Social Enterprise

First Post for the Geekend


I recently had the honor of being brought on to blog on the Geekend.  As with my previous blog, for those two people that read it, I'll be Linux focused, but I will probably post on all things geek.  As a matter of fact, I've been working on a hack for my 1970 VW Bug to put in a little more sound dampening and a couple more speakers.  'Course, that means I actually have work on my Bug and that seriously cuts into my World of Warcraft time.

Since this is my introduction, I thought I'd post about the recent court case: http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/421 that basically says you can do anything you want on your employer's network.  What really baffles me is this happened in the DoD!  The defense basically said that if you change your password, you have a right to expect privacy.  I'm not sure in what universe this makes sense, but the judge bought into it!  If someone could explain this to me, that'd be great; as it stands right now, I've no idea what's going on.

I'll be posting probably a couple times a week and I can't promise there'll be any continuity.  I look forward to posting more and having fun with the blog! 

 

JMG 


4 comments
Jack-M
Jack-M

The idea of personal privacy on an employers equipment is ludicrous. The idea of personal anything on an employers equipment is ludicrous. The employers equipment is provided the employee for work. Personal privacy on someone else's equipment is an oxymoron. privacy of any kind, excluding security, on an employers equipment is nuts. Whoever this judge is his diploma must have come from Groucho's School of Barbering and Legal Affairs for students of comedic degrees.

rebeccaaward
rebeccaaward

I can't possibly agree with this. As a systems/network administrator, my users can change their passwords. I don't have a beef with that. They can also expect privacy (i.e. I won't log in as them and wander through their files without good cause.) But, as the sysadmin, they are not GUARANTEED privacy. If I need to change their passwords or wander through their files on legitimate business, I will do so. I remember an 8-hour Saturday logged in as one of my co-workers as I tried to rid her workstation of Netsky and the porn that it had downloaded. Had I not done so, she would have been fired for having those type of files on her machine. The last thing on my mind at that time was her *privacy*. The only thing on my mind was protecting my network and the files of every other employee.

swampcat
swampcat

This seems to be an excellent example of our Judiciary in all of it's wisdom. We do in fact have some good and honorable people on the bench who discharge their duties with great honor and wisdom. This one, however, smacks of stupidity. The computer system that did, and still does, exist in my old place of employ required a change of passwords every thirty days as a matter of workstation security. It would be good if this decision were appealed and reversed. It appears that it provides a good chance for disaster in the matters of our national security.

zetacon4
zetacon4

I, nor anyone else, could have given a better example of why there is no valid expectation of privacy in a corporate computing environment. Neither should there be. A user of a business network system should have no expectation of use within that system other than to perform the tasks for which that system was intended - Work! I have no idea where this idea of privacy in the work place ever originated. It has no valid basis. No privacy is required to accomplish your tasks. If security demand that certain information be kept confidential, there are plenty of valid and authorized means to do that. The individual himself/herself has no need to protect personal actions or information. Any personal information should be contained entirely within the database controlled by HR and it's authorized members. We, as IT professionals, should help to stamp out such stupid and invalid ideas. Thanks again for your fine post on this subject.

Editor's Picks