Data harvesting disguised as a job application
Try :() :;:
My Instagram handle is '); DROP TABLE AccountNames;–
I don’t even have a TikTok account, lol.
You shouldn’t have an Instagram account, either. Meta is more evil than Google.
A decade ago I would’ve agreed. Now I’m not too sure there’s enough difference to be significant.
I mean the second part of your comment. Obviously I agree with not having an IG lol
These are evil companies, but I am curious what metric you’re using to say one is worse than the other when their objectives and methods are similar.
Then you are not qualified for this job
Have one just in case
Looking forward to the day I’m unemployable for not having those accounts instead of just for being really easy to find out I’m a communist
I have neither, what would I do?
Try a SQL injection attack
N/A
N/A
“N/A” is the correct answer unless your account happens to be under your real name. “Fuck you, try and find it” is what you should be thinking.
I was so proud when I read about teenagers who have a named social account and their “secondary” real account, because their schools required access to track them.
I recently attempted to apply for a job and they wanted a link to my LinkedIn page. Fair enough, but then they also had another spot for “Website” that was mandatory to fill in, and it would not allow me to continue with the application until I had a legit website in there, and it wouldn’t accept the same link as my LinkedIn page that I’d already used in the space above, so I just gave up. Fuckers.
Use https://example.com/ lol
But, yeah, it’s gotten ridiculous. No one wants to work, though…
Avoid use in operations.
Damn! I wanted to use it.
Put in a random github page and explain in the interview.
bit.ly that redirects to LinkedIn?
put “logout” in these forms and watch them logout from their account
lmao this is genius
It’s anecdotal, but back when I was on Reddit, I saw someone say that a prospective employer actually required your full credentials so that they could check your private information as well.
That not only sounds illegal and shady, it would be the dumbest thing you could do.
Now somebody else has your account, uploads some Epstein material for shits and giggles and you can go to jail
That is an immediate “Nope the fuck out of there, you do NOT want to work in het place”
You slipped out a bit of Dutch at the end there.
Could be, but what part, exactly?
“het place”
Strongly agreed!
Small company overreach.
They probably also ask you a bunch of illegal questions in the screening
Doesn’t sound illegal at all. Immoral sure. But there’s no way governments have created a law to make asking for social logins illegal
i recently looked up the Security clearance law in my country, which has 3 levels.
And only in the highest level, for social media, all they do is look at your public profile (if i did not misread it) (They do stuff like asking people close to you questions tho)
Yeah but this is asking for their credentials which is an absolute direct NO, as that would be extremely risky for me
That makes sense, because any government agencies that actually have a need for intimate knowledge of your social media footprint don’t actually need your password to harvest ALL the data that network has on you public and private.
I mean not really. In my country atleast, any goverment agency would require an order from an judge, which essential means that someone is part of active investigation/ suspect of a crime
spy agencys might have different capabilties, but practices like this would still be most likely illegal, without a cause
I mean maybe if they have an investigation and they want to use that information as evidence sure that would be illegal to use but for background checks any of that information is fair game if they are able to get it. Like if your terms of service specifically say they wont give any information out for any reason, maybe you can sue them if you can prove they got the information with your name attached directly instead of it being sold after being anonymized in aggregate then another company/data broker aggregating other data on you to infer who’s data belongs to who with device footprints then selling that to the government as a service which i mean good luck. But most likely the terms you sign say they will hand over data for criminal investigations or matters of national security to government entities which they can state background checks for high level clearance positions is a matter of national security.
i mean as i said, the law says what exactly is done in such a high level clearance check, and it does not say that they check like private information on social media. So they cant legally optain this information like this, and because of the privacy laws, the social media platforms would not be allowed to hand that information out just because someone asks without any legal claim either
sure spy agencys might do different stuff, and there might be some other type of international data base they can look into for a background check
But normal goverment agencys cant just bypass the law (in my country), thats just a myth.
No country is publicizing what checks they do for a high level security clearance check unless they want to give bad actors and easy way to beat their checks. What country is this and whats the exact law you are referencing? If you can provide me direct evidence for that I’ll eat my words but I think you are misunderstanding something if im honest.
SÜD (Sicherheitsüberprüfungsgesetz) In germany
The full one https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/s_g/index.html
The specific actions https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/s_g/__12.html
Sure i mean its totaly possible that i misunderstand something. But i think this is the law that defines these things in germany, even for like BND (spy agency) members
They just buy the data en masse from data brokers. All of the process is civil rights theater.
data brokers dont have private social media data like chats for example.
There’s no need to involve the courts when the social media networks are complicit. It’s not as if “how” they obtained the data will ever be tested in court, they only need the data for their own internal investigations. Courts and spy agencies don’t have anything to do with it.
that is just not true. Social media networks are also required by law to keep this data safe and not hand it out just because anyone asks. This is illegal and not how it works at all.
If that illusion makes you feel safer, then I don’t care enough to argue with you about it.
feel free to provide any evidence to your claims
My boss worked at IBM before his current role. He said a former colleague of his listed him as a reference for his security clearance and he “got to meet with some men in suits with no sense of humor” as part of it.
Honestly I’ll probably never go for any jobs that require a security clearance because honestly that’s just a level of stress that I don’t need
Probrally a scammer
What the Hell happens if you have neither?
deleted by creator
Either you:
- panic and stop the application because you’re a literal child
- you stop the application like an an adult because because of the red flag this is
- you write in “no” or “I don’t use them” like an adult
- or you provide your information like a child because you’re incapable of even the slimmest act of defiance.
“I have no social media because I devote all my free time to my job.”
Jfc
this could only come close to making sense for a social media manager.
I love (read: hate) the ones that have a lengthy survey, full of questions and repeats to gauge your priorities by forcing you to choose one thing over another. Ive gotten such gems as, “Would you rather: 1) ensure that customers leave satisfied and happy; or 2) have a good work-life balance?”
What if you don’t have an account?
I live in California. This is illegal.
I lived in a “purple” city and constantly dealt with illegal application requests.
Its only illegal if companies actually get punished. But nah, not when you have a man in the white house who can touch little girls and gargle presidential balls and nothing happens.
Let’s be very clear: only one of those two sexual acts is illegal. The other one is just hilarious proof that we live in the most stupid timeline.
Ah thanks for clarifying. I noticed I did write it that way implying the throating a president is against the law. My mistake. Knob jobs on politicians when done consensually is alright in my book.
This is the type of thing you get 40$ randomly from by signing up for the class action
Someone use ai for good so we can auto apply to all class actions
