As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I didn't know I would be getting too many replies so fast. I can provide more details. It is definitely for use within the company. I was looking for some info on whether I should be more careful or anything to watch out for...
My boss is asking me to put some tracking info on what users do with their application. It is not about collecting sensitive data but there might be some screenshots involved and I am not sure if this is a breach of privacy.
Would love to hear any thoughts on this or if you handled something similar.
At work, there is no privacy. Think of it this way, if you work for a financial institution, or a government one, monitoring users may be the difference between keeping sensitive information secret and not. (I want my personal information kept private). They are paid to do work at work. If they are afraid about what they are doing is wrong, then they shouldn't be doing it.
A comment brought up a good point. If you are selling the product and spying on end users, that is totally different. That is highly unethical to take screen shots and report them back to the company. Actually where I work, we'd have you arrested for it if we found out. (yes, you'd be violating a federal law, and I guarantee we'd go after everyone and sort out the mistakes later.) That is a very slippery slope.
If you mean users at large, yes it's a breach of privacy.
If you mean users internal to your company (workers), then no -- there should be no expectation of privacy in the workplace.
Sometimes it is good to collect some metrics and will help in enhancing the user experience. Once, we were able to prove that a certain functionality was never used and we were able to remove support for it. For screenshots, you should be careful to take only the required window instead of a full screen.
If the application is used internally within your organization, and you have a corporate policy that states "no expectation of privacy" that has been communicated to and signed by your users then there is no issue.
Monitoring the actions of employees within a business in the US is very common practice.
Legal issues aside, do you want to work at a company that takes screenshots of your desktop?
Even if legal, this behavior is sure to drive away developers. Remember, in a bad work environment often the best developers leave first; they have the best job prospects.
Here's a corollary example: would you want your boss taping and listening to phone calls you made from the office? You don't give up every right you have just by cashing a paycheck.
Even if this screen capture methodology is legal, it certainly isn't ethical and will absolutely damage the morale of employees by demonstrating that they cannot be trusted.
It's just a bad idea. There have got to be better ways of accomplishing your goals than this.
Screenshots? If it's not opt-in, I'd say that's a pretty clear breach of privacy.
I made a simple CMS in PHP and I had to store all actions of users, but it's a completely different situation. In my opinion what is asking your boss is a bit out of privacy, especially if in your application you don't mention to the user this kind of behavior.
On a work machine? Absolutely; as long as the users know the extent to which they are being monitored. It's their choice to work for the employer, and they are using the employer's equipment.If you don't notify them that they are being watched, then that is kind of a "grey area"....depending upon state lawss, it may even be illegal - depending on what sort of information you are monitoring.
Something that would help on clarification would be is this an internal company application or something that will be on user's personal computers.
Typically when it comes to computers that are owned by the company, if the company decides to do monitoring, it is their choice. Disclosure of the monitoring is often encouraged in an effort to be open and honest, but is not mandatory. A user should not have any expectation of privacy when using equipment owned and managed by the company.
This is not just a matter of custom built applications, but also web browsing, email, phone conversations, etc. If you are using company resources then you are releasing your privacy.
If this is an application going to users outside of the company, then yes it is wrong without permission by the users.
That is greatly depending on the country you are in and what information you are collecting and what you do with it.
There is a huge difference between the US and EU for instance.
The Law, jurisprudence, union contracts and company policy (when not in contradiction to the above) are what determines what is acceptable.
If its for an internal app its completely ethical.
Beyond disclosing to all users that their use of the apps is monitored there is no other obligation of disclosure(excepting federal contracts and union contracts).
What is most important about capturing this kind of data is to focus on capturing the absolute least amount necessary - capturing screenshots of all open windows plus any adjacent data streams does in fact incur liability issues (think HIPPA) as well as producing a mountain of data that no one will ever look thru until a lawyer requests it with a subpoena and you're asked to go thru it and redact all Names, DOB, and SSNs in 160GB of data.
Seems this has already been answered, but it should be noted that there are countries where this is illegal, even at a place of work.
For instance, in Switzerland it is illegal to track which websites each user has been visiting.
Other than specific laws to the contrary, I would agree that it is acceptable to do, since there should be no reasonable expectation of privacy at the workplace. That said, informing the users is the right thing to do.
One other caveat, if the data you are collecting is sensitive enough that an attacker would have use of it (say, the screenshots include CC numbers), then you must ensure that this information is well protected. (I'm not referring to the user's information, but say the bank's clients' account details.)
If it is done without the user's consent, then it is definitely a breach of privacy. Even with the user's consent, it must be made clear exactly what information is being passed back. If the screenshot was to grab the whole screen, not just a window, then you could potentially get all kinds of private info.
Is this an internal app or a something for the public? If it's internal, it's not unethical, even if it's scummy, to monitor users.
If it's something for the public, in order to not be sleazy:
the user has to be able to opt-out
no personally identifying data can be collected
only data about your app (not screenshots of the entire screen) can be collected
It really depends on exactly what is being collected, the disclosure, and if the program could be opted out of. If that passes the smell test, then ensuring the reporting does not provide an attack vector and the data is appropriately safeguarded becomes your concern. If things seem shady get some written 'feature request' to CYA. The basic idea, if done right, is nothing new. Microsoft, for instance, does it with some of their products.
In a work environment, I think it is OK as long as all employees know that they may be monitored. I've seen places (Intuit was one) where employees are tracked all day. Not my cup of tea, however.
In government facilities, there is typically some sort of login screen that states that anything and everything done on that machine is subject to monitoring.
If these are applications that are run by the general public, I'd say that it better be crystal clear that you are collecting data on them. Personally, I'd rather not have programs 'phoning home' with info about my activities, boring as they may be.
If the client is external, this should be disclosed to the client. Actually, if the client is internal OR external, if you do not disclose it, it is totally unethical.
An employment agreement that states that there can be no expectation of privacy constitutes disclosure.
Screenshots? If it's not opt-in, I'd
say that's a pretty clear breach of
privacy.
you've opted-in by cashing your paycheck :)
as many indicated, informing the user is the best the company can do. Informing, not asking to Opt-In.
I would suggest reading:
Privacy. My interpretation is that people will expect some things to be kept private such as their personal information. By interacting with your sites, users are sharing information with you that you should be able to use but not distribute or abuse as if it was your own.
Screen shots is obviously the hot button issue here. While users entering information into a text input field are knowingly giving you information, screen shots go beyond what a typical user would expect and therefore should be disclosed to the user through a privacy policy.
Collecting anonymous usage should be doable without screenshots.
If your app collects any data that is meant to be protected by privacy laws, then you will have to treat the screenshots as containing sensitive information and protect them accordingly. Data protection laws are pretty strict in most countries.
Unless you have a really really small company, privacy laws vary a lot between countries, and the feature is probably more trouble than it's worth. In any country I've even lived in, that idea would never fly.
But don't ask a bunch of hacks on a site like stack overflow. Seriously, ask a lawyer.
I think the question is still a bit vague as to who is going to be monitored for what. From what I understand who'll be monitored are the end users who are using the application and the gathered data will be used internally. Assuming this is the case, I think, I can contribute the following answer:
If you are going to monitor end users to see how they are using your product, you are in human factors/user experience business and what you want to do is really an experiment. Doing such an experiment requires consent of the subject (the end user). In an academic setting (and I think the same goes for industry as well), there is an Institutional Review Board (IRB) which grants permission for such experiments. I believe in the industry scene there are similar organizations (just not sure what they are called). A request for permission for such an experiment is accompanied by a report which details the user experiment in a very specific manner. The IRB than decides whether to issue a permit or not.
The important point is the consent here and users should know about the experiment and agree to be subjects. I think, in the absence of a user consent the experiment is neither ethical nor legal. Again, I approached this based on an assumption and tried to summarize my experience in such experiments.
Collecting screen shots may be illegal even if employees are notified. This is an issue of local law and federal law. You haven't said which country you are in. In California, for example, monitoring screens might violate both workplace privacy laws and wiretap laws. You should get an opinion of your corporate attorney before implementing this.
Related
This maybe a very newbie question, but exactly what do I need so that I can say my network is considered "secure"?
To be more specific, if I have a website that deals with login/signup and lots of money transactions, what do I need to protect it?
So far I know I need EV SSL certificate, login system protections like brute force login protection, hashing the password, key stretching. Is there anything I missed?
Besides, is firewall really necessary in my case? I just feel like everything I want to do can be accomplished by the server itself, so is there really a need to get a software/hardware firewall?
To be completely blunt, you should probably hire a security professional to assess and make recommendations about your site. Alternatively, a part or full-time network administrator with security experience/certifications might be a good hire.
I recommend the "don't do-it-yourself" approach not because I want to increase work for my peers, or that I don't believe you are a fully competent individual. Rather, I recommend it because security is really, really hard to get right, and any site that handles money is an ideal target for any attacker out there. From a professional perspective, you would be best served by getting an expert to secure your network, perhaps on an ongoing basis; this is a situation that security professionals are very used to, and very well equipped to handle. From a legal perspective, getting an expert opinion on such a sensitive matter is essential due diligence, and trying to do it entirely on your own opens you to significant liability if your system gets breached and attackers are able to carry off your customer's data. Which, as your business grows and you gain more visibility online, only more and more likely to happen without ongoing, professional help.
This may not be the most technical question, but I was just interested, nonetheless...
How does a giant company like Google keep from having their code stolen by employees? Maybe I'm wrong, but I would assume that their source code to their search algorithms (amongst other things) would be valuable to their competitors (i.e. Microsoft).
I guess I can best phrase it like this:
What's keeping an unscrupulous
employee who has sufficient clearance from
accessing Google's code repository for
a specific project and copying significant amounts of code
to a flash drive and taking it to their
competitors?
Fear of being sued?
Things within a company like Google are also compartmentalized. So not everybody has access to all code. If someone has access to code, you can bet that Google knows when they access it. I'm sure they have some kind of algorithm that looks and sees if somebody just downloads a lot of files very fast. The search algorithm isn't a small file obviously, it is a gigantic application.
All this would allow them to track who has stolen the code from within. There is also the fact that any self-respecting company or company with something to lose (i.e. Microsoft) would not take anything like this from somebody. They would probably even tell Google about it.
It is called protocol. The idea that only a few people get to know the code. In which then those few have to tell a major very embarrassing secret to the others. So then nobody can tell or else they get outed in the public. Which can be very simple like they like something, compared to as bashful as they are all the way to they killed somebody.
Many employers, including one that I've worked for, completely block flash drives.
In many cases, though, this is to protect non-technical confidential information.
Companies that are serious about protecting their assets will have access logging on their core systems and active scanning to detect suspicious patterns. Similar security is implemented for employees of government agencies (e.g. tax, social security) holding sensitive personal information. Users who access data outside of their assigned cases can be flagged and investigated.
I suspect (but don't know) that similar scanning could be implemented in high value source code repositories.
Some organizations block the use of removable media (It has been reported that some agencies have reacted to Wikileaks with such policies), in some cases by physically gluing up the USB/media ports. This restricts potential thiefs to network transfers of material which can be scanned.
I think companies such as Google will implement access control on their source code repository / version control system. So their employee would only be able to access source code in which they were involved. And their access could be revoked from previous repository if they're being assigned to different project. Its the same thing with normal internal documents, would a security-conscious company let documents be downloaded by any employee freely ?
I think codethis hit the nail on the head. Some fly-by-night operation may be interested, but Microsoft, Yahoo, etc - wouldn't touch stolen code with a ten foot pole. And the fly-by-night wouldn't have the infrastructure. If you didn't tell anybody it was stolen - it's not like you could get away with walking in to a company with an entire spider/searching algorithm on your thumbdrive and declare you wrote it last week.
The bigger threat is details of the search algorithm getting out. SEOers, as a whole, are rather shady - and many would kill for solid facts about how the algorithm ranked or downranked pages. Even then, Google has demonstrated the ability to change their ranking algorithms so quickly that it wouldn't much matter.
On the other hand, Google doesn't have that much super-secret code. Most of their cool stuff (MapReduce et.al) is publicly available (see Hadoop). This question is probably more applicable to a company like Adobe. Some of their Photoshop algorithms are really cool, and would probably hurt them if they got out - but again, no legit company would touch it.
Today online security is a very important factor. Many businesses are completely based online, and there is tons of sensitive data available to check out only by using your web browser.
Seeking knowledge to secure my own applications I've found that I'm often testing others applications for exploits and security holes, maybe just for curiosity. As my knowledge on this field has expanded by testing on own applications, reading zero day exploits and by reading the book The Web Application Hacker's Handbook: Discovering and Exploiting Security Flaws, I've come to realize that a majority of online web applications are really exposed to a lot of security holes.
So what do you do? I'm in no interest of destroying or ruining anything, but my biggest "break through" on hacking I decided to alert the administrators of the page. My inquiry was promptly ignored, and the security hole has yet not been fixed. Why wouldn't they wanna fix it? How long will it be before someone with bad intentions break inn and choose to destroy everything?
I wonder why there's not more focus on this these days, and I would think there would be plenty of business opportunities in actually offering to test web applications for security flaws. Is it just me who have a too big curiosity or is there anyone else out there who experience the same? It is punishable by law in Norway to actually try break into a web page, even if you just check the source code and find the "hidden password" there, use it for login, you're already breaking the law.
I once reported a serious authentication vulnerability in a online audiobook store that allowed you to switch the account once you were logged in. I was wary too if I should report this. Because in Germany hacking is forbidden by law too. So I reported the vulnerability anonymously.
The answer was that although they couldn’t check this vulnerability by themselves as the software was maintained by the parent company they were glad for my report.
Later I got a reply in that they confirmed the dangerousness of the vulnerability and that it was fixed now. And they wanted to thank me again for this security report and offered me an iPod and audiobook credits as a gift.
So I’m convinced that reporting a vulnerability is the right way.
"Ive found that Im often testing others applications for exploits and security holes, maybe just for curiosity".
In the UK, we have the "Computer Misuse Act". Now if these applications you're proverbially "looking at" are say Internet based and the ISP's concerned can be bothered to investigate (for purely political motivations) then you're opening yourself up getting fingered. Even doing the slightest "testing" unlesss you are the BBC is sufficient to get you convicted here.
Even Penetration Test houses require Sign Off from companies who wish to undertake formal work to provide security assurance on their systems.
To set expectations on the difficulty in reporting vulnerabilties, I have had this with actual employers where some pretty serious stuff has been raised and people have sat on it for months from the likes of brand damage to even completely shutting down operations to support an annual £100m E-Com environment.
I usually contact the site administrator, although the response is almost ALWAYS "omg you broke my javascript page validation I'll sue you."
People just don't like to hear that their stuff is broken.
Informing the administrator is the best thing to do, but some companies just won't take unsolicited advice. They don't trust or don't believe the source.
Some people would advise you to exploit the security flaw in a damaging way to draw their attention to the danger, but I would recommend against this, and it's possible that you could have serious consequences because of this.
Basically if you've informed them it's no longer your problem (not that it ever was in the first place).
Another way to ensure you get their attention is to provide specific steps as to how it can be exploited. That way it will be easier for whomever recieves the email to verify it, and pass it on to the right people.
But at the end of the line, you owe them nothing, so anything you choose to do is sticking your neck out.
Also, you could even create a new email address for yourself to use to alert the websites, because as you mentioned, some places it would be illegal to even verify the exploit, and some companies would choose to go after you instead of the security flaw.
If it doesn't affect many users, then I think notifying the site administrators is the most you can be expected to do. If the exploit has widespread ramifications (like a Windows security exploit) then you should notify someone in a position to fix the problem, then give them time to fix it before you publish the exploit (if publishing it is your intention).
A lot of people cry about exploit publication, but sometimes that's the only way to get a response. Keep in mind that if you found an exploit, there's a high likelihood that someone with less altruistic intentions has found it and has started exploiting it already.
Edit: Consult a lawyer before you publish anything that could damage a company's reputation.
I experienced the same like you. I once found an exploit in an oscommerce shop where you could download ebooks without paying. I wrote two mails:
1) Developers of oscommerce, they answered "Known issue, just don't use this paypal module, we won't fix"
2) Shop administrator: no answer at all
Actually I have no idea what's the best way to behave ... maybe even publicate the exploit to force the admins to react.
Contact the administrator, not a business-type person. Generally the admin will be thankful for the notice, and the chance to fix the problem before something happens and he gets blamed for it. A higher-up, or the channels a customer service person is going to go through, are the channels where lawyers get involved.
I was part of a group of people who reported an issue we stumbled across on the NAS system at University. The admins were very grateful we found the hole and reported it, and argued with their bosses on our behalf (the people in charge wanted to crucify us).
We informed the main developer about a sql injection vulnerability on their login page. Seriously, it's the classic '<your-sql-here>-- variety. You can't bypass the login, but you can easily execute arbitrary sql. Still hasn't been fixed in 2 months! Not sure what to do now...no one else at my office really cares, which amazes me since we pay so much for every little upgrade and new feature. It also scares me when I think about the code quality and how much stock we are putting in this software.
What is the best way to avoid that an application is copied and used without the owner’s knowing?
Is there any way to trace the usage? Meaning periodically the application communicates back, with enough information so that we can know where it is, and if it’s legal. Next thing, of course, shut it down, if it’s not legit.
Software that "phones home" will be quickly shunned by the vast majority of your users. Just license it appropriately and sell it.
People who use your software professionally will either pay for it or they won't use it. Corporations tend to frown on potential lawsuits.
People who want to use your software without paying for it will continue to do so despite your best efforts to counteract them. Once the software is in their hands, it is out of yours. Without pissing off your users, your only recourse is a legal one.
If your product is priced reasonably, some people will pay for it and some won't. That is just something you need to deal with upfront and it should be factored into your business plan.
Don't do this, don't attempt it, don't even think about it.
This is a battle you can't win. If people want to pirate your software they will. You'll be shamed by the fact that a smart reverse engineer can write a one byte binary patch to subvert all your protection schemes.
The people who are going to pirate your software will do so and all these "security features" you build in will likely end up only inconveniencing your true supporters: the people who have legitimately purchased your software. These draconian DRM / anti-piracy schemes only build resentment among software users.
Hardware dongles are the best way if you are really concerned about piracy IMO. Check out the big industrial CAD/CAM packages worth thousands or tens-of-thousands, or the AV/Music production software, they virtually all have dongle protection. Dongles can be emulated or reversed but not without a significant investment in time, a lot more than just changing a few JEs to JNEs in your assembly.
Phoning home is not the way to go unless you are providing a service that requires a subscription and constant updates (like antivirus products, for example) as part of your business model. You need to have a bit of respect for your users and their privacy. You might have perfectly innocent intentions but what if a court ordered your company to hand over that information (like the US government is doing with Google and its search terms) - would/could you fight it? What if you some time in the future sold your company and the new owners decided to sell all that historic information to a marketing company? Privacy is not just about trusting a company not to abuse your data, it is trusting that company to go out of their way to protect your data. Which is pretty far down the list of priorities for most companies. So basically, the monitoring users thing is not really a good path to go down.
The best (and pretty much only) way to reliably prevent piracy is to have a client/server application instead of a standalone one, where a non-trivial part of the work is done by the server and users need to register. Then you can at least detect and block simultaneous use of the same account.
There are several approaches you could take, but there are three that will be vastly more effective that any of the others.
A. Don't create it.
Software that doesn't exist never suffers from unauthorized use.
B. Don't release it.
If you have the only copy, and you keep it that way, then the chances are exceedingly good that there will be no unauthorized use.
C. Give everyone permission to use it.
If you don't want anyone to use it without permission, then you can give everyone permission and there will be no unauthorized users.
There is a possibility to trace the usage. You can accomplish this by letting phone your tool home and send the information you need. The problem with this is, that first nobody likes software that phones home for this purpose and second with a simple application-level gateway you can block the application to phone home! What you describe in your question is a common problem of software-distributors and it's not an easy one to solve!
There's another thing I haven't seen mentioned yet : You could add loads of settings to the applications' configuration file, and start with ridiculous defaults. Then do the installation & configuration personally, so no-one but you is able to figure out how everything should be set. This can be a mayor put-down for people that are just trying out if a copy is enough. (Be sure to add settings that depend on all sorts of system-settings, like OS-version related DLL-versions that should be loaded, etc). Not very user-friendly tho ;-)
Ok, so I'm building "Web 2.0/3.0" sites to make extra money. I currently run my own personal project sites with some advanced technology in the backend (AI stuff, recommendation system) that I've developed over the years. It's a subscription site for me to make money on the side.
Now, my company (they do web application/software technology, ad network) somehow found out I run several websites. They were like, "Hey Joe, you run so and so websites! Why not put them on our ad network?? The stuff you're doing is a threat to our technology -- we don't want you competing with us on the side. Let us have your websites and put it on our portfolio/ad network."
Ok, basically it seems they want the rights to my technology and personal project. Somehow they must've googled my name and linked it to some projects I'm working on on the side. Is this ethical for a company to do? Trying to own my personal project since it's got some cool technology and trying to own the rights to it? Just because I work for the company doesn't mean I'm gonna make an offer to them, right?
You probably need to consult a lawyer. What were the terms of your employment that you agreed to when you were hired? Was there a non-compete clause? Was there a required disclosure clause?
Depends on your employment contract. Your contract might say something like "anything you do, while in the employ of company XYZ, be it during work or non work hours belongs to us". It's time to talk to a lawyer, not ask StackOverflow, this isn't a technology/programming question.
Ethical? Yes, why not. If you're putting stuff out on the web and they can find it via Google, then why shouldn't they? If you don't want people to find stuff you've done on the web then don't put it on the web or use a robots.txt to hide it from Google. It's not completely unreasonable for them to at least wonder if you may be using technology that you developed while you were working for them.
Legal--maybe so, maybe not. Depends on the employment agreement that you signed when you joined the company. I'd consult an employment lawyer for real advice rather than asking here.
They may have web logs that demonstrate that you were working on your private web sites during work time--if you did so. I'd be very careful in how I proceed if I were you.
check your contract, and/or your state laws and case precedents. Talk to a lawyer.
IMHO it is unethical for them to attempt to take your intellectual property without compensation, even if you have a 'all your codez are belong to us' kind of work-for-hire agreement. But talk to a lawyer, and be prepared to walk, get sued, and countersue, if necessary. Someone trying to steal your lunch money is a bully and a thief, but they may just have a legal claim.
Unfrotunately, this is not a joke. Talk to a lawyer right away.
If what you do in any way competes with what your company does or uses technology, intellectual property, information or contacts that you gained because of your employment with your company, then you may have issues and should check your contract and see a lawyer.
The other side is: did you ever work on your sites (and this can include sending emails and the like) your personal projects at work? If so, you may be in trouble there too.
IANAL so that's all I'll say on the legalities.
You need to consult a lawyer to get a definitive answer to this question. The answer might depend on your employment contract, and the laws in your locale. Don't rely on anything people say on the internet regarding legal matters.
Regardless of whether or not it's within their rights to do so, I think it's unethical and foolish of them to pressure you like this. I imagine they have just lost any employee loyalty you might have had.
I think a proper response could be, "if you think there's ad revenue potential in my websites, make me an offer that reflects their value, and I'll consider it." After all, you started those sites to make money, right?
But first talk to a lawyer, to be sure you're in a position to negotiate.
Well a friendly way to go about it, and that they should probably be willing to accept if they are a reasonable lot, is to buy/lease your technology. This way you can get a nice sum of money for your work (since you mentioned the purpose of this site was to make extra money in your question).
Otherwise (if its a pet project first and foremost) you might as well tell them in a friendly manner that you keep that site as a hobby, and you'd prefer to not share it if thats ok, unless they let you work full time on your and a cut in the earnings, etc... (something most people would love to do, work on their pet projects and get paid a stable salary for it).
As always first try to reason with the other party in a civilized and friendly matter, it'll likely make both parties happier, and it'll be better than taking the legal route most of the time.
I am Not a Lawyer, and the laws almost certainly vary by country/state/province. But if you are working on a side project on your own time, on your own equipment, using only your own network resources, etc., then in my opinion, they have no right to your work.
If you signed some sort of vague non-compete contract, or something that says all the stuff you do on your own time is theirs, then you have less of a leg to stand on.
Your best bet is to ask a lawyer, if there's enough revenue from your subscription base to justify it.
Consult a lawyer! Regardless of your contractual obligations, any company has a right to be concerned if one of their employees is running a direct competitor on the side, especially if they can demonstrate that you have access to privileged information which you are using to compete (knowledge of their technologies, marketing strategy, customers etc).