[floatingatoll]

It doesn’t sound like a fun workplace, but nor should every workplace be fun. I’d really appreciate it if bankers and health insurance companies had to keep audited records and were disallowed encrypted / disposable backchannels, like Tor.

I assume that IT didn’t install Brave, the user did. No IT department at this strict of a company would approve a browser that actively inserts its own advertising into websites, much less has a Tor option builtin. So, then, why on earth would the user risk their employment by installing unapproved software without IT signoff?

If IT approved Brave and pre-installed it, then they would have grounds to contest the firing. That they’re let go suggests otherwise. One could likely predict the demographic of the let-go employee just by filtering for “would know and care about Brave” and “would not seek IT permission first”.

[ivraatiems]

Typically, workplaces this strict don't allow users to install software on their machines themselves at all.

This whole story still just sounds to me like a huge overreaction. I think we can invent a hypothetical situation where the company's behavior makes sense, or the employee's motives are impure, but I think it's much more likely that they just got scared and were rash and hurt an employee.

[GekkePrutser]

You can remove admin rights but portable software will still run just fine. It's actually really hard to stop unapproved software from running on Windows. You'll basically have to cut off all the methods of ingress like USB sticks and internet.