Slashdot Mirror


EFF Guide To Blogging Anonymously

jacksonwest writes "Annalee Newitz and Kurt Opsahl just published a great how-to on blogging anonymously. How To Blog Safely About Work (Or Anything Else), covering both the legal and technical aspects of blogging about your job and staying truly anonymous. A must read for those blogging from or about their office."

33 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Too bad by thundercatslair · · Score: 4, Interesting

    that this person didn't see this article earlier

    1. Re:Too bad by CSMastermind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      oo Wow. You know I disagree. I think she made the right decission to not post anonymously. If you look at the site there's nothing wrong with the pictures. It's not like she was hurting the company name by doing it and on a personal note, if I was in her place, I wouldn't want to work for them after they did that. I don't know, I'm proud of who I am, both in real life and online, I'm not afraid to take credit for what I say but that doesn't mean I don't from time to time need to do things anonymously.

  2. Iran and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Most useful in Iran, China and may be in USA

  3. Queen of the Air... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Quote: California has a law protecting employees from "demotion, suspension, or discharge from employment for lawful conduct occurring during nonworking hours away from the employer's premises.

    Posting pictures of yourself isn't illegal, but it didn't help the Queen of the Air...

  4. My strategy by slyxter · · Score: 3, Funny

    is to bash on a co-worker and then send the link to everyone at the office

  5. Just be careful by lecithin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We always 'google' our perspective new-hires. People have been not hired because of the content discovered.

    Just be careful in what you do, and it should be good.

    --
    It could be worse, it could be Monday.
    1. Re:Just be careful by lecithin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "I'm curious what industry you work in."

      The software industry. I would estimate that 98% of the people reading this would know the company.

      I don't believe that it is policy of the company. I think that it just started in 1 division and spread out a bit. HR probably wouldn't approve.

      --
      It could be worse, it could be Monday.
    2. Re:Just be careful by Anonymous+Luddite · · Score: 4, Funny

      >> 98% of the people reading this would know the company.

      ahh. You mean SCO?

    3. Re:Just be careful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called discrimination.

      Example:
      You interview an ace programmer who's been out of the industry for a few years and he does really well with all the interviewing managers. One manager decides to take it upon himself to "background check" the guy. It turns out that the reason he hasn't been in the industry for a while is because he's been in jail for child molestation. Well, you don't want to work with this guy, of course. So the manager circulates the weblinks and everyone agrees to reject the candidate.

      Next thing you know, the guy is filing suit against your company for discriminating against him for past crimes which he has already "paid for". Just as he was in jail, now your company is doing the bending over for him. All because one manager decided to step beyond the bounds of his role (and the law).

    4. Re:Just be careful by badasscat · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's scary to think that we leave a trail behind online.

      No, it's stupid to think that you don't. Especially if you are blogging, where the entire idea is that you leave a trail behind online.

      Here's an idea for those who'd like to blog about work: don't. Seriously. I'm as pro free speech as anyone, but being in favor of free speech doesn't mean I think people should be gabbing endlessly on cell phones during theatrical movie showings or that strangers should be screaming in my ear as I'm walking down the street or that employees should be talking about their employers on publicly accessible blogs. I mean, use your freakin' head.

      Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do that thing.

      And if you do, and you have to face the consequences of it, tough tits. It was your choice. Nobody asked you to write a blog. In most cases, nobody but your employer probably even cared to read it.

      To think you can actually write something in public online and not "leave a trail" is beyond naive.

      (And yes, I practice what I preach - I have a blog, and I have another site as well. I have never even mentioned the name of either my current employer or my previous employer online. It should be pretty much common sense, but I guess it isn't. These are things you do not publicly broadcast unless it is part of your job to do so.)

    5. Re:Just be careful by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Considering his other comments, I'm guessing Microsoft.

      JK.

      On the other hand, do be careful with Google. If you google me, I've apparently built bike frames, been a tax attorney, am Colorado's premier one-legged skiier, made several games, founded a birdwatching society, and am several computer consultants. One or two of these people is actually me. I'm one of 9 or 10 of me online. Unfortunately, according to the phone book there are over 50 of me in the US alone, meaning that if you google my name you only have a 1 in 5 chance that I have anything online at all, and then a 1 in 10 chance of guessing which one I am. And I don't have a very common name. If your candidate is named "Tom Jones" or "Hong Li" or "Sanjay Singh", you're pretty much firing at random.

      As a side note, I've always wondered if someone with your name could sue you for defamation for doing dumb things under your own name online...

    6. Re:Just be careful by Pxtl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Terrible example - in many places such practices are legal.

      Now, the difference is when your personal activity they're considering is something totally lawful. For example, lets say your employer is very opinionated Mormon, and thus believes that alcohol is spiritually unhealthy (or is just otherwise rather prudish). They stumble upon your blog, where you describe your last drunken bender with your friends, how you puked up your lungs and were hung over for 2 days. Its all perfectly legal, but many people object to that kind of behaviour - and it's not constitutionally protected like race and suchlike.

      That sort of stuff is none of their business in their professional capacity as an employer. They are perfectly free to ask you about your habits, read about them, whatever - but not to use that as a basis for hiring/review decisions.

    7. Re:Just be careful by Bemmu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey Larry, stop surfing on Slashdot and get back to work on Oracle 11g.

  6. Or don't be a pussy by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If free speech is to mean anything, it must be done with a name and responsibility attached. Anonymous speech is really worthless, consider the quality and substance of AC posts on this site.

    If you have something to say about your company, then say it. Have some balls and do what it takes to make change. Unless you're willing to put your name and reputation on the line, why should anyone take your speech seriously?

    So you have a choice, skulk around in the shadows like you are some kind of lowly criminal looking to the world like you're trying to get away with something, or stand up and post proudly and make a big noise. If you want to be treated like a criminal, then act like one. The EFF has just posted your guidelines. If you want to be treated like a human being with something important to say, then post without fear.

    1. Re:Or don't be a pussy by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Thanks for your advice about signing your real name to web posts, Dancin Santa. Is that a Swedish name, or Dutch?

    2. Re:Or don't be a pussy by norton_I · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anonymous opinions are worthless. Anonymous facts are not. Of course, in the real world, the difference between facts and opinions is somewhat blurred, but you can have valuable anonymous speech.

      Obviously it is nice to have an identity attached to information to help determine how credible it is, but even with no faith in the accuracy whatsoever, it can trigger independent research. This is the same as when information comes from a well-known but untrusted source.

      Whenever one of the nut-job religious extremist organizations says anything about sex (birth control, STDs, homosexuality, premarital sex) I assume that their is some grain of truth in it, but has been distorted beyond recognition. However, I usually do further research to determine what the truth is (which is often different than my previous conceptions, even if it bears almost no relation to the tripe spouted by said organization).

  7. Blogging from the office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't do it!

    It's way too easy for your employer to get any network traffic. My employer had a keylogger installed on one cow-irker's computer. Well, I suppose you could get away with it as long as you only speak in glowing terms about your employer.

    We had a case recently where a bunch of stock brokers were fired (and sued as I recall) because the sms messages they thought were safe; weren't!

  8. Anonymity inversely proportional to value by istartedi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't see how you can stay anonymous and say anything really interesting about your office. Of course you can say "my office has cubes" and nobody will smell you out, but if you say "I know all about the shape of the new iMac" there are only a few people that could have known that, and they will figure you out. Certainly there are variations within those two extremes, but the more unique and valuable your knowledge, the more likely they are to nail you.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  9. +5, informative. by Oliver+Defacszio · · Score: 5, Funny

    Don't use your real name? Don't mention the name of the place at which you work? Wow! I should be writing all of this down, right next to my "How Not To Drown While Doing Dishes" instructional.

    --

    -
    Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
  10. cue the subpoenas by Sean+Clifford · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Cue the subpoenas. :)

    Googling someone does not a background check make. If you googled my name you might get the impression that I'm an Irish athlete and mountain climber. Not so.

    Forget google.

    You need to do a background investigation on your hires - criminal and civil - check job history, references, and do a skills assessment.

    I don't care if someone mouthed off on Slashdot, Boing Boing, The Well, or wherever. I care about whether or not I can trust them to do the job and play well with others. Googling someone won't tell you these things.

  11. Maturity rather than Anonymnity by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The whiners who make up details about their boss, give away corporate secrets, or try to attack someone in an unfair manner are what should stop. There are many people's weblog entries I've read where they sound like spoiled brats. Comments and trackbacks indicate that they're writing this out of a self-esteem problem or just a nasty streak of insanity.

    But there are many ways to write a negative web log that still tries to be completely fair and see things from the other person's point of view. I read a number of these (I actually started reading their logs for some tech project they were on but kept on after finding out that they have lives that don't revolve around first person shooters). They seem to write out of a need to get some sort of honesty about what's going on.

    One fellow in particular that I enjoy reading writes about his boss, problem clients, assertive sex partners, and demanding family members. He's fun to read because he's figured out that in most cases he is the "problem" rather than all of these people he writes about. He is, after all, the only common link between all of these problematic things. When he writes about a stressful change at work he's not bitching about "the worst decision his boss ever made" but rather "a change his boss made that eluded his understanding".

    If I were a future employer and came across his blog, the level of maturity he displayed would go a lot further than whether he mentioned someone by name. Not everyone's that way, but jeez, if you are completely anonymous writing stuff seems like a waste of time.

    If you want to leak a secret wrongdoing, send it to a reporter's email address. If you want to write about your stresses and successes, do so in a mature way. If you want to bitch and moan and try to assasinate someone's integrity, be prepared to take the consequences for your juvenile tantrums.

  12. Pseudonymity by backslashdot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Advice to Chinese dissidents: If you are going to be anonymous, use a pseudonym and digitally sign your stuff .. so that others know it's actually you and/or your dissident group .. that way you can build credibility with a reduced chance of being screwed.

    Being totally anonymous isn't very effective, unless what you are saying can really stand on it's own (that is, it's stating provable logic rather than facts/events).

  13. Re:Or not.... by mp3phish · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Snap back into reality and you realize that almost nobody is capable of making a decent living and maintain 100% of their principles. The society we live in generates the opposite.

    It isn't human nature. It is the system we live in. Until that system might change you will always have the problem where your reputation in the business world changes significantly simply because you stand behind what is right. You see, there are too many potential haters out there which have the power to (and will!) ring your neck on a whim simply because they are religiously or politically against your ideas. The repurcussions(sp?) are limitless.

    --
    Your ignorance is infinitely greater than you realize.
  14. That's against the law by John+Seminal · · Score: 5, Interesting
    We always 'google' our perspective new-hires. People have been not hired because of the content discovered.

    You can't lawfully do that. If someone found out, they could sue you and whoever posted the information for defimation. It is the reason why former employers never can say anything bad about a former employees.

    Likewise, my personal opinions have nothing to do with my ability to do a job. Googeling to find out what political party a person belongs to, their world views, and the like is a bad practice. I know of a guy who sued a company because they asked for his social security number on an application, then did not offer him work. According to state law, that is illegal. The only reason to ask for a social security number is to pay taxes, and an employer that asks for it is implying they have offered you a job. Same thing goes for asking about marital status, or age.

    People should know thier rights and sue when violated. Otherwise corporations will keep crapping on people, paying less money, forcing people to get work as contractors, hiring temps, and the like. It all means the death of good paying jobs with health care and job security.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:That's against the law by norton_I · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You can't lawfully do that. If someone found out, they could sue you and whoever posted the information for defimation. It is the reason why former employers never can say anything bad about a former employees.


      Only if the information is false. The truth is an absolute defense against all defamation and libel suits. Even so, I doubt the prospective employer can be held accountable in most cases. However, a person (or former employer) saying something bad that is false (or not provably true) about someone, which causes them to not get hired is definately actionable.

      Now, there are certain types of information which you are not allowed to make hiring decisions on, but those are a specifically enumerated list (age, race, sex, religion, marital status, intent to have children, medical conditions, etc.). Asking about those on a job application is illegal, and if you can show that a prospective employer found this information on Google and probably used it to discriminate against you, then you have a suit.

      If, however, I use google to find a web page you wrote 5 years ago about how you hate puppies, and do not hire you, I am almost certain that is legal. I have a friend who was essentially fired for not cutting his hair (he was an hourly employee and they refused to schedule him any hours until he cut it). There is no legal recourse unless you can claim that the discrimination falls under one of the recognized and protected categories (ie. "my religion prevents me from cutting my hair").

      Also, consider that you can be denied employment for refusing or failing a drug test, even though your guild has not been legally proven. I personally think this is a travesty, but it is not illegal.
  15. Information Gathering from Blogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let me be the first to say that I, and many others, within the information gathering business use blogs including slashdot to collect information about our competitors. Competitors can be from business to government agencies.

    Passive information gathering from open sources goes on all the time especially here on slashdot where certain people give away pretty useful information about the current state of where they work including technical and operational matters.

    Some of this information might seem innocuous to many of you but for us 'in the know' we realise that some of you posters provide us with a goldmine of competitive intelligence because we recognize its context. It's basically reverse social engineering in action and it works because humans are social beings who want to 'connect' with their online social peers. We don't even have to resort to using 'recruitable weaknesses' like ideology, money or sex. Some of you people just blurt it out just because you want to be accepted.

    Here this bloggers who work in sensitive environment: Awareness of your surroundings can be a wonderful thing.

  16. Re:Surprisingly chilling advice from EFF by MoralHazard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Free speech" is a nice little term that gets bandied far too often in a nonsensical way, by people who don't think about rights concepts in a particularly rigorous way.

    If an employer's decision to censure or fire an employee based on work-related blogging is an infringement of free speech, then what about a person/group who decides to boycott a company because they disagree with that company's decisions? Or how about when there's a demonstration outside my window and I shut the window because I don't agree with them and don't want to hear it?

    "Free speech" becomes an *abusive* concept when you deprive people of their rights to avoid associating with people they don't like, or to take otherwise legal actions (like not shopping at a particular store) based on their opinons about an entity. After all, isn't the constitutional guarantee of freedom of association embedded in the exact same amendment as the right to free speech?

    "Free speech" cannot mean "speech without consequences from anyone". That would just be silly. I'll say what I want, and you'll decide whether you want to associate with me based on how you feel about it.

  17. Re:Anonymous posting reveals a lack of integrity. by daigu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ever hear of Deep Throat and Watergate? It doesn't take much imagination to think of scenarios where disclosiing your name is not an option and the alternative to being anonymous is being silent. You appear to be in confortable circumstances where this isn't an issue. Not everyone is so fortunate.

  18. Tor: another security/privacy tool by goon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bit surprised nobody has mentioned Tor.[0] Tor is a way for individuals, groups to source and share information but avoid some of the pitfalls. Tor is a useful tool for making your data (somewhat more) anonymous. Tor allows users to better hide the source or destination of their activities on-line. Tor unlike conventional encryption focuses on the header component of TCP packets so it makes it harder to determine the source or destination of your packets and ultimately your data. You can read more about how it works [1] and the Tor Protocol Specification here [2] and how it works here [3]. Tor should be another essential tool in your security kit.

    Reference
    [0] Tor, EFF Overview: http://tor.eff.org/overview.html
    [1] Tor, How it works: http://tor.eff.org/howitworks.html
    [2] Tor Protocol Specification: http://tor.eff.org/cvs/tor/doc/tor-spec.txt
    [3] Tor: How it Works: http://tor.eff.org/howitworks.html

    --
    peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
  19. Re:Anonymous posting reveals a lack of integrity. by node+3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Heya, Beka... What if you've been raped by your dad and you want to let people know about the hell it's put you through, but you don't want all the attention and bs you'll have to deal with if you post it under your real name?

    What if you work for a government agency, or corporate entity, etc, that is engaged in all sorts of chicanery? Would you post with your real name, and be fired on the spot, or would you post anonymously so you can be a "voice from the inside"?

    What if you are an atheist in a strictly Muslim country? Or a drug user in a country currently engaged in a "War on Drugs"?

    What tripe. What complete unadulterated tripe.

    Empty words, since you didn't back up your opinion with any logic or reasoning.

    Or are they not really thoughts worth standing up for?

    What you fail to understand is that just because something is worth standing up for that doesn't mean that there won't be negative, unjust, or undesirable consequences for posting something. The world isn't fair or just, and until it is (ie: never), there will be a need for anonymity.

  20. Slashdot AC policy by jay-be-em · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was curious as to what Slashdot's IP logging policy is, particularly for AC posts. From the faq, fyi:

    We log the usual stuff (IP, page, time, user, page views, moderation, and comment posting, mainly). A few other odds and ends too, but mostly the data is used to make moderation possible. We keep the logs for 48 hours.

    --
    "Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." --Eric Blair
  21. see also invisiblog.com by jpn · · Score: 3, Informative

    Invisiblog lets you post blog entries via the anonymous remailer network.

  22. Re:Anonymous posting reveals a lack of integrity. by russellh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Breeding a group of people who are convinced they're doing their thing for the world, yet who write anonymously behind the safety of a pseudonym or "Anonymous Coward" moniker?

    Get some integrity people, and write with your real names. Stand up for what you believe in and put your name next to your thoughts.


    I suppose you've never heard of the Federalist Papers.

    --
    must... stay... awake...