I believe this means you find the polygraph requirement as distasteful
as US govt-authorised use of scopomine.
No, I have the address of a company in Buenos Aires which can provide
it in bulk at a discount :-)
I think your main problem would come if employment protection law became
a reality in the US. At the moment they seem to use lawsuits as an alternative.
At a certain University there is a regular practice of assistant profs who fail
to make tenure suing the dept. Whether the cases have merit or not they can
often cost significant amounts to defend.
You may well find that the biggest problem is the difference in culture between
a computer company and a bank. Bankers are not known for their political
activism. Computer engineers tend to be much more intellectual and free
thinking
as a whole. They also tend to have higher mobility between firms and a very
high
level of commitment to the computing community.
Net hackers spend a lot of time online and tend to know their rights to the
millimeter.
I would see that a company like Verisign in particular would tend to attract
people from the crypto-community which is pretty much the radical end of the
spectrum. People often become crypto hackers because of their core beliefs.
Those joining the community tend to rapidly assimilate the community view.
My main objection to the polygraph is that its like security through
obscurity. It may convince you that you are safe without making you
appreciably safer. I think that the positive vetting system is far more
effective.
Phill