Slashdot Mirror


Bozeman, MT Drops Password Info Requirement

mcmoodle writes "Bozeman, Montana has decided that they don't want applicant personal information after all, citing a worldwide backlash on the issue: '"Effective at noon today the city of Bozeman permanently ceased the practice of requesting that candidates selected for positions under a provisional job offer to provide their usernames or passwords for candidates' internet sites," said Chris Kukulski, Bozeman City Manager. ... Kukulski says after a 90 minute staff meeting held earlier today, officials decided asking applicants to provide their passwords to sites such as Facebook or MySpace, "exceeded that which is acceptable to our community." Kukulski apologized for the negative impact the issue has generated from news organizations and blogs around the world.' I didn't have any doubt this would be immediately squashed. Now I'm just curious as to how many personal accounts they actually went through!"

19 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. Wow, worldwide backlashes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What else can we start worldwide backlashes against? They seem to fucking work.

    1. Re:Wow, worldwide backlashes. by siloko · · Score: 3, Funny

      I read: Re:Wow, worldwide backslashes.

      I thought you were proposing some new installation art. Big, fluffy backslashes shrewdly placed next to global landmarks to signify the growing dominance of technology over world culture.

  2. We are the Law by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In a system like ours, each branch of government has a specific role to play. The legislature crafts and passes laws. The judiciary determines whether the laws are valid. And the executive branch takes actions prescribed by the laws.

    But only the executive branch has the power to actually do anything about the laws. It is almost a travesty how much power this puts into one single branch of government. Where we expect checks and balances, there is only unbalance in favor of the executive branch.

    FTFA:
    The city will continue using the internet as part of background checks to judge the character of applicants, and although the city will stop asking for passwords Kukulski says the passwords already given by previous applicants will remain the confidential property of the city.

    It doesn't matter if searching online is legal or not. In fact, it may be illegal to consider anonymous online sources as actionable information. As long as the executive branch says it is going to do something, there are no laws that can truly restrict it.

    1. Re:We are the Law by Celeste+R · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Your analysis of the checks and balances system is a good one.

      Few companies are willing to stand up to abusive governments, especially when it's expensive to do so (lawyer fees, etc). Also, there are ways around the no-password thing (electronic surveillance is already here), and in general, passwords are not required when you play your trump card (we'll send the suits if you don't comply).

      Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The purpose of central government is regulation; because that is where power can be utilized in a non-biased fashion.

      Some would say that "bias is human" and such, but anyone can contrive an excuse to do something or not to do something. Placing the actions of the government (in this case, the hiring process) just to filter out applicants who say... have a fetish of any sort would have a hard time knowing whether or not their rejection was for that reason.

      It's not "wrong" for Bozeman to do what it's doing, but is it doing so with the appropriate regulations? Are things truly non-biased there, or does the system there need further tweaking? Those things should be brought to light, because a broken system only benefits a select few. Any executive decision needs the balance of proper legality.

      --
      There are no perfect answers, only the right questions. More questions at http://foresightandhindsight.blogspot.com/
  3. Fascinating... by Sorthum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Interesting that they declare the passwords they've already received to be the "property of the city."

    Bodes not well, that's for sure-- and it shows that the city still doesn't "get it." They likely just know that a lot of people got very upset, and figured they'd back away from something they just don't grasp...

    1. Re:Fascinating... by EdIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      shows that the city still doesn't "get it." They likely just know that a lot of people got very upset, and figured they'd back away from something they just don't grasp...

      Kukulski says after a 90 minute staff meeting held earlier today, officials decided asking applicants to provide their passwords to sites such as Facebook or MySpace, "exceeded that which is acceptable to our community." Kukulski apologized for the negative impact the issue has generated from news organizations and blogs around the world.' I didn't have any doubt this would be immediately squashed. Now I'm just curious as to how many personal accounts they actually went through!"

      Yeah, I would say they don't fucking get it. It took them 90 minutes to decide it was a bad idea apparently and that the backlash was not worth it. 90 minutes. 1 1/2 HOURS. If they understood it at all, the implications of what they were doing, the violations of people's privacy and freedoms, it would *not* have taken anywhere near 90 minutes. I can imagine it was mostly about how they could spin it a different way and still get the information.

      You can see it was just marketing PR with their half-assed insincere apology about it being unacceptable to the community.

      Now their curious about how many accounts they actually got. Translation: "We had to stop doing it because of the whiners, but at least we got to find out how many people would put up with our shit".

  4. Re:Myths and History by JordanL · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are you implying that a person's passwords to their personal accounts on websites are subject to public information requirements?

    Because the FBI has maintained that obtaining a person's passwords without their consent is a crime.

  5. Re:If you have nothing to hide... by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, this is not a cabinet position. This is fucking Bozeman, Montana, which no one had heard of until they pulled this stunt.

    Second, who watches the watchers?

    Third, define "nothing to hide"? As a simple example, I don't think my body is horrible, though it could certainly be better. That doesn't mean I want to be strip-searched to get on the bus to go to work.

    It's not about whether you have anything "suspicious" worth hiding. It's about whether you have anything you'd consider private. There's a reason privacy is part of the universal declaration of human rights.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  6. Re:Change Password by selven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or do the same without the hassle of changing your password by just lying. It's not like they'll subpoena records just to see if your password actually changed (and if it did, why did you fail to notify them?)

  7. What leaders are getting fired? by unlametheweak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... citing a worldwide backlash... ceased the practice of requesting that candidates selected for positions under a provisional job offer to provide their usernames or passwords for candidates' internet sites

    The common sense question would be why hasn't the city Manager and his accomplices been fired without severance because of this severe incompetence and lack of judgment. Reacting to a reaction is the worse kind of Management. These people should show some Leadership and resign from their positions without asking for severance pay or Letters of Reference.

  8. Re:Myths and History by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While Bozeman's government's actions aren't kosher, can we really defend against it? Records are records, and if they decide that they absolutely must have it for such and such, it's not something you can completely prevent

    This is nothing but the typical "if you don't have anything to hide, then you should be OK giving up your information" defense, slightly rephrased. Please read Daniel Solove's excellent evisceration of this argument here in PDF, and stop accepting the blanket "interests of national security" line without questioning on a case-by-case basis if it is reasonable.

    Someone needs to create a privacy argument checklist for /. like the "why your spam solution won't work" checklist.

    --
    An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
  9. Re:Myths and History by unlametheweak · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's completely unenforceable. People can just claim they have no Slashdot account (for example) and therefore not have to give their passwords away. Why anybody would be stupid enough to randomly give every potential employer their passwords is beyond reason. I could understand setting up temporary proxy accounts that would be used to, for example, say good things about the company in anticipation of a job interview.

    The people who thought up this scheme are obviously stupid. How do people get into Management?

  10. 90 minutes? by lgftsa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously people, pull your fingers out.

    Then again, it could have been a 1 minute vote and then 89 minutes of pin-the-blame on whoever's not there.

  11. Re:Myths and History by unlametheweak · · Score: 4, Funny

    Reality is 9/10th of the law.

    perception is reality

    therefore

    perception is 9/10 of the law

    Laws are meant to be broken. - Ref some Wall Street lawyer

  12. Re:Myths and History by DrgnDancer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, it's more like "Well, even the FBI, which not the most "privacy conscious" of organizations, thinks that accessing someone's personal accounts without their permission (or a warrant, or special PATRIOT act permission) is a crime."

    Heh.

    --
    I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
  13. The whole password part... by yoshi_mon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It would have been one thing had they just requested applicants list all of their social networking sites. And even listed their usernames with each site so that they would know who they were on those sites since most people don't use their real names as their logins. Clearly my real name is not yoshi_mon.

    It still would have been a very invasive and ethically dubious practice but not too surprising for a 'red state'.

    But to then ask for peoples passwords? That is where the whole thing gets surreal. Why the hell do you need access to the accounts? I've yet to see any real explanation for that part of this nonsense. Not that there really could be a good explanation for it but I'd really like to see what kind of twisted rational was given.

    --

    Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
  14. Re:Myths and History by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 3, Funny

    The people who thought up this scheme are obviously stupid. How do people get into Management?

    I would think the statement answers the question..... :-)

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  15. Re:If you have nothing to hide... by baKanale · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is fucking Bozeman, Montana, which no one had heard of until they pulled this stunt.

    In Star Trek: First Contact, Zefram Cochrane launched the Phoenix from a missile silo just outside Bozeman, Montana. But yeah, that's about it.

  16. ignorant often dishonest: remember Tuttle, OK? by KWTm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've found that when managers are ignorant about technology they often pretend that they understand.

    I'm giving up mod points to voice my agreement with you. Anyone else remember Tuttle, Oklahoma? I don't expect managers, even IT managers, to know everything, but it would be nice if they admitted they made mistakes rather than acting like jerks.

    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]