Fired, accused of conducting web searches I didn't do.












4














I had searches I didn't do show up on work devices, and ended up losing my job over this, for a first infraction. I know 100% I didn't search those things. I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission.
I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices. I never let anyone use my work devices. They said illicit or inappropriate use.



But I know 100% I didn't do it. How can I prove if it synced vs actually searched from that device? There has to be a way. Is there anythign I can do?



I know I signed into google maps with my personal gmail, but I can't remember if ever signed into Google or Chrome on them. But I know I was logged into other work devices too. I cannot remember. I'm Google dumb. About all the settings. Have anxiety and never read the pop ups. Just clicked ok. Assume something synced from another device.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • I've edited your question to make it a little clearer - I hope that's okay!
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 3




    Possible duplicate of Company policy violation due to browser history syncing
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    Did you not do them (at all) or did you do them on other devices and they may have synced?
    – bruglesco
    6 hours ago










  • @yochannah this is not a duplicate as browser history syncing is not specified as the cause here. As OP said, someone could have easily gone onto their computer, and such searches are commonly done as a prank among more juvenile people.
    – 520
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    I'm pretty sure signing into Maps logs you in to your Google account.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago
















4














I had searches I didn't do show up on work devices, and ended up losing my job over this, for a first infraction. I know 100% I didn't search those things. I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission.
I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices. I never let anyone use my work devices. They said illicit or inappropriate use.



But I know 100% I didn't do it. How can I prove if it synced vs actually searched from that device? There has to be a way. Is there anythign I can do?



I know I signed into google maps with my personal gmail, but I can't remember if ever signed into Google or Chrome on them. But I know I was logged into other work devices too. I cannot remember. I'm Google dumb. About all the settings. Have anxiety and never read the pop ups. Just clicked ok. Assume something synced from another device.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • I've edited your question to make it a little clearer - I hope that's okay!
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 3




    Possible duplicate of Company policy violation due to browser history syncing
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    Did you not do them (at all) or did you do them on other devices and they may have synced?
    – bruglesco
    6 hours ago










  • @yochannah this is not a duplicate as browser history syncing is not specified as the cause here. As OP said, someone could have easily gone onto their computer, and such searches are commonly done as a prank among more juvenile people.
    – 520
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    I'm pretty sure signing into Maps logs you in to your Google account.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago














4












4








4


1





I had searches I didn't do show up on work devices, and ended up losing my job over this, for a first infraction. I know 100% I didn't search those things. I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission.
I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices. I never let anyone use my work devices. They said illicit or inappropriate use.



But I know 100% I didn't do it. How can I prove if it synced vs actually searched from that device? There has to be a way. Is there anythign I can do?



I know I signed into google maps with my personal gmail, but I can't remember if ever signed into Google or Chrome on them. But I know I was logged into other work devices too. I cannot remember. I'm Google dumb. About all the settings. Have anxiety and never read the pop ups. Just clicked ok. Assume something synced from another device.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











I had searches I didn't do show up on work devices, and ended up losing my job over this, for a first infraction. I know 100% I didn't search those things. I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission.
I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices. I never let anyone use my work devices. They said illicit or inappropriate use.



But I know 100% I didn't do it. How can I prove if it synced vs actually searched from that device? There has to be a way. Is there anythign I can do?



I know I signed into google maps with my personal gmail, but I can't remember if ever signed into Google or Chrome on them. But I know I was logged into other work devices too. I cannot remember. I'm Google dumb. About all the settings. Have anxiety and never read the pop ups. Just clicked ok. Assume something synced from another device.







ethics






share|improve this question









New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 6 hours ago









yochannah

4,74373050




4,74373050






New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 6 hours ago









Confused so bad

261




261




New contributor




Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Confused so bad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • I've edited your question to make it a little clearer - I hope that's okay!
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 3




    Possible duplicate of Company policy violation due to browser history syncing
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    Did you not do them (at all) or did you do them on other devices and they may have synced?
    – bruglesco
    6 hours ago










  • @yochannah this is not a duplicate as browser history syncing is not specified as the cause here. As OP said, someone could have easily gone onto their computer, and such searches are commonly done as a prank among more juvenile people.
    – 520
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    I'm pretty sure signing into Maps logs you in to your Google account.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago


















  • I've edited your question to make it a little clearer - I hope that's okay!
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 3




    Possible duplicate of Company policy violation due to browser history syncing
    – yochannah
    6 hours ago






  • 1




    Did you not do them (at all) or did you do them on other devices and they may have synced?
    – bruglesco
    6 hours ago










  • @yochannah this is not a duplicate as browser history syncing is not specified as the cause here. As OP said, someone could have easily gone onto their computer, and such searches are commonly done as a prank among more juvenile people.
    – 520
    5 hours ago






  • 3




    I'm pretty sure signing into Maps logs you in to your Google account.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago
















I've edited your question to make it a little clearer - I hope that's okay!
– yochannah
6 hours ago




I've edited your question to make it a little clearer - I hope that's okay!
– yochannah
6 hours ago




3




3




Possible duplicate of Company policy violation due to browser history syncing
– yochannah
6 hours ago




Possible duplicate of Company policy violation due to browser history syncing
– yochannah
6 hours ago




1




1




Did you not do them (at all) or did you do them on other devices and they may have synced?
– bruglesco
6 hours ago




Did you not do them (at all) or did you do them on other devices and they may have synced?
– bruglesco
6 hours ago












@yochannah this is not a duplicate as browser history syncing is not specified as the cause here. As OP said, someone could have easily gone onto their computer, and such searches are commonly done as a prank among more juvenile people.
– 520
5 hours ago




@yochannah this is not a duplicate as browser history syncing is not specified as the cause here. As OP said, someone could have easily gone onto their computer, and such searches are commonly done as a prank among more juvenile people.
– 520
5 hours ago




3




3




I'm pretty sure signing into Maps logs you in to your Google account.
– bruglesco
4 hours ago




I'm pretty sure signing into Maps logs you in to your Google account.
– bruglesco
4 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















12














The only real advice anyone can give you is to contact a lawyer and see what they say.



You do have a basic responsibility to keep work devices and data secure, so not password protecting them is fairly irresponsible of you.



In future, keep your work and home devices separate. Don't sign into your personal stuff on work devices and vice versa. Always lock your devices when you step away from them to prevent others from using them without your permission. And don't ever search for porn, drugs or anything else which could be possibly frowned upon on a work device or on the work network.






share|improve this answer





















  • This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
    – Criggie
    1 hour ago



















2














Someone else was probably on your machine



In a lot of employment contracts, you are considered to be responsible for anything done under your corporate account/devices even if you yourself weren't at the keyboard.



It is unlikely that this was caused by syncing your Google Account with Chrome. Chrome has a tendency to identify what devices conducted what action. Plus the ability to synchronise histories would prove that the History data can be altered, and thus would typically not be trusted for the firing of an employee. Regardless, this was still a bad move.



What probably happened is that actual attempts to conduct those searches by your account and/or devices was picked up by network security devices as it was being performed. You'll notice I said 'by your account and/or devices' and not 'by you'.



In a lot of places, you'll see a culture for pranking people who leave devices unlocked. Most of the time, this is just a harmless 'beers are on me email' but more juvenile/malicious people may do things that stir up a bit more trouble, unaware (or possibly fully aware) of what their actions might bring.




I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission. I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices.




Locking your devices and accounts should not be something that needs to be spelt out. It should be, and needs to be from this point on, common sense. Your devices likely hold a lot of company-sensitive information. What if someone got onto your machine and accessed something they shouldn't have access to? What if someone trespassed into the building and got access to your computer? You could have been potentially looking at a lot worse than just getting fired for inappropriate searches.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago










  • @bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
    – 520
    4 hours ago








  • 1




    wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
    – bruglesco
    3 hours ago










  • @bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
    – 520
    3 hours ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});






Confused so bad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125553%2ffired-accused-of-conducting-web-searches-i-didnt-do%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









12














The only real advice anyone can give you is to contact a lawyer and see what they say.



You do have a basic responsibility to keep work devices and data secure, so not password protecting them is fairly irresponsible of you.



In future, keep your work and home devices separate. Don't sign into your personal stuff on work devices and vice versa. Always lock your devices when you step away from them to prevent others from using them without your permission. And don't ever search for porn, drugs or anything else which could be possibly frowned upon on a work device or on the work network.






share|improve this answer





















  • This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
    – Criggie
    1 hour ago
















12














The only real advice anyone can give you is to contact a lawyer and see what they say.



You do have a basic responsibility to keep work devices and data secure, so not password protecting them is fairly irresponsible of you.



In future, keep your work and home devices separate. Don't sign into your personal stuff on work devices and vice versa. Always lock your devices when you step away from them to prevent others from using them without your permission. And don't ever search for porn, drugs or anything else which could be possibly frowned upon on a work device or on the work network.






share|improve this answer





















  • This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
    – Criggie
    1 hour ago














12












12








12






The only real advice anyone can give you is to contact a lawyer and see what they say.



You do have a basic responsibility to keep work devices and data secure, so not password protecting them is fairly irresponsible of you.



In future, keep your work and home devices separate. Don't sign into your personal stuff on work devices and vice versa. Always lock your devices when you step away from them to prevent others from using them without your permission. And don't ever search for porn, drugs or anything else which could be possibly frowned upon on a work device or on the work network.






share|improve this answer












The only real advice anyone can give you is to contact a lawyer and see what they say.



You do have a basic responsibility to keep work devices and data secure, so not password protecting them is fairly irresponsible of you.



In future, keep your work and home devices separate. Don't sign into your personal stuff on work devices and vice versa. Always lock your devices when you step away from them to prevent others from using them without your permission. And don't ever search for porn, drugs or anything else which could be possibly frowned upon on a work device or on the work network.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 6 hours ago









user1666620

10.1k83335




10.1k83335












  • This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
    – Criggie
    1 hour ago


















  • This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
    – Criggie
    1 hour ago
















This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
– Criggie
1 hour ago




This, but more bluntly obvious, like "NEVER EVER mix work and personal accounts." I have a separate work and personal cellphone for this reason.
– Criggie
1 hour ago













2














Someone else was probably on your machine



In a lot of employment contracts, you are considered to be responsible for anything done under your corporate account/devices even if you yourself weren't at the keyboard.



It is unlikely that this was caused by syncing your Google Account with Chrome. Chrome has a tendency to identify what devices conducted what action. Plus the ability to synchronise histories would prove that the History data can be altered, and thus would typically not be trusted for the firing of an employee. Regardless, this was still a bad move.



What probably happened is that actual attempts to conduct those searches by your account and/or devices was picked up by network security devices as it was being performed. You'll notice I said 'by your account and/or devices' and not 'by you'.



In a lot of places, you'll see a culture for pranking people who leave devices unlocked. Most of the time, this is just a harmless 'beers are on me email' but more juvenile/malicious people may do things that stir up a bit more trouble, unaware (or possibly fully aware) of what their actions might bring.




I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission. I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices.




Locking your devices and accounts should not be something that needs to be spelt out. It should be, and needs to be from this point on, common sense. Your devices likely hold a lot of company-sensitive information. What if someone got onto your machine and accessed something they shouldn't have access to? What if someone trespassed into the building and got access to your computer? You could have been potentially looking at a lot worse than just getting fired for inappropriate searches.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago










  • @bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
    – 520
    4 hours ago








  • 1




    wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
    – bruglesco
    3 hours ago










  • @bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
    – 520
    3 hours ago


















2














Someone else was probably on your machine



In a lot of employment contracts, you are considered to be responsible for anything done under your corporate account/devices even if you yourself weren't at the keyboard.



It is unlikely that this was caused by syncing your Google Account with Chrome. Chrome has a tendency to identify what devices conducted what action. Plus the ability to synchronise histories would prove that the History data can be altered, and thus would typically not be trusted for the firing of an employee. Regardless, this was still a bad move.



What probably happened is that actual attempts to conduct those searches by your account and/or devices was picked up by network security devices as it was being performed. You'll notice I said 'by your account and/or devices' and not 'by you'.



In a lot of places, you'll see a culture for pranking people who leave devices unlocked. Most of the time, this is just a harmless 'beers are on me email' but more juvenile/malicious people may do things that stir up a bit more trouble, unaware (or possibly fully aware) of what their actions might bring.




I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission. I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices.




Locking your devices and accounts should not be something that needs to be spelt out. It should be, and needs to be from this point on, common sense. Your devices likely hold a lot of company-sensitive information. What if someone got onto your machine and accessed something they shouldn't have access to? What if someone trespassed into the building and got access to your computer? You could have been potentially looking at a lot worse than just getting fired for inappropriate searches.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago










  • @bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
    – 520
    4 hours ago








  • 1




    wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
    – bruglesco
    3 hours ago










  • @bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
    – 520
    3 hours ago
















2












2








2






Someone else was probably on your machine



In a lot of employment contracts, you are considered to be responsible for anything done under your corporate account/devices even if you yourself weren't at the keyboard.



It is unlikely that this was caused by syncing your Google Account with Chrome. Chrome has a tendency to identify what devices conducted what action. Plus the ability to synchronise histories would prove that the History data can be altered, and thus would typically not be trusted for the firing of an employee. Regardless, this was still a bad move.



What probably happened is that actual attempts to conduct those searches by your account and/or devices was picked up by network security devices as it was being performed. You'll notice I said 'by your account and/or devices' and not 'by you'.



In a lot of places, you'll see a culture for pranking people who leave devices unlocked. Most of the time, this is just a harmless 'beers are on me email' but more juvenile/malicious people may do things that stir up a bit more trouble, unaware (or possibly fully aware) of what their actions might bring.




I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission. I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices.




Locking your devices and accounts should not be something that needs to be spelt out. It should be, and needs to be from this point on, common sense. Your devices likely hold a lot of company-sensitive information. What if someone got onto your machine and accessed something they shouldn't have access to? What if someone trespassed into the building and got access to your computer? You could have been potentially looking at a lot worse than just getting fired for inappropriate searches.






share|improve this answer














Someone else was probably on your machine



In a lot of employment contracts, you are considered to be responsible for anything done under your corporate account/devices even if you yourself weren't at the keyboard.



It is unlikely that this was caused by syncing your Google Account with Chrome. Chrome has a tendency to identify what devices conducted what action. Plus the ability to synchronise histories would prove that the History data can be altered, and thus would typically not be trusted for the firing of an employee. Regardless, this was still a bad move.



What probably happened is that actual attempts to conduct those searches by your account and/or devices was picked up by network security devices as it was being performed. You'll notice I said 'by your account and/or devices' and not 'by you'.



In a lot of places, you'll see a culture for pranking people who leave devices unlocked. Most of the time, this is just a harmless 'beers are on me email' but more juvenile/malicious people may do things that stir up a bit more trouble, unaware (or possibly fully aware) of what their actions might bring.




I had no screen locks or passwords on any of mine or work devices. So it's possible anyone could have got on them, without my permission. I never even knew I was required to have screen locks, not did I care if people used my devices.




Locking your devices and accounts should not be something that needs to be spelt out. It should be, and needs to be from this point on, common sense. Your devices likely hold a lot of company-sensitive information. What if someone got onto your machine and accessed something they shouldn't have access to? What if someone trespassed into the building and got access to your computer? You could have been potentially looking at a lot worse than just getting fired for inappropriate searches.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 5 hours ago

























answered 5 hours ago









520

1,276212




1,276212








  • 1




    This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago










  • @bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
    – 520
    4 hours ago








  • 1




    wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
    – bruglesco
    3 hours ago










  • @bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
    – 520
    3 hours ago
















  • 1




    This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
    – bruglesco
    4 hours ago










  • @bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
    – 520
    4 hours ago








  • 1




    wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
    – bruglesco
    3 hours ago










  • @bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
    – 520
    3 hours ago










1




1




This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
– bruglesco
4 hours ago




This isn't clear. That is why I asked for clarification. It's absolutely possible that the searches were done by OP and synced when they logged into Google Maps.
– bruglesco
4 hours ago












@bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
– 520
4 hours ago






@bruglesco the browser history wouldn't be enough evidence to get the guy fired unless the company a) locked down the browser (they clearly did not) or b) really doesn't care about wrongful termination lawsuits - especially if it can be altered in this way by legitimate activity (and they WILL be aware of this). They would want something airtight, like what I mentioned.
– 520
4 hours ago






1




1




wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
– bruglesco
3 hours ago




wait are you implying that someone can't be fired for a misunderstanding on the companies part?
– bruglesco
3 hours ago












@bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
– 520
3 hours ago






@bruglesco if the device itself was being investigated, it would have to have been done by someone with a very specific technical competence. After all, you'd have to find a way onto their machine without their password (as apps on windows are managed on a per-machine basis, not by accounts), find a way to get to their (account) browser history on that machine and find a way to read it, yet not be technical enough to know the nuances of Google Chrome. Or they could just look at firewall/proxy logs. Not saying the first is impossible, but the second is MUCH more likely and bulletproof.
– 520
3 hours ago












Confused so bad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










draft saved

draft discarded


















Confused so bad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













Confused so bad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Confused so bad is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f125553%2ffired-accused-of-conducting-web-searches-i-didnt-do%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Morgemoulin

Scott Moir

Souastre