• Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    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)

    • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      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

    • Wolf314159@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 hours ago

        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

        • AlfredoJohn@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          21 hours ago

          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.

          • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            20 hours ago

            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.

            • AlfredoJohn@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              19 hours ago

              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.

        • Wolf314159@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          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.

          • Corridor8031@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            21 hours ago

            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.