Slashdot Mirror
WA State Bill Would Allow Bosses To Seek Facebook Passwords
An anonymous reader writes "A bill amendment proposed Tuesday could allow employers to ask for a worker's Facebook or other social media password during company investigations. The provision was proposed for a bill that safeguards social network passwords of workers and job applicants. The measure bars employers from asking for social media credentials during job interviews. The amendment says that an employer conducting an investigation may require or demand access to a personal account if an employee or prospective employee has allegations of work-place misconduct or giving away an employer's proprietary information. The amendment would require an investigation to ensure compliance with applicable laws or regulatory requirements."
This is easily avoided by simply refusing to participate in facebook and other social media. Actually, that solves a lot of really stupid problems. I highly recommend it.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Does the law force one to comply? I think a simple "pound sand" would suffice.
Granted, you maybe shit canned over it, but such is life.
I do not agree with the law. If they want it, they should have to go to court and require a judge to force it to be handed over. BS IMO.
Coming up next... An amendment to allow companies to request the keys to your home and vehicle if they are investigating allegations of work-place misconduct. Along with your personal phone records, and a strip search.
What's the difference?
More worrisome, what about AdultFriendFinder, xtube, NAMBLA online forums, etc?
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
What I do outside of work, on my own time, is not my employer's business. You guys can try passing this law if you want, but it'll be political suicide and the courts will shoot it down faster than you can say "republican in a public restroom caught with a man."
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I think the bill should allow employers to have access to all your online accounts, computers, phones, cameras, any storage device electronic or physical, safe deposit boxes, all financial records, vehicles, residence, storage facilities. These rights should be extended to you friends and family members, er accomplices, etc. etc, with all investigations aided and supported by the police.
So if I think the company may be leaking my personal information or doing something improper do I get the password to the HR and Financial systems, so I (or my lawyer) can investigate my claim?
The asshole senator that added this provision has already withdrawn it due to industry objections over possible privacy violations:
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/House-rejects-bill-that-would-allow-employer-access-to-Facebook-passwords-201316061.html
Frankly, if this became a law in my state I'd challenge it as a violation of unreasonable search and seizure so fast it would make the idiot senator's head spin. A warrant from a judge might be one thing, but some random employer just saying they requesting the info as part of an official investigation can GO FRACK THEMSELVES.
Those filthy employers who do wish to dig up some dirt would not hire someone without a Facebook account. It'll be considered too "creepy and suspicious".
If the company hire a PI to do an investigation, doesn't Facebook already have provisions in their TOS that says they'll give up access to the account?
Change your facebook password to "I-L0\/3-Tüü-ætP0O" and THEN give it to them.
Nobodies Prefect
Tidbits for Techs Technology Blog
Erp, the *amendment* was withdrawn. The bill it was attached to (SB 5211, meant to *prevent* employer access to social media accounts) is still alive.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Washington-House-panel-rejects-push-for-passwords-4406954.php
Work-Place misconduct defined:
If you are Representative Mike Sells, and you introduce a critically stupid amendment like this, you have engaged in workplace misconduct, and you are required to give the people of the State of Washington, who are your employers, all your social media passwords.
PS: The linked story from the OP has a comment which states that it was withdrawn. I imagine he pulled on his left ear with his right hand, and his right ear with his left hand, and the loud popping noise was his head coming out of his rear.
Where did you get that idea? Facebook may not be as vocal as Google about denying requests they aren't required to comply with, but they don't just hand over the info to anyone who asks.
PIs don't have any special legal authority to access any information. The only thing a PI license allows you to do is to charge the client for investigative services. In that way, ot's just like a cosmetology license or a food handler's permit. Source - I used to be a PI.
At 9am this morning the amendment was withdrawn, and the language of the bill changed to include that employers will be required to pay employees $500 along with any damages should they ask for their social media passwords. So no one is getting their social media passwords taken by employers.
See for your self
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?year=2013&bill=5211 It's under "In the house"
http://www.tvw.org/index.php?option=com_tvwliveplayer&eventID=2013041032 If you don't believe that then watch the senate themselves withdraw the amendment and change the language of the bill
This amendment never had a chance in hell, and has been put to death.
You can submit comments about the bill yourself at:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5211&year=2013
Even though the amendment has already been withdrawn, it never hurts to add your voice in opposition such that it won't be reintroduced. The new system where the public can comment on pending legislation is pretty cool
Sure, boss, I'd love to give you my password. However, since it's a violation of the TOS, if you access my account, we both would potentially be committing a felony under the CFAA.
Therefore, even though I'd love to give it to you, I'm afraid I can't. For our protection AND the company's protection.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Agreed. At a minimum a court ordered subpoena should be required. An employer with a big government/military contract can do something stupid, get in a huge amount of trouble over it, then they bring in the lawyers and "investigate"/interview everyone under the guise of "protecting the interests of the employees". When they are done, they take all the information they've amassed and store it away in case they need it for legal proceedings, then usually fire everyone in the department.
I should never have to relinquishment my personal information to an employer. If they have a right to my password, that doesn't just give them the right to look at my information, they can also abuse my account.
Even if a subpoena were issued, that shouldn't give someone my password. The subpoena should be served to the hosting company, which then provides a copy of requested information within the scope of the court order.
And as far as DoJ is concerned, a violation of a ToS is a crime: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/11/15/1821238/doj-violating-a-sites-tos-is-a-crime
Of course that's just a slashdot summary, and we all know how accurate those are sometimes.
Giving someone your facebook password allows them to change things, and not just to read.
This would allow my boss to outright plant things on me, and not just go snooping around.
If I had someone's facebook password and I wanted to compel them, I'd just post something compromising, change their password, and then threaten them with exposure if they didn't do what I told them.
This will allow bosses to coerce their workers into colluding with corruption.
Not just that, but passwords allow write access, not just read access.
I'm honestly more worried about my boss using my facebook password to plant something incriminating than I am about him snooping around.
Being able to set me up with a compromising photo and threaten to show the link to my wife would be a great way to try and force me to help him cook the books.
You want to search my house? Go to a judge and convince them, get a search warrant. Then c'mon in. Facebook password in a divorce case? Sure. Again, judicial oversight.
But my employer? NO. No, you can't search my house if you have an internal investigation going on me, and NO, you can't ransack my facebook either. If you want into either of those, take it to court like everybody else has to, prove to a judge that you need it.
I don't see a difference here. And neither should the law.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
You didn't even notice the real issue with it, that is far greater than all privacy protections, real or imagined, combined.
Password will give your employer the ability to impersonate you. Then they can plant or destroy any evidence of anything, and spread any kind of misinformation supposedly from you. Internal investigations aren't announced to the public, law enforcement, regulatory agencies, etc., so company can do this impersonation in secret, then claim that it never happened.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
The law is actually pro-worker - it prohibits employers from demanding passwords (which is something otherwise legal in "at-will" states).
The abomination was not the bill itself, but an amendment that would grant the exemption in question, effectively rendering the bill useless.
What FB and others need to do is have the ability to set two passwords
1 your normal day to day password
2 the "im being questioned by a LEO" password
if you use the Duress password
1 They do a reverse DNS on the ip address and make sure it belongs to some sort of Law Enforcement Organization
2 They pop up a box stating " Duress Password used Call 1-877-???-???? and provide the operator with verification string %string% to enable access for 72 hours"
3 if this fails then they refer the case to the FBI for prosecution under CyberCrimes
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
It will be used to hire and fire based on discrimination. They LEGALLY can't ask you if you're married, have kids, what church you go to, who you support politically, etc. etc.
But they can read it on Facebook and roast you for your associations.
I was told by a recruiter to just completely 100% and absolutely don't use social media and don't let any member of my immediate family use it. I said, I already do, and there are no "drunk pictures" or anything like that.
He was adamant. In the current hiring environment, employers will use ANYTHING to weed out anybody. Unless you're applying for a Social Media position--don't use social media. Employers who may want to send you around the world on a moment's notice doesn't want to find out you have children--or a spouse. If he wants to send you to Saudi Arabia--he pretty much CAN'T send you if you're a Jew. He may be a funny-mental-case Christian--he might let you slide if he thinks you're a luke-warm Xtian--but won't even THINK of hiring an atheist. You may not be gay, but if you have a family member who is out and proud, the employer may take exception. Did you "LIKE" Obama? In Virginia, there are people who have already been fired for that--LEGALLY! "LIKE" evidently isn't protected free speech--EVEN IF YOU WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT! (Yeah, a sheriff in Virginia Beach fired employees who supported Democrats last election--and used his investigative powers to do it. Right now they're investigating his use of his investigative powers, but the fired employees are still fired, because your political leanings aren't protected in matters of employment)
So, if you live in Washington--DO NOT LET YOUR LEGISLATORS VOTE FOR THIS BILL!