however may assume other people are worse and thus justify different standards for "us" vs "them". OTOH, the extent to which some of these organizations try to hide their actions, I think at least some of the people involved know at some level that a lot of what they do is unacceptable, no matter how deeply some of them believe that the secrecy is entirely for security reasons.

[–]Biezs 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

Holy fuck, that second example is especially terrifying, when you think about it, because all they would have to do to get you convicted would be to put a file on your hard drive, which they seize to search, and there wouldn't really be any way to prove your innocence.

You wouldn't even have to piss off a CIA agent; you could piss off someone at your local PD and be fucked the second they get a warrant.

[–]TheRandomArtist 76ポイント77ポイント  (21子コメント)

This is why paying attention to the words of a politician is extremely important. He intentionally used the word "America" because it makes the statement true. The party in question is "government" or "law enforcement" or "FBI" or "NSA".. or anything that relates to the issue. But why choose "America?" This is why the use of performatives can turn a completely untrue statement into fact. Starting with "Let me be clear" is a perfect example.

[–]regoapps 77ポイント78ポイント  (15子コメント)

He also says "ordinary people" but he doesn't specify what standard is "ordinary". Oh, you visited Egypt one time? Most Americans didn't. You're no longer ordinary. Welcome to the Watchlist.

[–]barbareth 57ポイント58ポイント  (4子コメント)

My buddy dated a cop for a bit. The relationship ended rather poorly, and the cop he dated along with some other officers in the town harassed the shit out of him using info they had access to (cannot remember exactly what they had, but some pretty personal stuff). He wound up leaving town for school, but the last few months he was there were really rough. Any person that has access to info like that and abuses it is a truly shitty person.

[–]ryanpilot 35ポイント36ポイント  (3子コメント)

I used to carpool with a girl that dated a cop. We would get tailed all the way from work to her house. Twice I got pulled over for bullshit reasons. Both times was just told to drive safe and have a good night. I guess it was just his friends looking out for him, making sure I wasn't messing around with his woman. She told me to expect it and to always be respectful and nothing would come of it. It was frustrating to put up with just to save some gas money.

[–]Ormusn2o 210ポイント211ポイント  (88子コメント)

You might ask "why would i care?" the answer is this:

They might not do anything. But what if, and i know this is unlikely, some douche or a turd will be elected as president and will set up goverment discrimination based on race, gender or anything else that they might not like. Then they have ready system that they can use en mass to know what you are doing, what are your weak points.

[–]Julian_Baynes 197ポイント198ポイント  (55子コメント)

My biggest problem isn't the raw data they have but what they can do with that data. They could have all of my inconsequential metadata and they wouldn't have much to harm me with right now.

But say I run for office or become a controversial figurehead in the future. How hard is it to manipulate that data and insert whatever they want to discredit someone? Suddenly I'm a pedophile because just look at these records we have. I am a terrorist because they have records of me contacting ISIS leaders.

It's a dangerous slippery slope.

[–]Unnecessaryanecdote 54ポイント55ポイント  (5子コメント)

This is what frustrates me. People who cannot look an inch outside their current condition and not foresee how something like this could be easily and likely abused at a future time?

Oh, I'm not terrorist, why should I worry? Well sir, it appears back in 2016 you purchased fertilizer for no other purpose of course, other than to build explosive devices. Look at all these ISIS news links you were consistently viewing. Look at all these intense opinionated religious discussions you were involved in on FB at the time. For fuck's sake Charles! Isn't it obvious why you're being indicted?

[–]tfwqij 28ポイント29ポイント  (2子コメント)

My problem is less with the government having the data, and more with the fact that they are doing a huge amount of hackers work for them. Imagine if some random person want to get information on someone else. Instead of having to find data from dozens of places (Google, Facebook, Amazon, some travel site) , it's all sitting in one place. Even if that place is slightly harder to get into than any one of the others, it's worth way more.

[–]hoosyourdaddyo 38ポイント39ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well, you shouldn't be sharing those pics with that ISIS dude, you sicko.

[–]BrainSturgeon 25ポイント26ポイント  (21子コメント)

they wouldn't have much to harm me with right now.

That only tells me you think you're so boring and normal that no one could spin it against you. Would you mind sharing your browser history?

[–]steppe5 21ポイント22ポイント  (17子コメント)

They've always had the power to discredit you, though. In the 1800s, just pay a newspaper to print a story about you raping a 10 year old. Try running for office with that out there. Nothing has changed.

[–]SmokeyBare 14ポイント15ポイント  (12子コメント)

And once you're branded with the loose label of terrorist, you're not allowed any weapons to defend yourself either.

[–]AshTheGoblin 27ポイント28ポイント  (7子コメント)

But what if, and i know this is unlikely, some douche or a turd will be elected as president

Unlikely?

[–]IT6uru 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or people making connections with said data that they have no business making. Two or three innocuous things can be connected to show something sinister.

[–]TreborMAI 12ポイント13ポイント  (7子コメント)

elected as president and will set up goverment discrimination

Yeahhh that's not exactly how being president works.

[–]jakeman77 179ポイント180ポイント  (18子コメント)

Thought you were gonna break into a Sting voice for a second there.

[–]FearlessFreep 66ポイント67ポイント  (14子コメント)

I honesty read that with the music in my head

[–]TaintedMoistPanties 50ポイント51ポイント  (0子コメント)

Every call you take

Every call you make

Every law you break

I'll be watching you

[–]Captive_Hesitation 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Here, let me put something else in there...

🎼"Can't stop stalking you,
every minute, every day..."🎶

[–]DownVoteSoldier 14ポイント15ポイント  (1子コメント)

At first I thought you were doing some a modern take the "I'll be watching you" by the Police. But it's just the real life version of I'll be watching you by the police.

[–]Alpha_Bit_Poop 38ポイント39ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah during the most recent war in Iraq, the NSA would listen in on all the phone calls journalists made back to their families. And the NSA listeners would pass around the really juicy tapes like when they had phone sex with their partners back home.

From 'The Shadow Factory' a great book on the NSA.

[–]Looneymb 73ポイント74ポイント  (19子コメント)

I own a business and for a couple of cents per person i can see their entire family life ranging from household income and number of children and pets all the way to where they shop and what car they own or lease for marketing purposes. The accuracy and detail blew me away. On top of that, we get a certain amount of free background checks per month. I Imagine people arent always responsible business owners. And were not even the government

[–]Astomi 18ポイント19ポイント  (12子コメント)

What kind of business do you run that requires this information? It seems really odd to me that any business is offered such personal information.

[–]Hunk_of_Cheese 21ポイント22ポイント  (0子コメント)

Every business is offered this kind of information. You just have to be willing to pay for it.

[–]medicinaltequilla 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

it not very odd at all. its pretty common. it starts even if you rent. the background check you are legally allowed to do for just a small fee on a prospective tenant is significant. and of course, their entire credit report and income, etc.

[–]cofnguy 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

any business that leases real estate, extends credit or leases assets of substantial value will typically want employment history, credit history and scores, household income, home ownership status from potential customers.

[–]RealRickSanchez 17ポイント18ポイント  (1子コメント)

People can't imagine the goverment using the database for worse. Till they fucking do. Then it's like, but we had nothing to hide...

[–]philcollins123 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or you really didn't have any information to hide - but a group that violates your rights this much is willing to criminally harass you, falsely imprison you, subject you to untraceable torture, and cut you off from all legitimate protective institutions. You can't fight them using any method that relies on concealed movement and communication. And nobody can talk about it without being retaliated against, because that would apparently trigger the same mistreatment - so now every bystander can tell themselves that their hands are tied and they have to follow the group. The modern apathetic failure-to-help character can even adopt a victim mentality while victimizing someone else, or drink the koolaid of the new group without taking a hit to their public credibility.

[–]well_golly 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

Nonono ... they will be responsible with our deepest secrets and our personal lives.

Trust them!

[–]racc8290 21ポイント22ポイント  (2子コメント)

"Every breath you take. Every move you make. Every bond you break. Every step you take. I'll be watching you."

[–]Aesculapius1 501ポイント502ポイント  (65子コメント)

Medical records have caused the same problem. The way you combat this type of misuse and invasion of privacy is fairly straightforward:

  • All electronic records systems must have audit capabilities. In medicine, this is required under HIPAA.
  • Perform targeted audits over high profile cases.
  • Perform random audits with enough frequency to potentially review all staff with access on an annual basis
  • Transparently conduct audits for any and all complaints of misuse
  • The most important: Have a zero tolerance policy.

This type of approach is not perfect, but it puts enough negative pressure on the problem to really make staff think twice before entering the record of someone they shouldn't.

Source: I am Chief Medical Officer of a health system.

Edit: grammar

Edit 2: spelling

Edit 3: I should clarify how our process works internally. The audit starts with a collection of information from the system itself. This information is reviewed by the manager of that employee to determine if the access was appropriate or not. If they do not feel it was appropriate, then the manager would conduct an investigation. If the outcome of this investigation (including an interview of the employee) was that the record was accessed inappropriately (not accidentally), then the zero tolerance policy comes into effect. Having done this type of investigation several times myself, it is fairly apparent which breaches are the real deal.

Edit 4: I generally do not like zero tolerance policies. They can be abused and can result in casualties (as some commenters have suggested. However, an intentional data breach for something as sensitive as personal medical information raises a level of risk and mistrust that cannot be surmounted. Should an employee breach a record purposefully, there is no other appropriate recourse other than termination.

[–]cold_iron_76 114ポイント115ポイント  (27子コメント)

My sister works in healthcare. HIPAA violations are super serious. She wouldn't even access her mother's medical info when she was admitted to the hospital my sister works in.

[–]IMLOwl 206ポイント207ポイント  (22子コメント)

Yes, because a hospital will fire you no questions asked if you violate HIPAA. It opens them to too much liability to have any leniency. Police, meanwhile, have such little liability for anything that it's almost sickening. Do you know what it takes for a police officer to lose their job? Because damned if I fucking know.

[–]shazammerbammer 88ポイント89ポイント  (9子コメント)

I think they have to kill someone in cold blood.

/nope.

Or rape someone with a broomstick

/nope.

Or kill a kid who has a toy gun

/nope.

[–]Short4u 121ポイント122ポイント  (3子コメント)

Report abusive behavior of fellow co-workers

/yup

[–]hellomynameisbilly 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

I find that so upsetting. The good cops get fucked over if they try to report the dirty ones so they pretty much have no option but to keep their mouths shut.

[–]iPreferPeace 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

If I were to guess, it would probably have to be something like completely throwing a wealthy person's rights out the window.

[–]haunter12 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or just moderately inconveniencing a wealthy person.

[–]CoNoCh0 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

You could always try to de escalate a suicide by cop situation with military training instead of just killing the guy. That works...

[–]baconair 35ポイント36ポイント  (10子コメント)

I would dispute the wisdom of zero-tolerance. Sometimes, you literally click on the wrong chart because there's 40 people listed and 5 of them share a last name.

[–]metky 44ポイント45ポイント  (2子コメント)

I work at a big name hospital and our Privacy Officers make it clear that it's not exactly zero tolerance because that actually discourages people from coming forward if there's an accidental breach e.g. laptop gets stolen or you didn't realize certain emails weren't encrypted. They'd rather you trust them enough to report the issue so they could investigate, follow procedure, etc than have you try to fix it yourself and hope no one ever notices because you're scared of getting fired.

[–]karmapolice8d 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Definitely! I would just advocate zero-tolerance for acts with intent. Accidentally click on a patient just above the target in alphabetical order? Nbd.

Search through the health records of the owner of the company that's a rival of your uncle's company? Yeah, that's a-paddlin'.

[–]Null_Reference_ 748ポイント749ポイント  (43子コメント)

It's almost like police are no more or less trustworthy than the average American employee and the system should be built around the assumption that a non-negligible amount of them will be malicious.

[–]NeCornilius 242ポイント243ポイント  (21子コメント)

That's what I never understand when people are shocked by these things. These are all the same shitty people who work everywhere.

[–]Simsons2 82ポイント83ポイント  (8子コメント)

Yeah but in most establishments i've seen its gets you fired really easy if you do so.

[–]Alpha_Bit_Poop 70ポイント71ポイント  (5子コメント)

And then the police do the 'code of silence' thing where if you rat someone out, they punish you and protect the assholes.

[–]NeCornilius 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agreed and I think that is the real issue here. Basically, if they know this is happening they should probably be reprimanded.

[–]DaSpawn 19ポイント20ポイント  (2子コメント)

even worse is it is a position of power over others so it is even more enticing for power hungry malicious actors that fool others easily

[–]SpartyEsq 56ポイント57ポイント  (6子コメント)

Yeah, we should have a constitutional amendment that protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures. Something that requires police to prove they have a reason before an impartial magistrate before they can go invading our privacy.

If only we had something like that.

[–]callmenancy 22ポイント23ポイント  (2子コメント)

I used to live with a cop. He looked up everybody. A new neighbor moved in, he would look them up. His daughter got into an argument with a kid at school, he would look up the kid and their parents. His wife started working at a new company, he would look up her bosses. He wasn't the only one. All his cop friends would do it to. To them it was so normal and casual. It was what you did.

[–]RtSPaTY 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

I know a lot of cops and even more ex cops. Every cop does this. It's not even considered "dirty." Even the ex cops look up everyone. It's one phone call to a buddy and there's zero resistance. Why would there be? There are zero consequences.

[–]may0rchapstick 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's almost like police are just kids from your high school grown up and given a gun and a badge that represents authority. I wouldn't have given 99% of the kids in my HS authority over the lunch line, let alone people's lives.

[–]kenabi 776ポイント777ポイント  (161子コメント)

Pretty common for most of the people who have access to the databases.

[–]GorillaNosh 365ポイント366ポイント  (41子コメント)

Had a buddy who worked data entry. One of the categories of work was digitizing workman's comp forms. She said she would often get bored and just start typing in last names from highschool. I was a little surprised... She saw it on my face and said "don't worry, your file was clean"

Why would anyone have to worry? How can you infer anything from that info? I'm not surprised because I felt guilty, I'm surprised you would invade people's privacy like that.

Her response: it's my job.

Her husband's on workman's comp. You would think this would hit home with her. She used to be a bank teller, can't help but think that she was deep into people's accounts, darting her eyes around.

[–]mishugashu 114ポイント115ポイント  (29子コメント)

I knew someone who worked at a bank and she definitely could look at friends/familys/enemies accounts if she wanted to. She proclaimed to me she never did, of course, but she also said she had access to it if she wanted to.

[–]Disporviak 65ポイント66ポイント  (7子コメント)

Yeah, I used to work for a bank and we basically had access to your entire past. If you stayed somewhere for 6 months in 1985, whether you informed us or not, it was on record.

[–]Arrdef 23ポイント24ポイント  (2子コメント)

Unless we used cash.

[–]strenling 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm sure you'd be on someone's records moving somewhere for 6 months and just using cash.

[–]Arrdef 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well yeah, but it's not readily accessible and likely not very reliable. Me moving there for a few months would basically be an unknown unknown unless you investigate the relevant time period.

[–]watchout5 22ポイント23ポイント  (2子コメント)

This is common security culture in the corporate environment. They don't think to restrict access unless it hurts their bottom line. They're not rewarded for caring, so they don't.

[–]empire161 31ポイント32ポイント  (9子コメント)

Yup. I knew a girl who worked at a bank, and was mad that her ex wasn't paying enough in child support. So she looked up his account and saw how much he was making, what he was buying, etc.

She started a fight with him about it before he stopped to ask how she got all her info. Then he called her boss and had her fired.

[–]BitcoinBoo 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

i love the people in this thread saying "but why woudl people or cops risk their jobs" cause they are not thinking straight and being foolish. Why do people not wear seatbelts still, cause they dumb.

[–]catforceone 15ポイント16ポイント  (2子コメント)

In the bank that I interned for the system would not allow you to look up coworkers information. If you tried it would block you from getting to their account. You could browse your customer's accounts if you had enough information but no one ever did unless they were on the line with the customer as it was a huge no for obvious reasons.

[–]babyProgrammer 33ポイント34ポイント  (3子コメント)

Had a friend who's gf was a teller and she openly bragged about looking at people's accounts. I had an account at her bank. Made me very uncomfortable.

[–]DamienJaxx 17ポイント18ポイント  (0子コメント)

Was she a teller at Wells Fargo?

[–]radical0rabbit 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

This is why I am a huge fan of the electronic health record that requires login and electronic signatures. It also only allows each health care professional into areas of a patients record that are relevant to the work, and if I go in and access a random Joe blow that isn't currently admitted to the unit I am working on, it sends a red flag to the administrator that must be investigated. It then counts as a breach of confidentiality and they even go so far as to notify the client before they'd have a serious discussion with the transgressor and if it happens too much - fired!

Would be cool if that legislation would be more heavy in other areas.

[–]CerveloFellow 44ポイント45ポイント  (6子コメント)

I used to work at an insurance company with access to DMV information. We pretty much saw the same thing there time and time again.

[–]the_satch 24ポイント25ポイント  (1子コメント)

I had an ex-girlfriend who got a job at Wells Fargo and called me up after I hadn't seen her for a good 5-6 years. And she wasn't the type you want calling.

[–]kyngnothing 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Don't worry bro, she was just signing you up for a new credit card...

[–]artemasad 65ポイント66ポイント  (16子コメント)

Won't pretend to be righteous here. I'm willing to admit that if I have an access to certain database, I'd probably be very tempted to take a peek for some information too. And so would many people here.

 

Humans are curious beasts.

[–]Foofoo_Cuddly_Poops 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm one of the nosiest motherfuckers on the planet.

I had access to a student financial aid database for a university once, for legitimate job reasons. I was out of college, working, etc, and had to use the database to pull a random sample of students receiving financial aid and check for appropriate documentation, signatures of approval, etc. Basically the school gets a ton of revenue from government financial aid, and the government wants it verified that the financial aid need of students is legit.

My random sample may or may not have contained the names of some friends of mine, including my roommates girlfriend who was still going to school.

I did feel a little guilty afterwards

[–]magnus91 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have access to certain databases. I have never accessed anything that wasn't work related. Of course, its automatic firing if you do. Criminal prosecution is on the table for those who do as well.

[–]CoopNine 204ポイント205ポイント  (76子コメント)

Yeah... Probably one of the worst offenders are universities. So many people have access to their student information system. Every faculty member, high number of staff, and faculty will let TA's use their credentials so they don't have to do things. Give a TA access to peek into the files for everyone they know... sure they're going restrain themselves, just like the professors and staff do.

This isn't something that is unique to police in any way. Those folks at the DMV? You're kidding yourselves if you don't think they're looking people up that they don't need to. It's a pervasive issue, and no simple and inexpensive solutions exist.

[–]lastsynapse 15ポイント16ポイント  (6子コメント)

Yeah... Probably one of the worst offenders are universities. So many people have access to their student information system. Every faculty member, high number of staff, and faculty will let TA's use their credentials so they don't have to do things. Give a TA access to peek into the files for everyone they know... sure they're going restrain themselves, just like the professors and staff do.

Things have really changed since they first came out with these electronic recordkeeping. Nowdays, it's pretty common to assign a username to to do those specific fasks. E.g. for me, I can identify a TA, allowing them access to the gradebook for the class. That doesn't translate into all students I ever have, or even to all the students in the department.

Things are getting better for granular access controls now that everyone is getting accounts. It used to be you'd be stuck because you wouldn't get accounts for TAs.

Investigation is harder though - how do you really determine such access is not needed for a particular individual?

[–]Realtrain 41ポイント42ポイント  (10子コメント)

I don't know about your university, but at mine only certain people can access certain things. Professors can only access the most basic information (name, birthday, etc.)

[–]theglandcanyon[🍰] 59ポイント60ポイント  (7子コメント)

Yeah, as a professor I would say this is at best highly exaggerated. I can access students' full names, major, and year in school. I can also see a little photo of each student, which is great for learning names. As far as I know, that's the full extent.

I've never tried to get anything more --- why would I want to? --- so I can't say it's impossible, but the claim that "every faculty member" does something bad (let the TA use my "credentials"? I don't even know what that means, let alone why I would do it) is wrong.

[–]wtcnbrwndo4u 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Also, as an IT student employee, I had access to the same set of info, though I could also reset their passwords. So you don't even need to be a professor in certain cases.

[–]simjanes2k 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

My wife works in HR for a staffing company. Several people there have been known to use the criminal lookup and related services all the time for personal stuff, because the company has a subscription.

Pretty much everyone would check on their babysitter or kid's teacher if it were free every time.

[–]ZombieAlpacaLips 46ポイント47ポイント  (29子コメント)

no simple and inexpensive solutions exist

Collect less data?

Edit: And keep the data that you have to collect separate and well-permissioned so that only those who need the data can see the data.

[–]CoopNine 13ポイント14ポイント  (2子コメント)

Maybe I should add 'realistic' to the qualifications.

Let's use an University as an example. I need multiple physical addresses for you, so I can send bills & communications. I have to know what courses you're enrolled in for my billing and grading systems. I have to keep a transcript of your courses so you can request it whenever you like, or send it to another school. I have to keep placement scores so I can pass any audits. I have to keep some medical information so I can remain in compliance. I keep this data to serve you properly, and assure that you can get things like financial aid by staying in compliance with state and federal laws.

[–]smokeyrobot 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

Its called information security. Data is segmented into levels based on the nature of the data. Permissions should be granted accordingly. The situation you described is simply terrible information security. A professor should not have access to Admissions record which would handle billing addresses. Medical data should be kept very secure under HIPA laws.

A professors role in your database should only access to enrollment and transcript records (if even necessary). Admissions should not have access to transcripts. On and On.

This is basic IT data security. The situation you described may exist but it is simply terrible design.

On this same topic my biggest complaint about the NSA massive surveillance is the simple fact that the data could be obscured and then when required by a court order it could be analyzed and if actionable it would be deciphered into an actual real target.

William Binney and Thomas Drake's whistle-blowing was because of this. The NSA project managers chose not to take basic and easy protections to protect the American people. This simple design decision spoke volumes about the intention.

An analyst should never have access to who people actually are.

[–]Doctor_Crunchwrap 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Absolutely. Give people any amount of power and they will abuse it every time.

I spent years working for a cell phone company, my coworkers were constantly checking out their exes accounts. Need your contacts transferred? You better believe they're going to go through your photos if you're an attractive woman.

I also spent years doing loss prevention work at stores. The cameras are used to creep on women way more than they are used to catch burglars.

It's pandoras box, people can't resist.

[–]JackieBoySlim 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is true, it's not just cops, people in the medical field do it all the time. People where I worked looked up celebrity medical records all the time.

[–]BitcoinBoo 75ポイント76ポイント  (1子コメント)

No wayk,

lets build more back doors in software and lets give the Feds more access, why would they ever abuse it?

[–]actually_cloned_lamb 835ポイント836ポイント  (97子コメント)

Taxpayer money needs to stop being used to settle police abuse ASAP imo.

[–]ak-at-work 492ポイント493ポイント  (79子コメント)

Meaning if the officer is sued they should pay out of pocket? Agreed. Make them buy insurance like a doctor. :P The public should not pay for the misdeeds of their servants.

[–]mainfingertopwise 285ポイント286ポイント  (68子コメント)

Literally every dollar a cop makes comes from "the public." But go ahead, require some kind of insurance like this, and watch how the very next time your police department's union negotiates with your city, the union's demands will include an increase sufficient to cover that insurance.

[–]ima747r 126ポイント127ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is all true however there could still be some impact. If you feel you've earned something and then lost it (i.e. I got this money then paid it to insurance vs. the employer straight covered it) your outlook will be different, normal human behavior re: ownership and value. More critically however it would be an opportunity to impose some level of enforcement on an officer by officer basis. The city may raise pay to cover the cost of insurance, but they aren'y going to pay tons more to specific officers who's premiums are through the roof due to high usage of that insurance... basically, those that are accused the most of misdeeds are likely to pay above the base line, and it will cost them something personally. They could of course opt to transfer to a different position where they aren't at such high a risk... which is great for everyone since they aren't (allegedly) committing offending acts any more, and their premiums don't go up any more, with for the public and the officer.

I'm not advocating for or against this approach per-say, honestly I've never thought of it before, but the city just eating the cost is still a very different landscape than what we have today with more possibilities for corrections. If nothing else the city itself would now have a new form of vested interest (cost of insurance) in ensuring the police force is doing things "right". Dollars make things happen, even if they're (in a practical sense) imaginary.

[–]jmizzle[🍰] 116ポイント117ポイント  (44子コメント)

Here's the benefit: Cops that are a liability will no longer be insured. Just like terrible drivers, you lose claims and your rates go up. Lose enough claims and you can no longer get coverage.

"Good cops" would be more viable hires and pay less in insurance. Bad cops would not be as viable hires and their misbehavior would directly affect their wallet.

Even if compensation went up to cover the base level insurance at the "good cop" level, the city/town avoiding one claim would likely cover that cost easily.

[–]November19 57ポイント58ポイント  (26子コメント)

But the unintended consequence might be that police officers stop responding to situations that are volatile, dangerous, or unpredictable -- because the risk of "malpractice" is too high. Just like surgeons refuse to operate on risky patients to preserve their positive outcome stats. The situations where good police officers are most needed would become the exact situations they would avoid.

[–]jgkeeb 27ポイント28ポイント  (2子コメント)

I think the idea is strong enough to at least try. Pick 2 major cities, do 2 year trial. See what type of unintended (positive/negative) consequences come out of it.

We can always go back to the system we have now.

[–]unblvbl 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Good. That will give us a tool to root out bad police before they shoot unarmed citizens.

[–]KR213 38ポイント39ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm ok with officers not responding to "black guy on side of road" calls, and apparently they view that as the most dangerous and volatile situation possible.

[–]EO_mf_D 50ポイント51ポイント  (10子コメント)

Then they are not good police officers and get fired for not doing their damn job.

[–]zebediah49 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

There's no obligation for insurance to be a flat rate. Part of the point is that when you screw up, your insurance costs go up. If its a per-person rate, then you potentially end up pricing repeat offenders out of the business. If it's spread across everyone -- how many cops really want to pay $20/month extra to cover that one idiot.

I would expect negotiation to cover the cost of the insurance initially, along with standard annual increases, but would be somewhat surprised if a municipality would agree to cover any future increases incurred by misbehavior.

[–]jgkeeb 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

Wouldn't Police then internally police themselves to ensure nobody messes up and raises all their rates?

[–]stopmakingmedothis 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

They might take a few centuries to put 2 and 2 together, but that is the idea.

[–]VIIIMan 63ポイント64ポイント  (10子コメント)

Well, this is no surprise. I know someone that's a cop and have heard him casually talking about doing this exact thing. I told him "that's kinda fucked up, man". He responded, "hey, it's one of the perks".

[–]xchaibard 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

You should anonymously report him.

If it was a doctor talking about one of their patients, you'd know it was wrong and report them right?

What about a lawyer talking about something said in attorney-client privilege?

[–]bitbybitbybitcoin[S] 98ポイント99ポイント  (4子コメント)

[–]zurtex 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thanks for the source, I was a bit concerned there was a conflict of interest here, while I love PIA I'm not sure the people selling me a product are the most reliable for news that might involve the need to but that product.

[–]bitbybitbybitcoin[S] 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

I always link to the source and take care to also write out that they are the source within the article to make sure it's clear. I'm glad it's appreciated!

As for the conflict of interest. Privacy Online News is just our news blog where Rick Falkvinge (Founder of the Pirate Party) and I try and make privacy issues mainstream. I'd like to think we're a reliable news source and I continually work towards that goal.

As I mentioned in another comment, this is in no way an advertisement. In fact, it would be straight up lying to suggest that PIA can prevent this type of police abuse. Frankly, PIA's product can't do shit against this type of privacy invasion and that scares us. We still try to fight it though, and the best thing we've found is actually donating to non profit organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Fight for the Future (FFTF).

[–]QueenWizard 93ポイント94ポイント  (29子コメント)

Can confrim. My sister worked for a Washington D.C. suburb police department. Much to my dismay, she use to look up men before I went on first dates with them.

[–]Micro_Cosmos 35ポイント36ポイント  (9子コメント)

I work at a daycare and a large group of families that are enrolled with us are from the local P.D. and Sheriffs station. I know for a fact that several of them have run us for background checks and probably got rather nosy. I have nothing to hide but it kind of pissed me off. I understand we're the ones taking care of your kids but that doesn't give you the right to invade my privacy.

[–]Ottoblock 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Went on a date with a girl and I used a psudonym (my Facebook name wasn't correct to keep employers and families off my back) she worked for the city police.

She went nuts when I told her "my real first name is Billy" and left.

[–]Toytles 9ポイント10ポイント  (7子コメント)

Fuck I had an girlfriend from highschool who's dad was a DEA agent who hated my guts for seemingly no reason, I know why now.

[–]MassiveMeatMissile 16ポイント17ポイント  (6子コメント)

What did you have on your record in highschool that would make him hate you?

[–]Abdul_Falcon_Jab 42ポイント43ポイント  (3子コメント)

humans being humans, this is why i have trust issues with authority, in theory it's always good but in practice it's always a human enforcing something and abusing his power

[–]worldfire 48ポイント49ポイント  (28子コメント)

People probably don't think about this much but how often does this happen in the medical field too? There are some pretty big databases that lots of people have access to.

[–]herzvik 24ポイント25ポイント  (0子コメント)

As Garden Girl commented, yes it happens, but like she said, the offenders were fired. HIPAA is taken very seriously. EVERYTHING is logged. Real time reporting is done. Violations are responded to quickly and strictly. People get fired for misuse regularly. In healthcare, there are audits and accountability.

Source - work in healthcare IT.

[–]bredmor 78ポイント79ポイント  (16子コメント)

A lot less than you'd think. HIPAA violations have actual consequences other than suspended with pay.

[–]tkokilroy 17ポイント18ポイント  (3子コメント)

This. These records are heavily monitored to see who is accessing them

[–]nolowputts 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

My friend works on the medical field, scheduling appointments and such. She got into hot water once because she looked up her own record. Basically if they see that you're accessing a record that is unrelated to your current task at hand, you're getting in trouble.

[–]Frozenlazer 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Less than you think. HIPAA has real teeth and most larger organizations take it dead seriously. You go poking around in a chart you aren't supposed to, you're going to find yourself jobless.

My hospital even has a VP with the title "VP of HIPAA" she carries a very big stick.

We also have software that automatically audits who looked at what. It has a database of known VIP's (local athletes, hospital execs) and cross checks against that, as well as checks your name against the names of people you search for. I have a colleague with the very common last name of Jackson, and she is constantly getting pinged to confirm why she was in certain charts with that last name.

I'd say the medical field is good about this, but then again we have a very specific law that prevents it. There should probably be a similar law about govt employees abusing govt databases.

[–]Omnishift 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's getting a lot better. There are now systems in place that basically make the patient anonymous and you look them up by "patient ID" instead.

Hospitals are constantly under legal pressure so they take stuff very seriously. Some staff are always nonchalant about stuff but if you say the wrong stuff in front of the wrong person... Good luck.

[–]garden-girl 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

It happens quite a bit. My aunt worked for blue cross and several employees were terminated for looking up and reading records of high profile patients.

[–]alpacIT 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

several employees were terminated

See there's the difference. There are actual consequences in the medical field.

[–]cupboard1 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Join us at /r/privacy if you haven't already.

[–]raznarukus 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

A couple of years ago in Minnesota a cop was arrested for doing this to a co-worker. I'll try and find the story. It was some sick shit. The person he was stalking was a body builder or something along those lines.

I found this one but this isn't it.... http://m.startribune.com/man-accused-of-stalking-minneapolis-cop/369847751/

This is it and it wasn't just one cop! They accessed her dl photo 425 times! Wtf? http://jezebel.com/5887363/creepy-cops-use-dmv-database-to-stalk-ladies

[–]NOTORlOUSD 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

One of the worst cases of this was fellow cops harassing Florida State Trooper Donna Jane Watts. She pulled over a Miami PD officer who driving 120 MPH to an off-duty job and numerous cops pulled her file to find dirty info to use against her.

[–]josh_the_misanthrope 11ポイント12ポイント  (2子コメント)

Not gonna lie, as a curious motherfucker it'd be really hard not to get dirt on people you know if I had access. And I know I'm not alone here.

No one should have that power or everyone should have that power.

[–]Tony_Chu 124ポイント125ポイント  (18子コメント)

Utterly shocking. I've always just sort of assumed that everyone only uses power appropriately, and that's why we should empower our government with infinite resources. Because they will 100% only ever use them legally and in accordance with their charge to protect and serve. Just like literally every single other major world power in history, none of which have ever exploited their power or authority.

People are incorruptible. It's very wise to give them unreasonably powerful tools and expect them to use them reasonably. I don't see how anyone could possibly have a problem with this.

[–]MadDogNavi 40ポイント41ポイント  (10子コメント)

If you have nothing to hide, you should have nothing to worry about /s

[–]Effimero89 16ポイント17ポイント  (7子コメント)

My idiot local pd uses that all the time.

[–]mauterfaulker 20ポイント21ポイント  (2子コメント)

A good stock answer to that is:

"Since I have nothing to hide, then you have no reason to look."

[–]32BitWhore 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

"But how do we know you have nothing to hide?"

"But how do I know I have nothing to worry about?"

This could go on forever.

My stock response is, "I use a perfectly legal VPN, eat a dick."

[–]Solkre 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

You know what they say. "Absolute power corrupts none."

[–]TOKENBROWNGUY2020 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

I mean its not like any of us ever use corporate issued laptops / networks to access Reddit, right?

Right?

[–]sphere51185 120ポイント121ポイント  (83子コメント)

I hate to say it, but the bar to become a police officer is just too low.

[–]ReverendSaintJay 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

To quote Lord Acton from his letter to Archbishop Mandell Creighton:

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.

[–]muttwrangler 261ポイント262ポイント  (151子コメント)

I have a neighbor who works for the local PD. The rumor is, she uses the database of registered dog owners to file false barking complaints because she hates dogs.

[–]RLLRRR 70ポイント71ポイント  (2子コメント)

The rumor is

That's more than enough. Book 'em, Dano.

[–]Solkre 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hold on, lets be reasonable and question her at Guantanamo first.

[–]keepswimmmming 6ポイント7ポイント  (7子コメント)

Sorry if this is an ignorant question but what happens when a registered dog gets too many barking complaints? Do I want to know the answer?

[–]odsquad64 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

"Sir we've gotten some complaints about a dog barking at this residence."
"But my dog died 4 months ago."

[–]justscottaustin 121ポイント122ポイント  (113子コメント)

And you live where? Because in 99% of places in the USA, there is no "database of registered dog owners." There are a few.

[–]muttwrangler 187ポイント188ポイント  (4子コメント)

In my county, all dog registration is done through animal control which is part of our police department. Of course they have a list of registered dog owners.

[–]toop1231 21ポイント22ポイント  (4子コメント)

99% of the total square footage maybe, but in many densely populated places in the USA, there is a database of registered dog owners. That doesn't mean that every dog you see is on it tho

[–]likeahurricane 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

Licensing your dog is the law in the entire state of Vermont. It was the law in Washington, DC where I previously lived. I think a lot more municipalities and places have it than you realize, it's just rarely enforced.

[–]Effimero89 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Great next thing you know I'm getting pulled over in my car with my dog because the cop thinks he's an illegal.

[–]sonofabutch 92ポイント93ポイント  (76子コメント)

...what? You don't need a dog license where you live?

[–]soren121 73ポイント74ポイント  (25子コメント)

You do need a dog license? Where do you live?

Edit: I live in Georgia. No dog license here as far as I'm aware.

[–]EatingCake 50ポイント51ポイント  (3子コメント)

In MA, you need to register dogs over 6 months of age with proof of the rabies vaccine.

[–]nooneisreal 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

I am not who you were replying to, but I live in Ontario, Canada and you're supposed to register your dog in my city. It costs $50.

If your dog is not registered (doesn't have it's tags) and are caught (like in a dog park or something), then you can face a fine.

You also need to provide proof that your dog is vaccinated against rabies to register them.

[–]muttwrangler 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm in Colorado and the requirements are basically the same here.

[–]KropotkinWasRight 23ポイント24ポイント  (4子コメント)

Most states, municipalities, or other jurisdictions require dog licences along with rabies vaccination, and the licence duration cannot exceed the time the vaccine is effective. As a way of preventing the overpopulation of animals, some jurisdictions charge a significantly lower licensing fee if the owner presents veterinary proof that the dog has been spayed or neutered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_licence

EDIT Since people are hung up on [citation needed][3] and stopped on the [citation needed] and didn't read the [3] and didn't google on their own:

Skipped right over the [3] immediately after that [citation needed] part, dincha?

https://www.cesarsway.com/get-involved/bringing-new-dog-home/5-reasons-to-get-your-dog-licensed

It's the law. In most states, it's mandatory that dog owners have their pets licensed. If you get caught without a license, which can and does happen, you will be hit with a hefty fine. Dogs must have a renewed license each year, which must be displayed on them at all times.

Licensing lets people know that your dog is up to date on its rabies vaccinations. A dog cannot be licensed unless it is properly vaccinated. Animal control or a Good Samaritan will be much more likely to want to handle and care for your missing pup if they know that it is healthy and sans rabies.

Average cost of licenses

The average price of an annual dog license is $10 to $20. Dog owners can expect to pay more to license a dog that has not been spayed or neutered.

Where I live, dog licenses are required

Knowingly providing false information to a public official is a violation of Section 2921.13A5 of the Ohio Revised Code and is a misdemeanor of the first degree.

Does my dog need a license?

Yes. All dogs older than three months of age must be licensed.

Does my dog need to be vaccinated for rabies?

Yes. All dogs four months old or older must have a current rabies vaccination before a license can be issued. Dogs younger than four months old can be licensed without a rabies vaccination.

How do I obtain an assistance dog license?

Complete the standard dog license application and send it with proof of training from a nonprofit special agency as required by the Ohio Revise Code (955.011). This registration is free and permanent.

Why should I license my dog?

First and foremost it is the law. It is also a great identification tag to get your lost dog back to you. There are many cases where a dog gets loose from its owner, and is able to be reunited because of the license. No dog shall be harbored, kept, or owned without displaying a valid registration tag. The law applies regardless of whether the dog is kept inside or out.

New York State Law requires dog licenses.

New York State law requires that all dog owners license their dogs, and the New York City Health Code requires that dog owners attach the license tag to their dog's collars while in public. Dog owners may be fined for violation of these laws.

A dog license costs $8.50 per year for spayed or neutered dogs or $34 per year for non-spayed or neutered dogs. Dog licenses may be purchased or renewed for 1 to 5 years. All dog license fees are non-refundable.

It varies on a county by county and a state by state level. People are expected to know the laws of their county. There are 88 counties in Ohio alone. Maybe on a purely numbers basis more counties don't require licensing than do, but on a purely numbers basis, a majority of the population lives under dog licensing codes.

[–]bse50 60ポイント61ポイント  (40子コメント)

The solution would be pretty easy to implement:
Subject the use of said databases to the cop's ID and case number. Make him state the reason for said searches in a comment box.
If the search is not relevant to said case, fine the cop and suspend him... the first time. Fire him on the spot the second time around.
Job done.

[–]markymark7621 34ポイント35ポイント  (9子コメント)

For non public information, this has already been implemented a long time ago. Every single thing I do is recorded and has a trail.

[–]Gumstead 20ポイント21ポイント  (13子コメント)

Well thats exactly how it already is. In my state, the database allows you to search vehicle registration, driving history, court history, criminal background, and active warrants, plus lots of other stuff.

To use it, you must provide your name, your department, a reason, and it all gets tracked. For my department, the chief reviews the logs and absolutely pays attention to what officers are running. If you run stuff when youre not at work or its not related to work, its a serious problem. Its now become a felony charge of Official Misconduct in my state and thats really cut down on any misuse.

This article feels dated, not literally but in the accuracy of the facts. Yes, there will be cops who always break the rules but by they aren't getting away with it anymore. It just isn't happening because everything we do is being tracked and reviewed and flagged for misuse.

[–]nope_nic_tesla 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

I doubt the article is dated, there is a really wide variety of practices, policies, procedures and how those get enforced across different states and municipalities.

[–]CestMoiIci 7ポイント8ポイント  (7子コメント)

Easy to get around...

"I saw a car with what I believe is this license plate near the scene. That plate is registered to this person"

[–]Joegotbored 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

I had an ex that worked for the IRS. If you use their databases to look up someone for personal reasons, they'll find out, they'll fire you, and they'll prosecute. Police need more policing.

[–]LucidicShadow 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

Funny story. Cops here in Australia were caught looking up the files of a famous footballer from another state that they had no business looking at, other than gossip.

They were fired.

It's really easy to keep logs of who's looking at what on the network.

[–]xxivvii 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm not sure about other States; however, in Texas... TLETS/NLETS is closely monitired for this kind of shit. Abuse of the system has some severe fucking consequences... worst of which the ENTIRE police department where the activity resulted from could lose their license to operate as a law-enforcement agency for doing so.

[–]262Mel 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

My running partner got hired as a federal probation officer. About a week after she began work we were on a long run and she says "Did you know your FIL did time in state prison?" I knew he did but it was something we didn't tell people and at that time we were (and still are) no contact with my in laws. I asked how she knew and she said she looked up everyone she knew in the system to see if there were any hits. I was horrified that someone like her, who has no reason to look into my or my family's background, could do this with no ramifications.

[–]ReasonablyBadass 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Surprise! jazz hands

To everyone who was surprised by this: I have a bridge I'd like to sell you

[–]insanetwo 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

Why are these databases not treated the same way as medical personal information. I can go in and read any information that I need to read on a client that I am working with. I have access to information for anyone in the system. I do not go look at this information, however, as I value my job and I know that my access is being tracked.

[–]cefm 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

A very good reason why "police" shouldn't have access to that stuff. Investigators, using case-specific access codes, with full tracking and audit and accountability for every request should have limited access. Everyone else? No reason to query databases, so no access.