Hacker News Reader

Comment by caseysoftware | Hacker News Reader

I 100% get this one.

A company has an obligation to protect their customers' data, due to GDPR and a variety of other privacy rules. If one of their people - employee or contractor - has access to customer data, the company must mitigate it being stolen. In an office environment, they could do that by limiting personal devices, barring notes and other information going out.

When these positions become WFH - even with a company owned/managed device - they have an entire new class of threats to mitigate: personal devices, shoulder surfing, etc by not the employee but someone standing next to them.

While I hate the surveillance aspects, I want my account information protected and I don't see a better approach in an uncontrolled/unknowable environment.

View on HN

You can't imagine other ways to protect data beyond such a dehumanizing denial of liberty?

These workers seem forced to accept these conditions by the fear of losing their jobs. This isn't a free choice but an imposed one.

Advocating for any form of forced surveillance of a persons home and family for the sake of consumer quality/safety is disgusting. Why is the threat of consumer data loss more important than the threat to their personal freedom? Do they not have inalienable rights too?

> You can't imagine other ways to protect data beyond such a dehumanizing denial of liberty?

There are other ways, most don't allow WFH.

But obviously, you have some ideas so please share them. I'd love to learn more.

Building a data processing system that mitigates the WFH risks might be more expensive than exploiting workers but it is absolutely doable.

The tasks performed in these contexts are mostly just different types of data transformations. Allowing operators to execute a transformation without exposing the actual state of the data itself should be possible with a well designed system but the details would very much depend on the specific context. Splitting data processing steps between operators would also minimize risk (even if it is a little more cumbersome). Automating sensitive processes like authentication and payment processes may also be an option in some cases.

Hacking employment contracts may be a cheaper solution for the companies involved but the cost to human dignity and liberty is far too high and it is being borne by the people least able to do anything about it. This simply isn't the type of business practice that we should tolerate anywhere in our supply chains even if it could mean slightly more customer "friction".

My guess is that it's not just about securing data, it's also about looking over everyone's should to be sure they look like they are working. Instead of having a supervisor for every ten people to spot check calls and go over performance they can scale to more people per supervisor. And the company doesn't bear the cost of the loss of privacy and dignity. Another win for the Apple's and Amazon's of the world...

How about an ivr with voice recognition to process credit card transactions over the phone, that agents can engage during a customer call as needed, getting the customer back when the ivr is done collecting their sensitive info or authenticating them or whatever?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com