
An internal Google email shows how the company cracks down on leaks - bobbytherobot
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/22/15666672/google-lawsuit-email-stop-leaks
======
sctb
Another discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14401074](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14401074)

------
SA500
This is a non story. Product leaks have a massive business impact. Hence
Apple's culture of extreme secrecy. Google is somewhere in between

~~~
wyldfire
It doesn't seem that simple. It sounds as if the scope includes more than just
products.

> The lawsuit alleges that Google’s leaks policy covers essentially all
> company information and prohibits reasonable discussion about company
> activities.

...

> One policy allegedly even prevents employees from writing a novel about
> working for a large Silicon Valley corporation — like, for instance, Dave
> Eggers’ dystopian novel, The Circle — without first getting final draft
> approval from Google.

John Doe v. Google, Inc [1].

[1] [https://www.scribd.com/document/334736972/John-Doe-vs-
Google...](https://www.scribd.com/document/334736972/John-Doe-vs-Google-
Inc#from_embed)

~~~
lostboys67
Not sure that would be Justiciable on first amendment rights alone

~~~
greenyoda
Google is not bound by the First Amendment - only the federal, state and local
governments are (and institutions they run, such as state universities).

~~~
lostboys67
Banning employees from discussing pay /conditions etc is illegal in the USA

------
erikb
I don't get it. Cracking down on leaks is called security. Everycompany should
do it, and the big ones certainly do. What's the deal with that?

~~~
nuggien
Sure but if you setup a system that encourages leak reporting by your
employees and then unjustly fire an innocent person claiming they leaked data,
wouldn't that be a big deal?

~~~
erikb
Well, people get fired for wrong/incomplete reasons all the time. And if the
employer can't proof it well enough he just needs to pay more. Most of us are
happy to get 50-200% of a year's salary for no work. That's why it's not
really a big deal or a problem for society.

~~~
pcwalton
I have no idea what this means.

~~~
erikb
Well, it would be better to either not say anything, or ask some kind of
question that brings the conversation forward. I really don't want to guess
what you don't understand. E.g., I hope you mean what "getting fired" means.
But maybe you don't know that getting fired often results in receiving a
severance package when the employee sues? But that is common practice as well.
So really, from where should I pick you up?

------
bobbytherobot
I'm curious on others insight about one section of the email management sent
to employees regarding leaks:

"Please remember: whether malicious or unintentional, leaks damage our
culture. Be aware of the company information you share and with whom you share
it. If you’re considering sharing confidential information to a reporter—or to
anyone externally—for the love of all that’s Googley, please reconsider! Not
only could it cost you your job, but it also betrays the values that makes us
a community."

I certainly understand the potential business impact leaking information, but
what is the aspect of the Google culture a leaked email harms?

~~~
zeroxfe
The culture of transparency.

Google is enormously transparent internally. The more there are leaks, the
less incentive there is to be transparent.

~~~
bobbytherobot
Ahh, thanks.

------
ghughes
Reporter decries company for prohibiting its employees from discussing company
business with reporters.

~~~
659087
I think it's more than fair to expect a company aiming to make the entire
world population fully transparent to itself, to be transparent to the
media/public.

Eric Schmidt believes you shouldn't do anything you wouldn't want to share
with anyone (aka Google). Why doesn't that work both ways? Does Google have
"something to hide"?

Or is Google exempt from the whole "privacy is a thing of the past" situation
these companies are trying to force on us all?

------
lima
Recent HN thread that ended up flagged, including a comment from a Googler:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14394600](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14394600)

------
ChuckMcM
Always raises the issues of due process.

An interesting challenge when I was there was leaving your workstation
unlocked. You go up to get a soda or something and don't want to lock your
workstation, go get your beverage, come back and reenter your password. But
you should, someone in your cube or nearby could prank you and send an email
to the group of an embarrassing nature. Of course they could also send an
internal only email to re/code which if they didn't like you might get you
fired.

The key is keeping the investigation folks above reproach. If they can't
convince that they have done a fair job investigating, you open yourself up
for a lot of issues down the road.

------
wl
It's sad to see that they've harmed accessibility (no more transcripts) under
some misguided notion that it helps keep secrets. The video of these talks is
still available, of course. Maybe it's captioned?

------
ungzd
Lawsuit against world's leading AI corporation that tries to stop leaking
secret dank memes. What a time to be alive!

------
rrggrr
I see the memo author is former US Dept State diplomatic security. I always
thought of State DS agents in terms of personal protection and not so much
counterintelligence and investigations. Guess I was wrong. I would have
expected to see a senior ex-FBI or former IC community member in this role.

~~~
tyingq
Prior to Google, he had 6 years as a "Special Agent" for the US State
Department in Israel. He lists his department as DS/CI, where CI would be
"criminal investigations". So, specifically in the subarea that's doing that.
That agency, for example, investigated and apprehended one of the 1993 WTC
bombers.

Interesting story involving Mr Katz:
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224589/Google-
threa...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2224589/Google-threatened-
bartender-employee-accidentally-left-secret-phone-bar.html)

~~~
rrggrr
Great link. I'm pretty sure the CI stands for counterintelligence, but I may
be wrong. Regardless, I have no opinion, just though it was interesting to see
where former DS agents find themselves after service.

~~~
tyingq
Looked it up...you're right:

"Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Office of Investigations and
Counterintelligence,Counterintelligence Division (CI division)"

With 3 branches:

DS/CI/ASB - Analysis Branch

DS/CI/IB - Investigations Branch

DS/CI/PPR - Policy and Programs Branch

