Surveillance Story Turns Into a Warning About Employer Monitoring 382
rtfa-troll writes "The story from yesterday about the Feds monitoring Google searches has turned into a warning about how work place surveillance could harm you. It turns out that Michele Catalano's husband's boss tipped off the police after finding 'suspicious' searches (including 'pressure cooker bombs') in his old work computer's search history. Luckily for the Catalanos, who even allowed a search of their house when they probably didn't have to, it seems the policemen and FBI agents were professional and friendly. Far from being imperiled by a SWAT raid, Catalano spoke to some men in black cars who were polite and even mentioned to Catalano that 99 times out of 100, these tip-offs come to nothing. Perhaps the lesson is to be a bit more careful about your privacy, so that what you do on the internet remains between you and the professionals at the NSA."
Re:Private browsing (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Alright then. Carry On. (Score:2, Informative)
Yeah. It's called INFO-OPS. Read Richard Tomlinson's book (google it) on how the spooks try to control public conscience.
Re:Private browsing (Score:5, Informative)
If your work browser is configured to accept certificates from the proxy server, SSL might not give you privacy.
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:How will they be compensated? (Score:4, Informative)
The important detail missing is that the couple wasn't searching for bombs. It appears the police added the word "bombs" to cover up their amateur-hour faux pas so that an investigation sounds reasonable.
That doesn't appear to be correct according to the fine article [wired.com]:
The former employee’s computer searches took place on this employee’s workplace computer. On that computer, the employee searched the terms ‘pressure cooker bombs’ and ‘backpacks.’
Re:Private browsing (Score:4, Informative)
A good proxy server is going to allow your system administrators to decrypt your SSL connection.
Yes and no. Yes, a proxy can do MITM attacks, but no, barring a key compromise, it can't do so undetectably. A computer-savvy employee who is concerned about a MITM attack can do some testing beforehand and on an ongoing basis to assess his risk.
Some things an employee who doesn't 0wn his own box probably cannot check for is a keyboard logger. Employees probably cannot check for other things like hidden cameras and other off-the-computer surveillance.
Re:Private browsing (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Private browsing (Score:5, Informative)
Once upon a time those jobs were restricted to the heads of the company and they were awarded accordingly. Now those jobs are everywhere unless you're literally the bottom rung on the ladder.
The working climate in the US is dismal.