The 404 Media Podcast

Episode: Landlords Demand Your Workplace Logins to Scrape Paystubs
Date: October 1, 2025
Hosts: Joseph, Sam Cole, Emanuel Mayberg, Jason Kebler

Overview

This week, the 404 Media team digs into two major investigative stories. First, they expose how some landlords are requiring prospective tenants to hand over their workplace logins—granting access to third-party software that aggressively scrapes personal payroll data well beyond what is needed for apartment screening. Second, they break down the phenomenon of lawyers getting caught using AI tools in legal briefs, resulting in fabricated case law and mounting professional embarrassment. Both conversations look at the intersection of technology, privacy, legality, and the real-world consequences for everyday people.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Landlords Demanding Employer Logins & Payroll Scraping

[Start: 03:07]

Personal Rental Horror Stories

• Sam prompts the group to share past landlord experiences, especially in competitive markets such as New York City and Los Angeles.
  • Emmanuel: Describes the financial strain of moving in NYC, recounting how broker fees, deposits, and the need for a co-signer left him near-broke, resorting to rice and beans.
    Quote: “...the poorest I’ve been was not when I was making the least money I’ve made, but when I was moving to an apartment in New York.” – Emmanuel [03:49]
  • Jason: Never paid a broker fee but recalls the rapid decision-making required and the general stress of big city apartment hunts.

The Story: Increasing Invasiveness in Tenant Screening

• Joseph introduces the investigative piece, sourced from a tip:
  • A Georgia renter was asked not only for banking credentials (a common practice via services like Plaid), but also for their employer’s Workday login—the HR portal used by many firms to manage paystubs and personal details.
  • Upon consent, third-party software scraped all paystubs and W-4s (tax documents), going as far back as 2024, far exceeding the typical request for two months' proof-of-income.
    • Quote: “They were basically forced to hand over the login credentials—not for their own bank account ... but ... for their employer’s sort of Workday instance.” – Joseph [07:34]
  • This raised alarm for both the renter and, indirectly, for the employer when audit logs showed foreign access. The IP addresses and device info in the logs did not match the tenant’s own.

The Tech Players: Approved Shield and Argyle

• Approved Shield: Marketed as a tenant screening service to landlords; promises frictionless, outsourced verification and claims to reduce “bad debt” and eviction rates.

• Argyle: The backend tool used by many screening services; logs in with given credentials and mass-downloads pay and tax documents.

  • Quote: “They watched Argyle hijack their Workday session... downloaded every paystub, plus all their W4s back to 2024.” – Joseph [11:23]
  • Evidence includes a slew of Workday email alerts and audit logs showing unfamiliar devices/IP addresses.

• Other companies in the space include Pay Score, Nova Credit, and Snapt, all integrating with Argyle.

Privacy & Legal Concerns

• Once workplace credentials are handed over, neither the scope of the data extraction nor the security of that data is clear to the tenant.
  • “Once you give over those login details, you don’t... know what Argyle or Approved Shield... is going to do with them. Are they going to log in once and just scrape all the data one time? They’re already scraping more data than is necessary...” – Joseph [21:44]
• Possible violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) are raised, particularly as users likely lack authority to hand over employer account credentials to third-party services.
  • Quote: “You can’t share login credentials that you do not have author[ity] to share, basically.” – Joseph [22:29]

Notable Quotes/Moments

• “It stayed hidden from view, and then it downloaded every paystub plus all of their W4s back to 2024...that is way, way more than the four paystubs necessary…” – Joseph [11:24]
• "It sounds illegal to me, but... it sounds like it could also be something that could get people into legal trouble in both directions." – Sam [22:11]
• Joseph reveals Argyle’s links to suspicious "Workers Unite" phishing campaigns masquerading as wage data democratization. When questioned, Argyle did not reply, and the campaign vanished from the web. [18:22]

Broader Industry Context

• The hosts discuss the increasing prevalence and normalization of "data gatekeeping" for access to services (not just housing), citing how many apps now require account connections without transparency about data usage.

2. Lawyers Caught Using AI to Write Legal Briefs

[Transition: 28:35]

The Rise of AI in Law

• As AI tools become prevalent, some lawyers have turned to generative models like ChatGPT, Copilot, and even platforms within LexisNexis or Westlaw for drafting legal documents.
  • But AI frequently hallucinates—fabricates case law, makes up statutes, and misinterprets existing laws—leading to serious professional consequences.
    • Quote: “Judges keep finding lawyers who have written briefs where they cite cases that don’t exist... hallucinating precedent.” – Jason [31:09]

Research: Lawyers’ Excuses & Sanctions

• Jason and Jules curated apologies and justifications from 18 lawyers who ran afoul of AI in real-world cases, mining court records across the US and beyond.

  • Reasons for using AI included lack of technical expertise, relying on misleading marketing, illness, or blaming paralegals and assistants.
    • Quote: “The reasons are almost uniformly very bad... the vibe is like, ‘the dog ate my homework.’” – Jason [35:39]
    • Two main excuse buckets:
      1. Ignorance/incompetency: “Your honor, I’m a moron. I don’t understand AI.” – Emanuel [40:43]
      2. Blame-shifting: “My assistant did it. What a moron.” – Emanuel [41:03]

• Notable Cop-outs:

  • A lawyer cited persistent vertigo, confusion, and malware attacks as reasons for not vetting hallucinatory brief content. [39:17]
    • “He blames both vertigo and the fact that he was hacked.” – Jason [39:20]
  • Another claimed it was a “legal experiment” on the court. [43:27]

• Mainstream legal research tools like Lexis and Westlaw are now integrating AI, but even their systems can produce hallucinated content—lawyers assumed these tools were more reliable than public-facing AIs like ChatGPT or Copilot.

  • “Some people are like, hey man, this was advertised as a thing that I can use, so I trusted ... and it turns out I can’t.” – Emanuel [41:03]

Regulatory & Industry Responses

• Some legal professionals have had to take AI education courses as a sanction; Jason reveals those courses are heavily marketing "safe" legal AI tools, rather than focusing on rigorous due diligence or verification.
  • Five lawyers blamed IT or internet issues for their AI snafus. [43:16]

Notable Quotes/Moments

• “If your lawyer’s using Grammarly to write their briefs, probably should get a better lawyer.” – Jason [38:39]
• “It’s not just navigating PACER...finding the correct document...was like the 15th click on the worst website that you’ve ever used.” – Jason [43:28]
• “Some of them just throw their hands up and be like, ‘Yeah, whatever.’” – Joseph [44:35]

Memorable Quotes & Timestamps

• On broker fees:
  “I’ve definitely turned down apartments because of broker fees before because they, they didn’t do anything. They didn’t even unlock the apartment. They were like, here’s a lockbox. $900, please.” – Sam [06:56]

• On landlord screening invasiveness:
  “They were basically forced to hand over the login credentials...for their employer's sort of workday instance.” – Joseph [07:34]

• On discovering Argyle’s scraping behavior:
  “They watched Argyle hijack their workday session...downloaded every paystub, plus all their W4s back to 2024.” – Joseph [11:23]

• On legal danger for tenants:
  “You can’t share login credentials that you do not have author to share, basically.” – Joseph [22:29]

• On lawyers’ excuses for using faulty AI:
  “The vibe is like, the dog ate my homework.” – Jason [35:39]
  “Your honor, I’m a moron. You know what I mean?” – Emmanuel [40:43]
  “My assistant did it. What a moron.” – Emmanuel [41:03]
  “He blames both vertigo and the fact that he was hacked.” – Jason [39:20]

• On industry self-policing:
  “One of the lawyers...was forced to go to an AI class with the Texas State Bar. And...that class is just, like, five AI companies being like, use our AI.” – Jason [42:03]

• On the persistence of landlord/tenant screening overreach:
  “If you have gotten in trouble because of Argyle, please hit up Joseph.” – Sam [25:30]

Important Segment Timestamps

• [03:07] EPISODE START Proper / Introduction of Rental Story
• [06:56] Broker Fees, Firsthand Apartment Struggles
• [07:34] Introduction to New Tenant Screening Tactics
• [11:18] Approved Shield/Argyle Data Scrape Walkthrough
• [14:54] Discussion of Other Companies in the Space
• [18:22] Argyle vs Plaid, History of Argyle and Phishing
• [21:44] Discussion on Consent and Overreach
• [22:29] Legal Implications (CFAA)
• [28:35] Segment Shift: AI & Law
• [31:09] The Problem: AI Hallucinations in Legal Briefs
• [35:39] Common and Ridiculous Lawyer Excuses
• [40:43] “I’m a moron” / Paralegal Blaming / Ad Effect on AI Use
• [42:03] Lawyers Sanctioned & Sent to AI Class
• [43:16] Internet Outage & IT Blame
• [44:35] Document Filing Struggles / Industry Reaction

Tone & Style Notes

The hosts speak with a mixture of professional skepticism, dark humor, and empathy for both renters and frontline workers caught in impossible systems. There’s an undercurrent of outrage at the shadowy (and possibly illegal) new norms enabled by tech companies in both real estate and law. The reporting is both rich in technical investigation and grounded in personal experience, making the episode both eye-opening and highly relatable.

Summary

This episode exposes the growing invasiveness and opacity of digital gatekeeping in two critical life domains—housing and legal defense. From third-party data harvester's demands for corporate logins (opening tenants up to privacy breaches and possible termination), to lawyers reduced to embarrassing AI hallucinations and dubious excuses, both stories reveal how quickly technology can strip away due process, informed consent, and basic dignity in pursuit of profit or 'efficiency.' Listeners are left with a vivid picture of these risks—and the critical role of investigative reporting in holding bad actors accountable.