dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-03-06 12:28:34: The Baltimore Sun (via Ars Technica) notes that Verizon contacted police after they noticed a Baltimore Deacon was quite happily storing his significant child pornography collection in the cloud. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next

Chris 313
Because It's Geekier
Premium Member
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
·AT&T FTTP
·Comcast XFINITY

Chris 313

Premium Member

First mistake?

The obviously horrible child porn aside, his first mistake was using an ISP provided backup service. Didn't he think they could snoop at will?

Second, why is it always priests or church related people you hear about getting smacked down for this crap?

Makes me glad I don't even go to church.
Expand your moderator at work

rogerser
@voxility.net

rogerser to Chris 313

Anon

to Chris 313

Re: First mistake?

Actually rabbis are knows for child abuse too.

»iamthewitness.com/listen ··· -WHY.htm

delusion ftl
@comcast.net

delusion ftl to Chris 313

Anon

to Chris 313
Normally to give a comprehensive answer it would take several pages of background and analysis to provide a complete response, so for the sake of time let me be succinct.

First, Child predators find ways to be around children in a way they are trusted. There are many ways to do this, but one of the low hanging fruit areas is in a church as parishioners tend to have high levels of trust right out of the gate. The catholic church, in particular, has a particular issue with this, tied in with their celibacy creed. The combination makes for a potentially dangerous environment.

Second, There's no evidence that the pictures were produced by him, or that they involved children from his church. Which means that going or not going to his church would make no difference.

Third, This is a good example of critical theory in action. Notice how the article ties in the fact that he is a church goer. Note that there is no indication that his church or it's members are involved in any way with this issue. The article could have labeled him as a democrat (unknown but almost certainly based on demographics), or a member of a local bowling team, or "wealthy east side resident", or local business owner. What if they had listed him as a tea party member (not likely, just added to make a point)? The goal of critical theory is really brilliant as it takes a group and makes them responsible for the ills. Note how your response is something equivalent to "church related people are stupid and scary". If the article writer (Baltimore sun) had wanted to cast aspersions on democrats, or bowling teams they would have chosen those labels instead, but they chose this persons church affiliation as something they wanted to "criticize". By the way, i don't have a problem with examples of critical theory, only that Americans, by and large, are completely unaware of what it is, who started it, and why it's used. Knowledge is power.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: First mistake?

said by delusion ftl :

Third, This is a good example of critical theory in action. Notice how the article ties in the fact that he is a church goer. Note that there is no indication that his church or it's members are involved in any way with this issue.

If he was a teacher or a doctor regardless of religion affiliation that would have been brought up too.

I see cases in the news all the time about female teachers( typically very attractive ) having sex with teenage students. Surely there are male teachers and female and males who are just regular people that get caught having sex with minors. 99.99% of these cases never make the national news.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to Chris 313

Member

to Chris 313
Because it brings more drama as 1.) many "Christians" try to portray themselves as holier than thou 2.) many idiots out there attempt to put Christians in a box as "better" (because of 1) and they love to see them fall.

I live my life knowing every man/woman has their faults and none of us are perfect. Some can be forgiven and let go. The others can be forgiven and must still deal with the punishment, however harsh that may be. I personally think any violation of a child should result in death of the predator. Viewing a violation, should certainly result in some prison, consoling and removal from society for a repeat offense.
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina

Member

Re: First mistake?

Typically it is others who put those labels on Christians. Of course some Christians do behave that way but every group of people has these types and unfortunately we let it taint the entire group.

Holdon
@comcast.net

Holdon to Chris 313

Anon

to Chris 313
said by Chris 313:

The obviously horrible child porn aside, his first mistake was using an ISP provided backup service. Didn't he think they could snoop at will?

Second, why is it always priests or church related people you hear about getting smacked down for this crap?

Makes me glad I don't even go to church.

I worked with an Atheist who got busted for having kiddy porn on his work laptop. Guess sickness comes from all kinds.
Dru2u
join:2013-03-06
united state

Dru2u to Chris 313

Member

to Chris 313
I suspect if he was employed for 21 years by a school system in support of electronic equipment (and thankfully not children), then he was a permanent deacon vs a transitional deacon and potentially even married. That I should suspect would considerably lessen his involvement with children in the parish community.

As far as the Verizon cloud storage system, are we sure it was for backups, or was Albaugh just a goober who didn't know it was a public viewing cloud system? It doesn't seem clear to me that it would have been a private access system.
moonpuppy (banned)
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD

moonpuppy (banned) to Chris 313

Member

to Chris 313
said by Chris 313:

Second, why is it always priests or church related people you hear about getting smacked down for this crap?

Makes me glad I don't even go to church.

People get busted for child porn all the time. We only hear about the religious people because that sells news.
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul

Member

Why was Verizon snooping on his files?

Not to defend people who upload child porn to a cloud service, but why exactly was Verizon snooping on the content of his files? Does that mean that Verizon will also look through your family photos and videos as well?
nanoflower
join:2002-07-14
30876

nanoflower

Member

Re: Why was Verizon snooping on his files?

Agreed. My first thought on reading this was how exactly did Verizon find out about the pictures that he had? I can't see him calling up and asking them to look at them so why where they looking? Was this some sort of automated search or was someone specifically looking in his account?

The fact that anyone let alone a leader of the church had pictures they shouldn't have can't be a surprise to anyone at this point given the revelations of the past few years.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to Rekrul

Premium Member

to Rekrul
said by Rekrul:

Not to defend people who upload child porn to a cloud service, but why exactly was Verizon snooping on the content of his files? Does that mean that Verizon will also look through your family photos and videos as well?

Experiment to Conduct
----------------------
Upload a bunch of jpeg's of flowers, landscapes, or otherwise innocuous pictures of politicians, with file names like "Little Billy taking it up the a$$.jpg", "Mary 6 years old with my c*ck.jpg", and see what happens.

It will give some indication as to whether Verizon is scanning file names or actively looking at content.
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

Chubbysumo

Member

Re: Why was Verizon snooping on his files?

said by MaynardKrebs:

said by Rekrul:

Not to defend people who upload child porn to a cloud service, but why exactly was Verizon snooping on the content of his files? Does that mean that Verizon will also look through your family photos and videos as well?

Experiment to Conduct
----------------------
Upload a bunch of jpeg's of flowers, landscapes, or otherwise innocuous pictures of politicians, with file names like "Little Billy taking it up the a$$.jpg", "Mary 6 years old with my c*ck.jpg", and see what happens.

It will give some indication as to whether Verizon is scanning file names or actively looking at content.

its probably hashed content in conjunction with files names, but the simple fact is, is that you sign away the rights to any content you upload to someone else's server. Just like FB owns the rights(or was going to try to) the photos you post on FB and instagram. Seriously, look at and read your ToSs and contracts. He signed away his rights, and gave verizon legal grounds to snoop as soon as he used their services to back up his own stuff, even if it wasn't intentional. There was a huge discussion about this on reddit whether or not he had been auto-enrolled in their backup service or not, which could make the find null, and even counting those they found on his laptop and phone/tablets, it means that the original search warrant would have never been issued, thus he gets off. He needs mental help, along side some jail time.
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Rekrul

Member

Re: Why was Verizon snooping on his files?

said by Chubbysumo:

its probably hashed content in conjunction with files names, but the simple fact is, is that you sign away the rights to any content you upload to someone else's server.

I understand that things you upload aren't private, but there's a difference between "can look at" and "will look at". The phone company can listen in on your calls, but I would normally expect that they won't unless they have some particular reason to.

gdj50
join:2001-02-01
Spokane, WA

gdj50 to Rekrul

Member

to Rekrul
Yes they do and they will continue too.
19579823 (banned)
An Awesome Dude
join:2003-08-04

19579823 (banned) to Rekrul

Member

to Rekrul
quote:
Aside from the obvious discussion on disgusting child porn, priests, and stupidity -- the incident raises some obvious questions about just how extensively Verizon monitors cloud content.
They obviously monitor it quite closely!!

Quite stupid to upload ANYTHING LIKE THAT to a public place! (In my opinion no one should look @ that stuff at all)

Anyway: I have always hated this "CLOUD STORAGE" -- Just a way for them to keep track of everything you have!

swintec
Premium Member
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME

swintec

Premium Member

I'll ask the obvious..

Ill ask the obvious, what was Verizon doing looking in users personal storage accounts?
itguy05
join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA

itguy05

Member

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

said by swintec:

Ill ask the obvious, what was Verizon doing looking in users personal storage accounts?

Bingo. Why are they snooping on their users?
whoyourdaddy
join:2013-02-20
Honey Brook, PA

whoyourdaddy

Member

Shame On You Verizon

i wont be storing my family pictures their or ill start seeing them on their tv ads shame on u verizon for snooping on people pics not only u reported this guy. but how many other people you invaded in too??
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

Chubbysumo

Member

Re: Shame On You Verizon

said by whoyourdaddy:

i wont be storing my family pictures their or ill start seeing them on their tv ads shame on u verizon for snooping on people pics not only u reported this guy. but how many other people you invaded in too??

Go and read their ToS. Its explained that anything you store there, they have the rights to view and monitor. This was pointed out in the reddit thread, 3 days ago.

WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX

WHT to itguy05

Member

to itguy05

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

Uhhh...Where have you been for the last two decades?

Verizon was enforcing the "Think of the children" exception clause in the Fourth Amendment of the bill of Rights.
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

Crookshanks

Member

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

The Fourth Amendment does not apply to private actors, it applies to the Government. If I break into your house, discover your cache of kiddie porn, and call the police you're going directly to jail without passing go or collecting $200. The fact that I broke the law to obtain the evidence is immaterial. It only comes into play if the police do it, or if they co-opt someone into doing it on their behalf.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

said by Crookshanks:

The Fourth Amendment does not apply to private actors, it applies to the Government. If I break into your house, discover your cache of kiddie porn, and call the police you're going directly to jail without passing go or collecting $200. The fact that I broke the law to obtain the evidence is immaterial. It only comes into play if the police do it, or if they co-opt someone into doing it on their behalf.

I can definitely attest to that being the case here in NY. When I worked as a detective in a department store, we would search the cars of people we apprehended and didn't need a warrant. We would often find that they had been loading up their car for several trips (sometimes from other stores) before we finally caught them. Sometimes the police would tell us the search was illegal but the police very often don't really know the law (as my boss often said who was a retired PD lieutenant). The evidence was always admissible.
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

1 recommendation

Crookshanks

Member

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

said by CXM_Splicer:

When I worked as a detective in a department store, we would search the cars of people we apprehended and didn't need a warrant.

Brave man to apprehend people as a private citizen in NYS. I'm from there you know, and NYS has one of the narrowest citizen arrest laws in the country. Doesn't take much to expose yourself to criminal charges, never mind the civil liability.

As an aside, you wouldn't be searching my car or taking me into custody without having one hell of a fight on your hands. Doubt you would have tried that without probable cause, which you would not have with me because I'm not a thief. That said, one of my pet peeves are the self important "bag checkers" at big box stores. I don't even break stride when they ask to search my property, and the one that was stupid enough to chase me backed down real quick when I pulled out the pepper spray.

I understand the need for loss prevention but most places don't even approach it logically. I got a real kick out having to track down an employee at K-Mart to buy an eight pack of razor cartridges. The eight packs were behind the locked loss prevention device, but the more expensive (per unit) four packs were right below it without any such protection. If that isn't absurd enough, they wouldn't let me put the eight pack in my cart and continue shopping. It was either pay for it right then and there, or we'll hold it for you at the electronics counter as a "courtesy".

Gotta love being treated like a criminal over a $18.99 pack of Quattro Pro cartridges. I've purchased firearms with less hassle than that pack of razor cartridges.
meowmeow
join:2003-07-26
Helena, MT

meowmeow

Member

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

Which is why Kmart's... Kmart. Though my biggest issue at Kmart is the fact that they hire mentally handicapped people for cashiers. I think it's GREAT finding work that people can do within their abilities. Being a cashier is NOT within their abilities. Speed is of the essence and hiring someone who can't work quickly and efficiently... makes a very frustrating experience. Being one of only a few people in the store and still having to take 10 minutes to checkout is NOT on my to do list. Thus, Kmart isn't on my shopping list.
dagg
join:2001-03-25
Galt, CA

dagg to itguy05

Member

to itguy05
bu...bu...but... "for the children!!!!"

thats why
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer to itguy05

Premium Member

to itguy05
Agreed. They have no reason to go through the files at all much less examine the contents. Would they also load up your spreadsheets & Bank statement PDFs to check them out? How about tax returns? What exactly are you suppose to keep in cloud storage knowing Verizon is going to go through it?

I guess since all this data is already being piped to the NSA voluntarily it should be no surprise that Verizon (and the others) have no respect for customers privacy from the get go.

Just in case anyone isn't aware, any picture or video sent as a text message can also be viewed by inquiring minds so if your honey sends you something a little risque, don't be surprised to find it on a porn site somewhere.

Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA

Thaler

Premium Member

Re: I'll ask the obvious..

said by CXM_Splicer:

What exactly are you suppose to keep in cloud storage knowing Verizon is going to go through it?

Music. Unless VZ's going to call goons on you for having poor taste in music.
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

Chubbysumo to CXM_Splicer

Member

to CXM_Splicer
said by CXM_Splicer:

Agreed. They have no reason to go through the files at all much less examine the contents. Would they also load up your spreadsheets & Bank statement PDFs to check them out? How about tax returns? What exactly are you suppose to keep in cloud storage knowing Verizon is going to go through it?

I guess since all this data is already being piped to the NSA voluntarily it should be no surprise that Verizon (and the others) have no respect for customers privacy from the get go.

Just in case anyone isn't aware, any picture or video sent as a text message can also be viewed by inquiring minds so if your honey sends you something a little risque, don't be surprised to find it on a porn site somewhere.

Read the Verizon backup ToS, its written in there that they can view anything you store on it.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd to itguy05

Premium Member

to itguy05
said by itguy05:

said by swintec:

Ill ask the obvious, what was Verizon doing looking in users personal storage accounts?

Bingo. Why are they snooping on their users?

Knowing a big ISP, They were looking for good photos to use in advertising spots. I bet somewhere in the TOS/EULA you consent to Verizon using any photographs you upload use them in advertising or sharing with their advertising partners.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt to swintec

Premium Member

to swintec
It says online storage and SHARING.
It would be reasonable for them to check any publicly shared info, not so much any other stored data, but likely the ToS gives them permission to check anything on/sent over their network.
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
united state

b10010011 to swintec

Member

to swintec
Possibly because they could be held liable if the child porn was found on their servers by someone else and reported to the authorities.

•••••••••••••••••

cdru
Go Colts
MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN

1 recommendation

cdru to swintec

MVM

to swintec
said by swintec:

Ill ask the obvious, what was Verizon doing looking in users personal storage accounts?

Details obviously are thin as to how the files were discovered. But the files can be examined without someone actually examining what's in them.

The Center for Missing and Exploited Children along with law enforcement have a very large collection of previous exploitation that's used as part of the identification and/or prosecution of victims and offenders. They could easily share hashes of the files with various backup service providers for the detection of illegal content.

When a file is transferred, both the client and server generates hashes of the file to ensure that it was transferred correctly and successfully. The hash could also then be queried against previously and compared to a list of known images that have been shared or otherwise obtained. While a false positive is theoretically possible depending on the hashing technique, it is extremely remote and could easily double checked by authorities.

Or... Providers should already scan for virus protection, both for their sake as well as the consumers. It's not that hard of an extension to just classify the child porn as a type of virus and use the same mechanisms.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

Verizon just wants to make sure everything you

do is legal.

Wait, what?????????????

Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium Member
join:2000-08-05
united state

Snakeoil

Premium Member

This reminds me of a computer repair tech

The tech was repairing a computer and discovered a bunch of child porn.
He called the cops, and the cops arrested the PC owner when he came to pick up the PC.

Point being:
The tech, and Verizon are over stepping their bouns by snooping what a person has stored on the hard drive,

Though in the case of Verizon, they do own the storage, hence it doesn't surprise me that they would snoop the files that people store on it.

Just like sending IM's on this site. Justin or whoever runs the service, could capture and snoop the IM's. Hence it's never a good idea to message/email things that you want to keep private.

Recently, Microsoft has been running ads for Outlook.com. It's their new e-mail service, to replace Hotmail. Anyhow, they point out the fact that google reads your e-mails, and directs ads to you, by what it finds in the emails.

Hence why people need to wake up and realize that there really is no privacy on the internet.

••••••••

cableties
Premium Member
join:2005-01-27

cableties

Premium Member

God told them to...

Heh.

AS serious as ChPorn is, this makes one aware that Verizon could be implementing hardware or software to analyze your data for image patterns (flesh tones, file names). Once anything gets flagged, just a matter for someone to view and go, "uh oh".
Then call legal. Escalate from there.

Now, I wonder if the priest will be like, "Um I don't know how that got there! I just use that service for backing up my Windows XP Home PC.."

I always thought these pervs used hidden image software or encryption. Guess not.

I am sure more of you that have regular pron keep it on a local drive?
Crookshanks
join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

Crookshanks

Member

Re: God told them to...

said by cableties:

I always thought these pervs used hidden image software or encryption. Guess not.

Those aren't the ones who get caught. You never hear about the smart criminals, be they white-collar criminals, serial killers, or perverts.
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
united state

b10010011

Member

I don't trust the cloud

Porn or not I would never store anything in the cloud unless I encrypted it first. I do not believe any privacy or security is guaranteed by any of these cloud storage services.

floyd007
join:2004-06-07
Glen Allen, VA

floyd007

Member

Re: I don't trust the cloud

Encrypted or not, any "encryptable' files stays offline on my local server. end of story. the only exception is Turbo Tax online (convenience only but I really do not like it) BUT my credit is frozen so in the event my identity is stolen, they will be unable to access or pretend to be me for credit purposes unless they have the PIN number.
tpkatl
join:2009-11-16
Dacula, GA

tpkatl

Member

Two points

- Anything you store in the cloud - Music, pictures, porn, important documents, - anything and everything should be encrypted. On general principles.

- Anyone who thinks that cloud is a safe haven for anything is nuts. Does the name Kim Dotcom mean anything to you?
toolman25
join:2012-11-19
Cincinnati, OH

toolman25

Member

Isn't that illegal what Verizon did?????????

I wonder if this will make it to court. Because I am sure the Deacon's defense team is going to try to get the evidence dismissed saying that Verizon illegally went through his backup files and that they are not municipal in court. This would be an interesting case. To see if Verizon can legally get away with this invasion of privacy.

SimbaSeven
I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
·StarLink

SimbaSeven

Member

What about personal pics of family?

So, what if you get busted for child pr0n if it's your own child? If your kid was playing in the tub, would that be considered CP?

..or decided to completely color him/herself from head to toe in their underwear. Would that be considered?

This is why I don't trust squat in the cloud.. I prefer to do my own backups on my own servers and workstations.

•••••••

Probitas
@teksavvy.com

Probitas

Anon

I think I know

They snoop for that with the same quasi-legal excuse that they use for snooping phone calls most likely.

So now you have a police state, trolling for perps, without warrant or due process.

Of course, it may have been part of an ongoing investigation, and an undercover may have been given access to his collection first because the perp is like all perps, and never thinks he'll get caught.

danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA

danclan

Member

For those that didnt read other articles on this

The hosting is done by a third party and offered through Verizon, they use de-dup tech and in the process scan for known child porn via hashes and other comparisons.

The de-dup tech saves them huge amounts of space so that don't have to host the same sets of common files a million times.

The TOS says they can scan. Failure to read is not Verizon's fault.

Always use encryption.
Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom

Member

Re: For those that didnt read other articles on this

Or only backup freshly-made child porn...

onemanshow
@sbc.com

onemanshow

Anon

Reality of the cloud

I hope the deacon goes to a dark lonley dungeon for this. But the reality of cloud computing should be hitting everyone real hard. I hope all of the financial gurus keep using the cloud for all of thier secret info.

viperpa33s
Why Me?
Premium Member
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL

viperpa33s

Premium Member

Why are people so surprised?

Microsoft got busted for removing someone's photo's from there skydrive account and then suspending them.

»wmpoweruser.com/watch-wh ··· ft-life/

tmh
@verizon.net

tmh

Anon

Never store anything online

Quite apart from the heinous nature of the content, this is why I never store anything "in the cloud".

No telling how many private accounts Verizon poked their nose into before finding this. And now they have even more reason to snoop.

They'll read your tax returns because you may be hiding money. They'll check your bank statements because you may be laundering for the cartel. Maybe even look at pictures of your wife or gf to make sure she's not underaged.
brianiscool
join:2000-08-16
Tampa, FL

brianiscool

Member

Haha, Really?

How dumb are these people to store that on a public cloud. Anything you store on the cloud be sure to use PGP encyption or zip it in a file with AES encyption.

Eddy120876
join:2009-02-16
Bronx, NY

Eddy120876

Member

Re: Haha, Really?

Is simple most of this folks just want to scream to the world thats their preference and leave then be and thats the scary part. Where they want the world to accept them and leave then alone.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

Note to pedophile priests....

You guys have been hanging around with the alter boys waaaay to long.
God can't protect you, but »mega.co.nz/ can.
Of course anyone signing up with Mega is deemed to be guilty of something by the US government until proven otherwise.
Hail Mary muchachos, and have a nice day.

KnowSomethin
@vectorindustries.com

KnowSomethin

Anon

MD5 Checksums?

It's possible there's a known database of this illegal content that contents the MD5 checksums? That seems to be the only way they could identify the files without actually viewing them. So, maybe there systems scans for these known files and then it triggers an alert?

MooJohn
join:2005-12-18
Milledgeville, GA

MooJohn

Member

I fix lots of PCs

I'm sick of the stereotype that the guy fixing your computer looks at all your stuff. I don't give a damn about what people have on their computers. I am too busy fixing them to go "snooping" into their files. I may see file names and such as they are backed up before a reinstall but I certainly don't have time to go looking for vacation pics and resumes and such.

If the "slide show" screen saver fires up during a virus scan I have no control over that. I've seen she-males, bestiality, and other raunchiness but never anything blatantly illegal. However, if I did find anything like this, you can bet I would have the sheriff's dept on the scene at once.

LightS
Premium Member
join:2005-12-17
Greenville, TX

LightS

Premium Member

Re: I fix lots of PCs

Ugh, I know. At my company, people always say, "Well if you didn't spy on us so often..."

Uhhh, why on earth would I spy on your browsing history? Yes, we log it, but we don't active snoop through it unless requested by the users supervisor.. ugh lol

cork1958
Cork
Premium Member
join:2000-02-26

cork1958

Premium Member

Right on!!

Right on, Verizon!!

One of the few decent things you've done
page: 1 · 2 · next