IT Employment·20,064 discussions

“Big Brother”

Locked

“Big Brother”
I work at a school that just implemented a new device that records key strokes and notifies of profanity and when a user visits a xrated website. The school is up in arms over this. There have been little signs put up saying “Big Brother is watching” secret meetings the whole nine. Is it a bad thing that we are monitoring out students and teachers. is it a bad thing that we are stopping students and teachers from visiting xrated, My space, the favorite chat programs, and many others. Last month the show Nightline aor a series that used MySpace anfd other sites like it to lure in potential predators. i say ptoential because thay were caught before anything could happen most of the guys caught knew they would be there to meet an underage youth. Who is the “bad guy”?

Topic

In larger interest

In reply to “Big Brother”

Since it is in the larger interest for both students and teachers, the monitoring is justified, only how it is implemented will decide whether they take in a positive or negative way.
Take them into confidence and educate them, particularly the students.
Alternately you can bar undesired “sites” on your server.

Refreshingly calm

In reply to In larger interest

I have to say, I found your comment — compared to some below — to be sensible, dpkchauhan.

Come on boys, don’t you have anything better to do with your time than surf porn and look for ways to sneak swear words into your passwords?

And don’t tell me it’s the principle of the thing — people don’t get excited about the principle until it’s about something really politically important, like bad people telling you how to spend your time at work …

What is so special about …. CYBERSPACE

In reply to Refreshingly calm

They are in a school looking at materials that
are not appropriate for school. If is it drooling over National Geographic, or IED designs what difference does it make that it is on a “magic box of technology”? So many of you are just in complete awe of the tools. GET OVER IT.
Computers are just tools, the internet is just a bunch of info. No magic, no special place that the rules are different. If you are not allowed to view kiddie pron at home, you can’t do it in “cyberspace”. If you aren’t supposed to be talking to your friends, you can’t do it in cyberspace. If you are supposed to be doing research, you are supposed to be reading in the library, not taking to your friends in “cyberspace”. The schools are not restricting what they can do in some mythical magical realm. They are directing what they children are to do in the library and in class.

Exactly!

In reply to What is so special about …. CYBERSPACE

swwg69 is completely correct. Why isn’t anyone complaining because their kids cannot check playboy out from the school library? Answer, because NOBODY expects that playboy would be available in the school library. If I have to explain that expectation to you, forget it … you’re beyond hope.

Remember when you were in school and we didn’t have a PC on every desk. Were you allowed to pass notes (profane or not)? No. If you were caught, the note might be read to the whole class and IF the note was inappropriate according to the teacher’s standards, you could plan on detention, a visit to the office, Mom and Dad being called, etc.

Nothing has changed. We have just started applying the same rules to cybermedia. And remember, unlike the note you could not pass in class or the Playboy you could not bring into school — both of which you owned — the school owns the PCs and, by virtue of ownership, has the right to tell you what you can and cannot do with the PC.

So all the Big Brother conspiracy folks hitting on this one, get over it. This isn’t Big Brother watching what you do walking down the street, this is a school protecting their investments. Wouldn’t you do the same?

Cyberspace is another classroom and requires a diferent teaching approach

In reply to What is so special about …. CYBERSPACE

I agree with the general principles that you mnetion in your post, but would like to suggest that the ‘tool’ of ICT means that there are going to be fundamental changes in the way skills and knowledge are going to be delivered and taken up. Sure, we should put some parameters in place, but it is worth remembering that this tool will also allow for some really new ways for teachers and students to interact, so we need to provide some filters, witout being overly restrictive.
It’s about education and helping people make appropriate choices.
Surely that’s what education is about. If we encourage facilitated inquistion of knowledge then we can help the students make positive choices. The societal norms should be applied in the types of filters that are put in place, without being overly religious, morally righteous or cultural/racialy exclusive; we live in the developed democratic world and our education systems should reflect that.

space=geometry=axioms

In reply to Cyberspace is another classroom and requires a diferent teaching approach

cyberswpace, workspace, learning space…etc.
ok. if a =1/b then it does.
along the x, y, or z axes.
somebody might wanna look at the supremes opinion of why >prayer< cannot be outlawed in school: "there will be prayers in schools as long as there are math tests". this sets an array boundary. the principle of elegance requires another array sdet at "u cain't watch porn on company/school/library time-space." these "free speech"/big brother discussions are therefore, hmmmm. segmentation faults. and there is an effort to get them deep into the source code of the social contract.

refreshing and accurate view

In reply to What is so special about …. CYBERSPACE

Like it.

You have put things in perspective that all the daft legal words fail to address.

Reverse the viewpoint and it all makes sense.
Good one!

LOL

In reply to What is so special about …. CYBERSPACE

I wish I had read this earlier! Way to cut to the chase!

If your parents don’t buy you a computer of your very own, and you don’t choose to buy one with the money you earned on your paper route (if you’re industrious enough to hold a job), don’t expect unlimited, unmonitored use of the computer I bought you!

what are priniciples?

In reply to Refreshingly calm

are you kidding? seriously, I cannot tell from your post. your last
paragraph is either entirely facetious, or you do not understand
that “principle of the thing” is what is known as a Platonic ideal: it
is a principle; can you think in the abstract? Do you understand
what a slippery slope is? What are “principles” to you? ARE YOU
KIDDING?

Obviously Not Educated in U.S.

In reply to Refreshingly calm

Many people don’t understand what free speech is for, or what it protects.

Most of us raised here consider it a precious right, and not one to be truncated by either state or private action. The First Amendment stands different from, for instance, the Fourth Amendment right to be free of unlawful searches, which CAN be “infringed” by private persons in certain circumstances with relative impunity, whereas the State is not permitted to do so.

Free Speech is what we fought for in WWII. It is what we fought for in 1776. It is one of the most important rights we own, and a school has no right to infringe on it, without some competing interest which “trumps” free speech.

There are very few interests that do, and they usually amount to “Fire!” in a crowded theater and the like.

Free speech?

In reply to Obviously Not Educated in U.S.

As a Citizen of the United States by birth I believe that the right to free speech is a fundamental concept, a cornerstone to the concept that is our democracy.
However it is not now nor has it ever been a “right” of free speech to spend a school’s (or any other entity) resources on the kind of personal activity that is being discussed here UNLESS THE SCHOOL ALLOWS IT.
While considering the ramifications of the “slippery slope” you might also consider the fact that the underpinning of our democratic society happens to be it’s capitalistic economy. Free enterprise folks, that means that a business – any business (and certainly a school is) has a complete right to control it’s assets in any way it sees fit. There’s plenty of case law to back that one up. I don’t think there’s any “BIG BROTHER HERE”.
I do think we’d better keep an eye on “homeland security”, congress, and the other branches of government that seem bent on REALLY impungning our rights.

Bravo

In reply to Free speech?

So many people make stuff up about infringes on perceived “rights” when they mix emotions with logic. This original topic being about a school flags me with the thought, why would we allow access to these sites, IM unrelated to learning, cell phone usage, etc. seems to centered around curing a fear. It would be great if educators together developed a context that transformed these “fears” into lessons that demonstrated an oportunity to learn the technology that runs the schools systems.

These systems are the property of the school, yes; and should be maintained however the administration feels fit, yes; however, where is the place in this discussion about the lesson to the children who are there to learn from every experience they encounter? If knowledge is the key then a good place to be is at school.

Not about rights but about wrongs

In reply to Bravo

The roiginal post said “I work at a school that just implemented a new device that records key strokes and notifies of profanity and when a user visits a xrated website”. This says nothing about stopping access to these web sites, IM or chat – it speaks about recording what is entered to use the information for a later witch hunt AFTER the access has been made.

Most agree that there is no need for students to access IM, chat, or inappropriate web sites (eg porn, bomb making); most would also agree that the best way to manage this is to block access to them. What we object to is the use of an intrusive technology that does NOT stop access to them, but enables people to see EVERYTHING that a person does on the computer.

The method is akin to place video cameras in every room in your house that records everything, and then allowing the police unrestricted access to come along and check those tapes when they want and then charging you with any little infraction that they PERCEIVE to have happened via the visual evidence. And such evidence can not really tell the difference between a poorly done roll-your-own cigarette and a marijuana cigarette – so they charge you for using marijuana.

That’s a bit extreme…

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

The school records the keystrokes, akin to sound on the video instead of perceived visuals. School computers, government computers, corporate computers, it’s all the same. They own them, they make the rules. You want your bandwidth taken by your children porn surfing while you’re into a web project?
If the student or teacher is ‘caught’ on the wrong website or using profanity, ask yourself the same question the IM folks should ask… Is it a legit use? There could be some research taking place that requires access to and use of ‘those’ resources and is completely ‘straight up’.
BTW, the cops would have to PROVE marijuana in that case, though…

Hey Jinxsm – max post level reached so

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

I am responding here. I suspect that you are missing the main point in all this, so I will try again. But first, I do not think it is appropriate for students at school to be accessing chat, IM, or porn – I accept the point you made about specific research, in such a case special arrangements can be made for a specific time and a specific machine. But generally no porn, IM, or chat for students – can we at least agree on that.

The best way to handle this is with a blocker at the gateway as it STOPS access from happening – I think we can also agree here.

What was propsed was a keylogger which does NOT block any access but provides a record for later examination. It also records people’s IDs and passwords so there is no longer any security or evidence that the person who made the access is the one whose ID was used. Not everyone has to be savvy enough to do this, just one or two who can show others or use the process to implicate others. The breach of password security means that you can no longer prove who did what, as in my cigarette example you can not prove what is in it. However, in the school they appear to be taking their keylogger entries as gospel and are ready to convict on that flawed information.

Another important point is the original post implies that the only signs warning of the process have been ones put up by those who protest the key logger system, not the school.

You’re wrong, Ernest.

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

Deadly Ernest: “The method is akin to place video cameras in every room in your house that records everything, and then allowing the police unrestricted access to come along and check those tapes when they want and then charging you with any little infraction that they PERCEIVE to have happened via the visual evidence.”

In fact, when the public decides that the computers we provide for the education of students is only to be used for what we deem educational, and exercises our right to monitor that use, the methods described are akin to me placing video cameras in every room of my house except the bathrooms, recording everything, informing my guests that upon entry they will be recorded, and then allowing the police the same access to any relevant evidence that they have in any case where there is probable cause or [b]reasonable[/b] suspicion of a crime.

Nobody should be smoking anything on the grounds of a public school.

First of all I’m not so sure about that

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

A few years ago a person was arrested for caring a [b]Green Leafy Substance[/b] which the Police Officer believed to be cannabis so that person was arrested thrown in jail as there was over 1 kilo of the substance involved and refused bail on the strength of the evidence given by the Prosecution to the Court.

The substance in question was Green Peppermint Tea in a sealed box which clearly stated the contents. It was the police officer who opened the box and arrested the person for caring suspected Cannabis and it was the Crown Prosecution Service which failed to mention that the substance was in a sealed box that had just been bought from a herbal remedy shop. Although to be fair to them they may not have been told that bit of information.

The result was an Innocent person sitting in a jail cell for 8 months the first 4 because the Government Labs where so over worked and understaffed that they couldn’t test the stuff and the second 4 months because the Court System is so overloaded that they couldn’t get a Court Date to have the charges dismissed well actually to get a Court to free the person from custody as that required a Judge/Magistrate to do and because of the amount it required a Judge because it is mandatory to go to one of the Higher Courts to be dealt with the Magistrate who [b]Rubber Stamped the custody[/b] lacked the authority to dismiss the charges as by that time they had already been passed to a higher court which happened the moment that the Magistrate imprisoned the person and before anyone actually knew what was in the bag.

And before you jump on the Legal System no that’s how it’s going to go even thought the accused person actually told the Magistrate what the content of the plastic bag was this had to be proved before it was possible to allow them released.

Now if you log teachers key strokes you had better be 120% sure that the keystrokes actually belong to who you think they do as this is a perfect case of a [b]Set Up[/b] in the making. I’ve seen far too many cases of teachers being accused of child abuse sexual and otherwise who have their lives destroyed all on the whim of a disgruntled child who is out to get their own way. In every case it has been the teachers who stop then doing as they please who get accused and even someone with 20 + years in the field will be suspended and hung out to dry while the disgruntled child will be offered counseling and allowed to do as they like to help them heal!

If you are going to allow this then you had better have some major insurance policy in place to prevent the school going bankrupt when these falsely accused people sue for the damages that they have suffered at the hands of disreputable children. And you have to educate the teachers much better as well and make sure that they log off their terminals every time they move away from the monitor & keyboard. That should cut their teaching time in half constantly logging on and off.

At the same time you’ll also have to protect the students from similar activity as I’m sure that everyone remembers when they where in School there was the [b]In Crowd[/b] and the [b]Nerds[/b] and it was the [b]Nerds[/b] who constantly got the blame for a lot of the actions of the so called [b]In Crowd.[/b]

With the ability to destroy someones life in the balance here you have to be way over 2,000% sure of your actions before you even consider accusing anyone of anything and then you have to have a lot more proof before it goes any further. Key Logging just isn’t good enough to do this and lacks any form of security at all.

If this was to become used for some Legal Action just the Key Logging itself would not be considered as enough evidence of someone actually doing [b]The Deed[/b] all it would prove is that its occurred not who’s responsible. Unless you have other proof that is unimpeachable you have no evidence and a students word just isn’t enough to cut the mustard here as they have been known to be less than truthful when it suits their own ends.

Of course at the same time you can not have wireless keyboards and mice used as it’s way too easy to cross channel these and even if you have a Legitimate person actually logged on and under supervision it’s always possible for someone else within range to type in what they like and not get caught so the monitored person will take the wrap for someone else’s actions. The only way that this would be picked up is if there was one teacher per student and they could see characters appearing on the screen when their student had their hands well away from the keyboard or mouse. I personally don’t think that the school budgets will actually stretch that far to have 1 teacher per student do you?

Col

HAL: “you had better be 120% sure”

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

No, certainty is the jury’s responsibility, [b]if[/b] key strokes are recorded that warrant a trial. Then, the jury had better be 100% sure, and had better understand that the logging of keystrokes and association of those keystrokes with a username does not alone constitute 100% certainty. The school officials would be responsible to do more than record one instance of “bad” keyboard entries: they would have to follow the first recorded instance with closer scrutiny of all plausible suspects, and acquire enough evidence to truly be certain. If the school officials treat a single instance of “bad” key strokes as incontrivertible evidence, they are to blame for the wasted time. As your mint tea arrest story illustrates, there is a widespread problem involving the treatment of first impressions and hastily made assumptions as irrefutable fact, but reducing the amount of available information is not the correct solution. Improving the methods by which that information is sorted, queried and analyzed is the correct solution. In other words, determining the truth requires that we [b]think[/b], not that we have an invariant process to follow like idiots.

Unfortunately thats not how the Law Works

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

Justice isn’t the End Goal of any Court Action Winning is the only acceptable outcome for both sides. With the Adversarial System of LAW there are no winners only losers no matter the outcome.

Not so long ago many people where convicted on DNA evidence alone as the legal Fraternity didn’t have [b]The Technical Knowledge to Question This New Science[/b] now however things are slightly different but as always laws are now being changed to prevent outside sources to do DNA testing that is acceptable to the Courts and this is being restricted to the Government Testing Labs who are at best suspect in their outcomes. They work to a budget and look for positives and more often than not find False Positives or chose to construe unsatisfactory outcomes as Positives so many people have been convicted on [b]Faulty Evidence that is very difficult to question![/b]

Key Logging the the [b]Worst[/b] method of any forensic evidence but I’m sure that Legislation will be passed to make it unquestionable as [b]Computers Don’t Lie do they?[/b]

Every IT professional will tell you different but the average person on the street and in the Bureaucracy who know no better are a different story they particularly the Bureaucrats will always take the cheapest option to get a positive result hence Radar Speed Measuring Devices are accepted without question even though they can show stationary objects at alarming speeds.

Car speedometers are considered under Law to be Accurate if there is no other information that has a better recording result they are classed as [b]Scientific Instruments[/b] and when this is the sole reason for an action it is always the State Owned Speedio that is accepted as accurate and the other vehicles as inaccurate by the Judge and this is how a jury is instructed.

Also the worst option here is that this form of blocking is reactive rather than Proactive it allows the offense to be committed and then action started not the other way around and prevents the original action from occurring in the first place.

If your car had much better handling, Braking capacity and maneuvering ability this is called Proactive Engineering where as sticking things like Air Bags and crumple zones onto an already established design is Reactive Engineering.

Personally I would prefer to be driving the proactive vehicle than be in a reactive designed vehicle as the chances of being involved in a serious collision is far less. The same applies here with reactive monitoring in this case Key Logging it could even be argued as a form of Entrapment acted out by the Authorities and therefore illegal.

What’s would you prefer your hard earned Tax $ to be spent on a 2K solution which has no or little maintenance fees or a $2.00 solution with extremely high maintains fees involved. The Bureaucrats will always chose the latter as it makes them look as if they are saving your money when actually they are wasting your money and in much larger amounts that the proper solution would have originally cost.

I’ve seen first hand the stupidity of Bureaucrats who are only willing to spend 3 times the cost of an item in a repair rather than the 1/3 cost of a replacement item.

Until you realize that Bureaucrats waste far more money than they actually save you will continue to be paying for costly ineffective solutions that could have better solutions at a lower overall cost.

Col

What I would prefer, HAL, would be neither.

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

HAL9000: “What’s would you prefer your hard earned Tax $ to be spent on a 2K solution which has no or little maintenance fees or a $2.00 solution with extremely high maintains fees involved. The Bureaucrats will always chose the latter as it makes them look as if they are saving your money when actually they are wasting your money and in much larger amounts that the proper solution would have originally cost.”

Public schools are a violation of the Constitution’s protection of the right not to be deprived of property without due process. Except as punishment for a crime, the government has no right to take my money. The government’s power to levy taxes does not include giving free rides, free lunches, or free books and lessons to slackers. As long as the slackers are voting to take my money for those things, I don’t care one bit about the quality of schools they have no right to have in the first place.

grasping at straws

In reply to Not about rights but about wrongs

school is not home. plain and simple.

Fought for Free Speech?

In reply to Obviously Not Educated in U.S.

This is not about freedom of speech and never has been.
This about the protection of the schools network and ensuring that the students and teachers utilise the resources available in the correct manner.
You seem to forget, that, at the end of the day the school has a DUTY of CARE to the students and the parents of the students and they are fulfilling that responsibility by ensuring that students only access content for learning.
I also administer an educational network and while typing this I am processing my proxy logs and looking at which students have not been using the resource for the intended purpose which is learning related.
Oh me OH my here is a student who has managed a gig of traffic from my network to the Internet via megaupload.com, BLOODY HELL now my department has to wear the cost of that!.
Well well well look at that this student who is meant to be doing research on monitoring products is hanging out on Anime sites.
Not on my watch!
And to hell with their rights, on my network they have the rights and priviledges that I give them in accordance with institutional guidelines for learning and if I have to monitor what they attempt to view and what they view, so I can build a better filter list to ensure that learing is not disrupted because a student wants to upload warez or look at p0rn then that is what will happen.
Free speech does not come into it.

Cheers

so very correct

In reply to Fought for Free Speech?

free speach has absolutley nothing to do with monitoring student and staff activitey on nets thru school resources. why should the publics tax dollars be used for anything than what they are intended for. how can anyone justify any activity that does not comply with the curriculum. this is not BIG BROTHER this is common sense. oh yeah i forgot, common sense is hiding out there somewere because we nead to impliment these measures. if they are so intent on wasteing resources, let them do it at their own homes and on their dime.

Free Speech?

In reply to Obviously Not Educated in U.S.

What most people under 60 in the US do not understand is that when you are using the equipment in a place of business, and a scholl is a place of business, you are not free to exercize all of the constitutional rights everyone fought for. The OWNER of the equipment gets to set some rules, not to limit your right to free speech but to limit your right of use of their equipment and bandwidth. Even John Kerry and Ted Kennedy probably understand this.

in the interests of science and commerce …

In reply to Free Speech?

If we educate/employ in the interests of either science or commerce, management studies show high acheivers do not develop in an openly repressive environment.

The equipment belongs to the owner – agreed. If the owner would like a little more bang for the buck (especially important in education) let the owner (property tax payer) provide an enviroment that respects privacy and encourages individuality. As a property tax payer, I say teacher, leave those kids alone. Maybe they will learn something, as opposed to children being cruelly exposed to shame and criminalization as the norms (of a society gone wrong).

R U nuts?

In reply to in the interests of science and commerce …

I don’t know what to say except, go take your piggy bank, break it open and buy a clue.

Making teachers or others obligated to make sure your child ‘has an environement’ to learn or respect privacy is absurd. That is YOUR duty!

Maybe if more parents understood this basic fundamental truth these absurd strings would not be necessary.

no children, we take it?

In reply to R U nuts?

I’ve been raising children all my life, and working in academia for nearly ten years. Next week I adopt two more children.

Teachers and others are obligated to treat my children with respect because I pay their salary.

You ignorance is astounding, but not in comparision with your insecurity.

AMEN BROTHER

In reply to R U nuts?

In this day in age of “somebody’s gotta be responsible for every little thing my kid does as long as it’s not me”. The parents of the “hood ornament” children who thumb their noses at the adults around them who’ve paid their dues – student loans, longevity on the job – certifications and recerts etc, etc. These crybaby parents and their crybaby children most of whom who wouldn’t know how to balance a checkbook or determine the difference between an IRA and a GPA need a heck of a lot more time actually LEARNING and a lot less time SURFING. I have plenty to say about responsibility.
But you succinctly hit the nail on the head. Responsiblity begins at home just as does learning. What happened to the notion that the PARENT is the PRIMARY teacher in a child’s life????
Whaaaaaa, so the boss is looking at your keystrokes, what’ve you done (directed at the individual who brought this into the light) that might’ve led the employer to think he (or she) should spend resources on scrutinizing such activity????
If it were my computer – I’D WANT TO KNOW!!!

The taxpayer does not have that ability

In reply to in the interests of science and commerce …

sue.hawkins: “If the owner would like a little more bang for the buck (especially important in education) let the owner (property tax payer) provide an enviroment that respects privacy and encourages individuality. As a property tax payer, I say teacher, leave those kids alone. Maybe they will learn something, as opposed to children being cruelly exposed to shame and criminalization as the norms (of a society gone wrong).”

Just as it is not possible to simultaneously prevent and prepare for war, it is not possible to encourage individuality while practicing collectivism. The best lesson about individuality to teach in this case is that rights to use property accompany ownership, and that use of others’ property is not a right, but a privilege, which may be conditional, according to the preferences of the property owner. What I consider openly repressive is the claim that I, as a taxpayer, may be forced to fund a public school system where technology that fosters accountability is considered an invasion of an assumed, but incorrect, right to privacy in public.

“I before e, except after c, etc.”

You misspelled “achievers”.

It’s all in the Constitution

In reply to The taxpayer does not have that ability

The US Constitution and the accompanying Bill of Rights is all about collectively encouraging individuality.

Start with Plato, read political history, go back to Plato.

Beg pardon for any mispellings.

I have been meaning to read “Republic” for many years.

In reply to The taxpayer does not have that ability

Thank you for the reminder.

I simply believe that it is the duty of government to protect the right to individualism, not to decide, nor even consider, how to “encourage” [b]anything[/b]. I agree completely with your goal of encouraging more independent and rational children, but I do not trust government, especially obtuse, arrogant, bitter, collectivism, tyrannical, entry-level government bureaucrats to be of any value in achieving that goal.

I apologize for all the adjectives, and their redundancy when juxtaposed with the phrase “entry-level government bureaucrats”, but it was necessary, to emphasize the futility of hoping that a collective-minded collection of virtual non-entities will have any ability to encourage individuality in any way.

I thought that misspelling of “achiever” was ironic, and suspect you did it intentionally, btw. You seem pretty astute, and I have more important corrections to make than misspelled words, but in this one case I thought it was pretty sassy. My compliments.

Criminalization?

In reply to in the interests of science and commerce …

How in heaven’s name does scrutiny = criminalization? Perhaps you should do a little study on the process of and application of law. Our justice system, and this includes for the most part, policy intended at regulation that is not specifically “law” begins as codification. If a regulation is implemented and is subsuquently found to be intrusive or at worst “unconstitutional” then it must be “tested” by being challenged in a judicial or regulatory forum whether in a PTA meeting or at the Supreme Court Level. Seems to me that there’s nothing more educational and/or perhaps more IMPORTANT “educationally” than having this process exposed to children. Having children I (and I dare say the affected employees) exposed to this testing process perhaps in this exact controversial subject might do more to EDUCATE than whining about “Big Brother”. I don’t think anyone said anything about an actual “criminal” aspect to this scenerio. I bet you don’t know the difference between a traffic ticket (infraction) and a misdemeanor (criminal)….
THINK – THINK – AND THEN THINK SOME MORE!!!

crimialization is a social, not legal issue

In reply to Criminalization?

Criminalization is when a harmless, albeit distasteful act renders a segment of the population criminals. A good, current example is pot-smoking chemo patients.

Scrutiny = Criminalization when the scrutinizer tattles. Plain and simple.

READ, READ, AND THEN READ SOME. Give up thinking, it’s not your forte.

Sue

In reply to Criminalization?

Who are you judge whether someone’s forte is anything?
Are you afraid to look at something simply for what it is? Criminalization is “legislation which makes something legal” – period. I did not see anywhere in the original post anything about criminalization. Your labeling of something as being Criminal is naive especially when the process is nowhere in evidence here.
I suggest that while you critique my thinking prowess you expose your own fascist thought process and paranoia.
You might benefit from a little actual constitutional law education.

A more rigorous definition of “regulations”

In reply to Criminalization?

as opposed to laws.

I’m not a lawyer, but have been paying close attention to this distinction since I began poking smot, which I have quit, btw, everybody (say it out loud until you get it. It?s the best thing I can say about pot that this phrase once seemed fairly amusing to me.). I used to believe that drug “laws” were just silly, now I know that they are malicious, and really a separate class of statute called “regulations”, which are by definition incompatible with the Bill of Rights? guarantee of the right to the pursuit of happiness.

Laws protect people by preventing harmful actions.

Regulations harm people by preventing harmless actions according to the premise that certain actions that are sometimes harmful may be prohibited as though they are always harmful, which is an irrational curtailment of individuals’ rights to pursue our own happiness (1) as we define happiness, not as you define it (2) to the best of our ability, which makes us happier, better company for you, and more productive, thus more beneficial to society, to the extent that society is competent to profit from productivity. Most of you, apparently, are not!

Some drug users are thieves. [b]Most[/b] are not.

Some drug users are rapists. [b]Most[/b] are not.

Some drug users are murderers. [b]Most[/b] are not.

All thieves, rapists and murderers should be punished. [b]Most[/b] drug users should not. Except for the few who are truly, intentionally evil, you who have supported the DEA and the war on the poor, disingenuously described by its evil proponents as a “War on Drugs” have done so on the basis of a “plausibility argument” which is contradicted by all data. Unfortunately, neither is scrutinized by many voters, or very rigorously, for reasons I do not understand nor have any reason to discuss. They are your emotions, which makes them your problems, not mine ? until you make those the basis of statutes that make the world more dangerous for us all, and in this case your irrationality absolutely is my business!

The plausibility argument for drug prohibition is based on symptoms of drug use and your emotional, not intellectual, response to those descriptions. Before you vote again, please examine the “possible side effects” listed on every medicine you have ever taken, or better yet, every one that you know by name. Then compare those side effects to the side effects of illegal drugs [b]as documented in controlled studies[/b], some of which have been conducted on even the most potent “street drugs”. Then, examine all data you can find on drug-related assault of any variety & theft, ie [b]legitimate[/b] “crimes against persons or property”, and see whether all drug users are truly criminals, or just barely more likely to actually be harmful than any sober person.

Laws vs regulations — and drug use

In reply to Criminalization?

First let me say that I do not think this is the right thread for this discussion and if you really want to discuss it, you should start a new thread with a more appropriate topic. I have not posted in response to the message I wanted to as it has reached maximum depth.

1. Laws are pieces of legislation passed by a legislative body, usually a state or federal body. Many are laws about how people are to act in the community or society, some are on finances – the annual budget is a law as well.

2. Regulations are expansions on laws where the law has given the administrating authority, usually a govt beaurocracy, the right to make sub-laws on how they go about administrating and controlling their area of responsibility under the law. A common example being the speed law setting out that it is unlawful, while the regulation sets out the amount of the fine and how it is paid.

3. Many laws and regulations are passed to protect people from other people’s stupidity, many are made to protect people from their own stupidity. And some are made to protect corporate profits because the companies bought off the legislators – The Digital Media Copyright Act is a classic example of that (please start a new thread if you wish to discuss this at length).

4. Most drug laws are based on the premises that they are harmful in the medium to long term, some can be harmful in the short term – eg a drug overdose. Some drug laws are to protect others – eg driving a care whilst under the influence of certain drugs is unlawful as they can warp your senses – because that is what they are designed to do.

Some prohibited drugs are harmful and should be banned, some are less so and can be argued for legality. In the end it comes down to a group decision, exercised via elected representatives (when they have not been bought by corporate entities), as to which are and are not acceptable. Then it comes down to do as the society wants or rebelling against the society and taking the risk – if the later don’t bitch if you get caught and punished, you knew what you were doing.

Right wrong, moral, immoral

In reply to Criminalization?

lassiez faire or nanny state, doesn’t matter. Criminalisation of drugs is stupid.
There are three sorts of drug related crime.
1) Reduced inhibitions causing someone to ignore the consequences of their actions.
2) Inter-producer wars to secure market share and a serious profit.
3) Crimes committed to support a very expensive habit.

De-criminalise you get rid of 99% of 2 and 3 on the spot, 1 is a lot less of a problem than various people who make money out of 2 and 3 would have you believe.

Drug problems are serious, but criminalising their use just made the problem worse not better.

You can be incapable of driving a car if you over do cough medicine. Anybody been done for being in possession of a bottle of linctus ?

Tony: 1, 2, 3

In reply to Criminalization?

Tony Hopkinson: “There are three sorts of drug related crime.
1) Reduced inhibitions causing someone to ignore the consequences of their actions.
2) Inter-producer wars to secure market share and a serious profit.
3) Crimes committed to support a very expensive habit.

De-criminalise you get rid of 99% of 2 and 3 on the spot, 1 is a lot less of a problem than various people who make money out of 2 and 3 would have you believe.”

Not only is your #1 a lot less of a problem than people believe, but in the absence of persecution, people’s faculties are less bothered whilst under the influence because we don’t have the added stress of secrecy to bother us.

Deadly Ernest: “First let me say that I do not think this is the right thread for this discussion and if you really want to discuss it, you should start a new thread with a more appropriate topic.”

Thank you, for exemplifying the hypocritical approach of all supporters of drug prohibition! In the same post in which you tell me that I’m posting about drug legalization/prohibition in the wrong thread, you include 5 paragraphs of your own on the same subject!

This glaring logical contradiction leads me to conclude that your contradictions were intentional, and thank you for helping me to make my point, which is: the solution to any problem is best achieved by identifying it precisely, and its causes, in order of statistical correlation. And folks, when it comes to drugs, violence is correlated to [b]more[/b] regulations, not to fewer of them.

Absolutely – look at the original post

In reply to Criminalization?

This thread is about the use of a keystroke logger to manage access to porn sites. One section has split off into other areas and is now covering the use of illicit drugs. This section has reached maximine thread depth and makes further posts harder. I suggested that if you wish to discuss the use or legalisation of drugs then you should start a thread with a title that indicates as such and do it properly. Laws, right or wrong, is not about big brother watching which is the widest way you could interprete the thread title.

Before you start labelling people about being
“exemplifying the hypocritical approach of all supporters of drug prohibition” you should try finding something out about them. My post was in response to your post, as is this one, so I responded to your post and all that was in it. I also said you should start a new thread if you wanted to discuss this properly. And you see my being courteous as being hypocritical, that says a lot about your biased view point.

BTW Here in Australia we have things called Royal Commissions, kind of like the USA Joint House Investigative Committees – in the past I have put submissions to Royal Commission into the Use of Drugs recommending the decriminalisation of them for reasons similar to what you suggest. However, I also recognise that there are problems with ensuring the safety of the other members of the community with regards to the use of many drugs, some illicit some not. This issue is not simple and has many wider ramifications than can be dealt with in two or three short posts.

Deadly Ernest: 3, 2, 1…

In reply to Criminalization?

3. I read the original post. I also read the messages to which I replied, one of which asserted something about “criminalization”, then another about regulation, and from there my comments about drug prohibition were part of a smooth segue, and an apt example of the evil inherent in laws that limit liberty but do not address actions that are harmful in and of themselves.

2. I do not see your “being courteous as being hypocritical,” I see your failure to obey your own advice as hypocritical. Get a good dictionary before you argue this point further.

1. I’m glad you’re an advocate of decriminalisation, but the issue is, in fact, simple. The behavior of “drug abusers” (“poor abused cannabis, did that smoker hurt you?”) that constitutes a legitimate complaint is not the use of drugs, but choices that only a few abusers make, to harm others or deprive them of property, and those actions are illegal, as they should be, without drug prohibition.

Free Speech Includes Responsibility

In reply to Obviously Not Educated in U.S.

There is no such thing as TOTAL free speech. Get on an airplane and yell “highjack” or “bomb” and see how far you get with your free speech.

With free speech comes responsibility. Responsibility is the reason we don’t use swear words or display pornography around young children.

By the same token, businesses have a right to protect their systems and limit free speech. If a business allowed kiddie porn at their work site, for example, they become liable for consequences. If a school allows the certain activities, they become liable.

Think about it for a minute. If your daughter was assaulted by a person they met on myspace you would begin to ask how they began using myspace and it would eventually lead to the school and individual teachers who allowed the activities. Who do you think would be the first to be sued in court? I’ve been a teacher so I know the answer to that one.

It’s just not worth the risk.

Free Speech…

In reply to Obviously Not Educated in U.S.

Well, add yourself your long list of those who don’t understandt the concepts and precepts of the 1st amendment.

Free speech is not included as a ‘right’ as you are utilizing the property of others in your personal ambitions. Nor is it gauranteed in your workplace.

As an example, I may not agree with unionizing however, if a union thug shows up at my doorstep, I am bound by law to let them talk to my employees.

I don’t agree with that law, and I feel it infringes my rights, but that is the law

What you do with either government owned property or the property of others can and is regulated by the owners of the property. Any school (or other government or private institution) may institute restrictions or controls so as to insure proper use and care of that property.

Now, my opinion as it applies to schools: We have all seen the fallout in the last 8 years of pornographic, violent, inane websites on the mental activity of students. I for one with 2 young children would gladly approve limiting the activities on-line of anyone who is working with or around my children.

Part of my duties as a parent is to provide a safe environment for my children; both at home and in school. The school system should have had these safeguards years ago.

Ben had it right.

In reply to In larger interest

You shouldn’t sacrifce freedom in search of security, because if you do, you will get neither in the end (to parphrase a great man).

Teach kids how to defend themselves, how to assess risk for themselves and stop telling everyone that a loss of personal freedom (privacy) is reasonable in the face of danger.

A society such as ours (that is a democratic one) has to accept that one of the risks of our way of life is that unscruples people might use our liberties to harm us. I’d rather take that risk than allow the western world to become somekind of nanny state that dictates what kind of books I can read, what journals I look at or what sites I can visit, and ultimately what I’m allowed to think.

You have it wrong.

In reply to Ben had it right.

Sacrifice freedom in search of security? These are children, on school property (and I mean both the grounds and the computers), during a school day. If a 14 year old girl pulled out a pornographic magazine in the middle of class and began reading, would it be “a loss of personal freedom” for the school to not allow her to look at it then? Is it a “nanny state” if the school library does not stock pornographic material? By your argument, it should be there and we’ll let kids defend themselves. Yeah, that’s how a responsible society works, by telling kids, “Now don’t look at this,” and then turning them loose. Of course the children, being the completely responsible animals they are, with no curiosity and no desire to disobey because they know their parents and guardians are always right about everything, will not delve into mischief. Why, that’s the only reason we have jails in the first place, because we don’t allow people to do whatever they want. Oh, if only we had TOLD James it was wrong to shoot people!

That was sarcasm. I was laying it on thick, but I wanted to make sure everyone knows it.

A society such as ours (which is a Republic, not a Democracy) can’t make sweeping generalizations about situations and consequences. We do not have the same punishment for capital murder as we do for jaywalking. We are talking about keeping pornographic websites out and monitoring how children spend their time IN THE CLASSROOM. I believe teachers, parents, school administrators, and other students have the full right to know everything that everyone is doing IN A CLASSROOM. This is not the same thing as Men In Black performing midnight raids on our homes in search of propaganda against the Motherland. Don’t blow it out of proportion.

I could not agree more…

In reply to You have it wrong.

I’ve read many of the posts in this thread and am thoroughly disappointed in the apparently very confused responses regarding security, privacy, and freedom.

I may be considered conservative, but the suppression of profane and inappropriate material from the eyes of our CHILDREN is not an issue of freedom.

As these kids mature and become ADULTS, they will be entitled to their freedom to view materials to which I may object, but to which I would not limit their viewing.

But we are talking about a CLASSROOM and the management of the materials to which the CHILDREN are exposed. Get over the freedom issue, those that are touting that here. It is not about freedom. It is about responsible education and responsible upbringing.

If we controlled everything that EVERYONE could see, then we would be entering into a very dangerous realm of restriction and sensorship. But if any of you (not you Joe) that it is OKAY to let your CHILDREN watch pornographic films while on school time and equipment, then you are simply sick and need help.

Calm or not, sarcastic or not, conservative or liberal… let’s not use “labels” to debate this issue. Let’s use common sense.

I AGREE 100%+

In reply to I could not agree more…

THINK!!!! The next generation will already have it bad enough from drugs, gangs, etc. What we teach,or allow, our children when they are young, there is a great possibliity that the evil
thay see will stay with them into adulthood. Porno movies can help warp a mind into what it sees; as abuse is ok; depending on the movie; killing is also ok; and I could rant on but won’t. As I have said before, IF it helps the security of my country(USA) and it’s citizens, which include my family. Let :Big Brother” monitor what I do on the internet, even monitor my phone. A “Black Hacker” is probably monitoring it anyway!! I have nothing to hide from the government, but I wish harsher penalties were placed on “Black Hackers” when they are caught regardless of the nation they are caught. WEll that’s that!!

You make an incorrect assumption

In reply to You have it wrong.

This guy is a tech support so I assume he is an adult and in a college or university of some kind. What you say may apply to minor children, but not adults.
Academia is the crucible of newness. It is a special place that must have special freedoms, especially to explore. Unfettered freedom can be a problem. You want it limited, but what and by who? History shows that no one is qualified and the only ones that want to are control freaks or people that want to exploit.

Your assumption is also incorrect

In reply to You make an incorrect assumption

That guy was tech support, so I assume he is an adult, who has a job and is paying taxes to support our schools. Which we, through our arcane system, have developed to educate our children so they can assume a place as responsible adults in our – the adults’ – society. It is not a “crucible of newness” – what is that? It is a training ground for adulthood (not the main one, though, I hope). It is also not a jobs program for teachers; although we tend to give them a great degree of flexibility in how they impart to our children the education WE deem important they are accountable to us. Pornography, gambling, seducing jailbait are not yet an important part of the education I expect to see imparted to the students in schools I support.

Not sure you can make that assumption either.

In reply to You make an incorrect assumption

“This guy is a tech support so I assume he is an adult and in a college or university of some kind.”

Since he specifically mentions “underage youth” in his post, I would assume a public school.

I live in a rural area and all of the public school districts in this area (7 in the county) have at least minimal IT tech support staff.

“Academia is the crucible of newness. It is a special place that must have special freedoms, especially to explore.”

The world is where you explore. School (talking about primary and secondary)is where you learn how. You are there because you are not yet ready for real exploration. It should be a protected environment.

The problem is he didn’t tell us the vital info.

In reply to Not sure you can make that assumption either.

Really, both replys to my post assumed he is in a high school or lower. I made the assumption he was past high school. I think we are both correct given our assumptions, but really, we don’t know. He left out that vital piece of information. There is no way to judge…. Clever bit of ambiguity.
Enjoy, M

ambiguity?

In reply to The problem is he didn’t tell us the vital info.

What is ambiguous about “underage youth”?

What one school IT manager did.

In reply to The problem is he didn’t tell us the vital info.

Since I can’t reply below. I’ll reply here.
You mentioned a site, myspace.com, that had a problem with underage predation. He said nothing about that being the problem he had. You didn’t seem to read what he said.
Considering that he said “Big Brother is watching” signs had appeared, I have to assume that could only be done in a post high school class room. These are adults. Their privacy, especially in an academic setting, should not be infringed.
I also happen to remember some comments from an instructor I had who was head of IT at the college and also a member of the union representing the teachers. He had an interesting problem of an instructor viewing rather explicit adult porn (Nude Greco-Roman wrestlers with erections.) Legally, it presented an enormous legal and academic problem that the administratiuon had no idea what to do with and no idea what all the ramifications were, but they were ugly so they left it in his lap. Now this is real world legalisms, not any wishful thinking. A whole lot of rules came into conflict.
They had to do something, but any restriction on academic freedom was not going to fly.
His conclusion was that the best resolution was to give the instructor a computer with an internet connection that was not connected to the school network. That satisfied all the legal requirtements of the situation.

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to You have it wrong.

The 14 year old girl is in the care and custody of a school which stands in stead of her parents (in loco parentis).

We are talking about a college. There is no such doctrine to protect the students there, since they are pretty uniformly over eighteen.

And you’re right, that the school has an interest, but it is an EXTREMELY circumscribed one. And absolutely nothing in the post that started this thread militates to show that that interest is going to prevail.

Not a college

In reply to Reply To: “Big Brother”

Later in this thread, the original author states that the purpose of the software is to protect KIDS (his emphasis).

Right!

In reply to You have it wrong.

Two things. Thanks for pointing out to the many that this is a republic. I tire of people calling this a democracy. Revisit your Pledge of Allegence people … “and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands” not “and to the democracy for which it stands.” Nuff said.

Now, the protection goes beyond what joe-horr stated. Highly graphic web sites (what’s the point of a NON-highly graphic pornography site?!?) use large amounts of bandwidth and tend to be those with the most worms/viruses/spyware/malware that gets pumped onto the PC.

This means that by barring access to such sites, the school is protecting the bandwidth so that it may be used for its intended purpose — education. Also, by barring these sites, the school is taking a step toward keeping the PC operational so that the next student — the one that was NOT viewing porn — can use the PC as a tool for learning.

This is not simply an individual rights issue because NOTHING in a school, and I do mean absolutely NOTHING, effects only one person. Your rights stop at your nose. You don’t have the right to crap-up the computer I’ll be using in my next class. The school is protecting my right to a working PC and good bandwidth when they deny you the right to do whatever you want on that PC.

Those who make the personal freedom argument, why not take your argument a step farther. Why don’t we allow the student’s the right to format the schools PC hard disk drive? After all, stopping them from such action is denying them a right, isn’t it? This idea is no more ridiculous than saying that a student should be allowed to view porn at school on a school PC because of freedom of choice. View porn or format the HDD, both are a choice, both could be protected by rights, and both are blocked in order to protect the rights of EVERYONE else.

You also have it wrong

In reply to You have it wrong.

I’m not advocating porn in schools as a right, but I do think that blocking inappropiate sites is more than sufficient. Monitoring key strokes is an unreasonable intrusion on anyones privacy, including teenagers, and especially on teachers.

Ben’s view of public schools

In reply to Ben had it right.

Most, if not all, of the Founders would have described education provided to all by government mandate as a sacrifice of personal liberty for a bit of security.

You shouldn’t expect unlimited freedom on equipment provided at state expense.

Freedom vs. Security

In reply to Ben’s view of public schools

Let’s also remember that we give up freedom for security every day.

The law works both ways. The laws that protect us from harm are the same laws that prohibit us from causing harm. We give up the “freedom” to take matters into our own hands in exchange for the protection from someone else doing the same.

The idea that school children should be allowed to visit any site from a school computer is just not realistic. I’m all for freedom of expression, and a very vocal opponent of censorship, but I’m also realistic. There are limits even to the freedoms of speech and expression. Those limits, believe it or not, are in place for our protection.

Now, whether or not our laws are effective, that’s a discussion for another time.

Liberty vs. Safety

In reply to Freedom vs. Security

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety. — Benjamin Franklin

Liberty vs. Safety

In reply to Liberty vs. Safety

I’m familiar with the quote, but it’s either that or we become an anarchistic society with no rules AND no protections. You can’t protect children from pedophiles unless you outlaw pedophilia. Is the government curbing the pedophiles liberty by doing so?

Ben’s Quote

In reply to Liberty vs. Safety

I think the operative word in Mr. Franklin’s quote is “Essential” liberty. Is the restriction placed on proprietary equipment by the managers of a public institution an infringement of an essential liberty? The students (and I’m unclear on the educational level) are free to pursue these activities on their own time and place. there appears to me to be no infringement of liberty. If they are minors and unemancipated then they have certain restrictions placed on them by law and custom. If they are adults and citizens then they can vote with their feet for more liberty by attending an institution that does not restrict their access to this information.

When I Was a Kid, This Was a Free Country

In reply to Liberty vs. Safety

All the essential liberties are gone now. They have all been legislated away over the years, including an assumed, but never written, right to privacy. (Unless you are aborting a f?tus, that is.)

A constitutional right to privacy regarding what goes on inside your home and who you communicate with, whatever the methodology, would set this legal system on its ear.

“When I Was a Kid, This Was a Free Country” – G. Gordon Liddy

The “social contract”, exactly, thank you rshanberg.

In reply to Freedom vs. Security

I didn’t have time to be so elaborate & complete today until I went home from work.

rshanberg: “We give up the “freedom” to take matters into our own hands in exchange for the protection from someone else doing the same.”

The single attribute common to absolutely every government is the claim of a monopoly on the legal use of [?????] (*).

The only question that a citizen may help decide, and only to the extent that he and/or she is fortunate enough to live in a democratic state, is, “According to what criterion should that monopoly be exercised?”

If you claim that there should be criteria, not a single criterion, I disagree. The only crime I acknowledge as a crime (or the only “sin” if you prefer that word) is [b]coercion[/b].

*Every government claims a monopoly on the legal use of [b]coercion[/b].

at state expense

In reply to Ben’s view of public schools

should we expect ANY freedom on ‘equipment provided at state
expense’? what state? how is said state funded? is this
totalitarianism or is it a republic? assuming this is in, i donno, the
USA, theoretically the state is for and by the people. it is or it isn’t.

the state is for and by the people

In reply to at state expense

The state is already going beyond its promise — securing our rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness — when it provides education, which amounts to assistance in the pursuit of happiness. If you don’t like the terms of that assistance, you have the right to attend any school you can afford.

for and by the people? Who’s making the terms …

In reply to the state is for and by the people

The state’s promise to whom? Itself??? Are you an American? You say BY and FOR the people. The state IS the people. If I don’t like my own terms, I change them. You talk as if we live in a dictatorship where I have no choice, and then announce yourself as “by and for the people.”

Who, indeed, is making the terms?

In reply to for and by the people? Who’s making the terms …

Yes, I am a citizen of the United States.

By “the state’s promise” I meant its statement of purpose, in the Declaration of Independence, the [b]the reason[/b] that “Governments are instituted among Men”, is to protect “certain unalienable Rights…Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” I agree that the “Consent of the Governed” is also vitally important, but I also believe that the purpose of the Constitution is to strictly & absolutely delimit the extent to which you may change the terms if you do not like them. The Founders not only remembered the tyranny of King George, they also remembered the historical commonness of tyranny by the majority, and recognized that as [b]equally[/b] evil as tyranny by an individual or minority. No numbers game changes the fact that it is evil to use somebody else’s property for your pursuit of happiness, at the expense, and against the will, of the person from whom you took it. The argument that public restrictions on individuals’ use of [b]public[/b] property is an infringement of those individuals’ rights is the argument of a dictator.

My argument is based on the rights and limitations in the Constitution, yours is the one that is symptomatic of a wish for tyrannical power. If I wish to borrow your computer, I ask for permission, which you may refuse, or grant according to [b]any[/b] terms you wish. I may then accept, gratefully, or decline your offer. One reason I may decline your offer is that you wish to log my key strokes while I use your computer. I might, in that situation, thank you for telling me of your intention to track my activities, and politely refuse that arrangement. I would never have the right to demand the use of [b]your[/b] computer according to [b]my[/b] terms.

If you don’t like the terms by which public services are provided, you may decline them, not change your use of public services from a privilege to a right. Your only right is protection from coercion.

The word “Pursuit” is capitalized in the Declaration to emphasize the nobility of the Pursuit of Happiness. There is no such thing as a free lunch!

In other words

In reply to Ben’s view of public schools

Anything obtained with “someone else’s money” should be expected to come with “someone else’s strings” attached 🙂

Absolutely

In reply to In other words

adunlap: “Anything obtained with “someone else’s money” should be expected to come with “someone else’s strings” attached”

Or, in other words, “there is no such thing as a ‘free lunch’.”

not someone else’s money – my money

In reply to In other words

The war is Iraq is not being fought with someone else’s money, and incompetent public school techs are not paid out of someone else’s money. It comes out of my money and your money. What happened to America? Remember … Liberty and Justice, our forgotten friends? And her little sister, Mercy?

I think this whole thread is about kid-hating, the coolest hate activity in the new millenium, next to mental illness.

Kid Hating?

In reply to not someone else’s money – my money

I don’t see how asking teachers/administrators to watch where they surf and monitor the systems amounts to kid hating. Limits are put in place for kids out of love and caring not hate.

I personally am sick and tired of parents who say, “Oh Johnny was just expressing his individuality with his kicking and screaming tantrum”. These are the same punks who grow up still wanting it their way not caring about others. That’s not individuality it’s selfishness. Expecting a town to allow its children to roam the Internet sans monitoring because one or two parents don’t care enough to put limits on their kids and their “freedom of expression” is a little selfish in my mind.

I love my kids, that’s why I put limits on them. They play nice and when they go beyond the boundaries of what is expected of them and get caught they know what to expect. I think, I hope, the majority of parents feel the same. This is why there are such limits on educational networks.

The kids? Who cares about the kids?

In reply to Kid Hating?

Well, I actually do, but they are not the issue, and how I feel about kids as such, has nothing to do with who owns the computers, which is the first issue to recognize. The public schools, and all the equipment in them, are put in place for kids out of love, caring, and motivated, collective self-interest in an educated, intelligent, informed, competent populace. I hope most people will consider the latter the highest priority and most noble reason for education, public or private.

I love myself and I accept limits because I expect them to apply to you, too.

ABS not exactly correct

In reply to Kid Hating?

Many studies have shown that a well educated population is far less likely to blindly follow their [b]Political Leaders[/b] and they are far more likely to ask questions and debate the merits of any Government Action.

So the ideal in Education is to offer the Bare Minimum while making it appear to be a massive success so that you keep a poorly educated population which will do as you [b]The Government Wants[/b] and think that they are well off.

It’s a well known fact that Public Schools are underfunded to Hell and back but many people still think that they are doing a good job even if they turn out students who are incapable of reading after 12 + years of schooling.

Col

Really, HAL?

In reply to Kid Hating?

I specified “…in an educated, intelligent, informed, competent populace.”

I didn’t claim that I live in one!

I think you need to read it again.

In reply to not someone else’s money – my money

“I think this whole thread is about kid-hating”

For the life of me I cannot see how you can come to that conclusion.

Liberty and Justice? I guess it depends on your definitions. Liberty cannot be had because your liberty might interfere with someone else’s liberty. Justice is punishing someone whose exercise of their liberty interfered with you exercising yours.

Allow me to explain

In reply to I think you need to read it again.

“I think this whole thread is about kid-hating”

Giving children the impression that they are not accountable but that their teachers are makes a statement about positions of authority and responsibility that will motivate them to shun the very positions that are most important. That statement would be the hateful one to make.

The price of feeling safe

In reply to Ben had it right.

Go see the new movie “V for Vendetta” and you’ll see what our society would be like if we let our fears overtake us. Once we allow everything to be censored and controlled by “higher powers”, we lose our freedom little by little…eventually, all that’s left is a lot of security and a society living in fear of security breaches.

It all depends

In reply to The price of feeling safe

I can see the fear over “big brother” because sometimes when you give the government an inch it takes several thousand miles. I won’t bore you with the ever growing list of freedoms stripped away from the people of this country by our government.

Having said that, there are very simple solutions to this problem. Public and Private instutions have rights to setup and enforce rules on how their equipment is used. These rules are easy to setup and enforce with web filters such as Dansguardian, Smooth Web, or many other of the shelf firewalls. They block unwanted content and allow people to use the computers in the context they were ment to be used.

If you want to visit x-rated sites and community sites, buy your own computer and internet connection. Big brother should stop there. No monitoring without just cause and evidence.

Further, you should not blame MySpace for sexual predators. Where are the parents? When did the government and society become responsible for the actions of our kids? Parents should montitor their children’s internet activities and be responsible for their childrens activities and whereabouts.

Two things the Government has done lately in a “Big Brother” way:
1. Getting involved with the “.xxx” tld. They have no business there.
2. Giving Verisign a monopoly on the “.com” tld. Something that Network Solutions had for years, and when ICANN started allowing other companies register domain names the prices fell and service improved.

Big Brother – STAY OUT!

Well, maybe sometimes. Fortunately, not a Lot.

In reply to It all depends

“Public and Private instutions have rights to setup and enforce rules on how their equipment is used.”

They do? Because of what? Certainly, a private institution has more rights than a public one, but even those are narrow. If they don’t want free speech, they should take the computers away. But here in the good ol’ USA, we have free speech, and it should not be trammeled by fear. Only by real, identifiable threats.

Bull Hockey!

In reply to Well, maybe sometimes. Fortunately, not a Lot.

SendBux said “Certainly, a private institution has more rights than a public one, but even those are narrow.”

Excuse me? If you are being paid to do your employer’s work, on your employer’s computer equipment, over your employer’s high-speed data connection, then your employer has *TREMENDOUS* latitude in what they can say and do about your activities while using those resources. If agree with an earlier poster’s statement — if you want to be unmolested in your unsavory surfing, do it on your home computer, with your own Internet connection and on your own time.

The state is a racket

In reply to Ben had it right.

The state is a protection racket, not much different in kind from any organized crime syndicate. Just as the state fails in its ancillary functions, such as schooling and caring for the poor, so does it fail in its advertised primary function as an institution of protection. That?s why it?s a racket. That?s why it?s a fraud.

Absolutely

In reply to Ben had it right.

To do this is an invasion of privacy QED. They should be taught how to use these fascilities in a responsible way, NOT spied on.

QED means you have proven your point

In reply to Absolutely

But you didn’t even present evidence in support of your claim.

In refutation of your claim that “To do this is an invasion of privacy,” I present the following:

What you describe as “this” is public control of the use of public computers, using methods including keyloggers. The public has as much right to dictate the use of its property as individuals have to dictate the use of their own property. There is no right to privacy in public, only in private. There is no right to use the property of others, which by definition includes public property, and when such property is made available, there is no inherent right to expect that such use is unconditional nor private.

If I loan you my computer, I have the right to install a keylogger on that computer, and not tell you about it. If I sell you a computer, I do not have the right to install a keylogger on that computer, and not tell you about it. Public schools make public property available to the individuals attending and employed there. They do not transfer ownership of the public’s property to the students and employees of the school. The state has every right to enforce our appropriate usage rules using keyloggers, because we collectively own those computers being used at public schools. The individuals using the computers have no rights of ownership to any of the public facilities at the public schools they attend, and no more claim to a right to any control over that property than each of the taxpayers. By installing keyloggers, the taxpayers are merely reminding the students and state employees using these publicly owned computers that the public owns the computers, and makes them available to individuals for educational use defined by the public, not by the individual users’ whims.

Any expectation of privacy in a public school, outside of a lavatory or locker room, is irrational. That, sir, is how a premise is proven.

QED

where is the love?

In reply to QED means you have proven your point

No, you may not loan your key-logging computer without telling a person it is bugged, any more than you may record a telephone conversation without forewarning.

It called entrapment and it is illegal.

That is private.

In reply to where is the love?

The location of “the love”, in all seriousness, is none of your damned business!

I may do anything I want to my computer, and you have no [b]rights[/b] while using it unless you are the legal owner of it.

It is called my property, and that is absolute.

Pure an Simple

In reply to QED means you have proven your point

TRUTH, unimpeachable pure and simple.
Laws exist because people can’t or won’t control themselves. As long as such controls stay within the confines of such necessary controls I’m all for it. But then I’m also one of those who think that the concept of Freedom OF Religion is not the same as Freedom FROM Religion. The latter being one of the erosions of my freedom being foisted on me (and I think US) via minority opinion through government. I think the connective tendrils of this are intricately being woven in ways that are NOT in the best interest of “freedom and security”.

Way off track though I suppose….

It’s not about YOU!

In reply to Ben had it right.

I don’t believe the school is telling teachers and students that they can’t visit porn sites and use curse words. The school is telling them that they can’t do it on school time and/or property. To tell a student that they cannot pray or talk about God at school is supposed to be O.K. but, it is fine for them to seek out porn and distribute profanity is O.K. is not the message we want to send to our youth or teaching professionals.

With two-thirds of graduating seniors unable to pass an 8th grade math test I can’t see where they would, or should, have time and resources to dwell in the porn world.

Not sure of your “right”

In reply to Ben had it right.

Schools are not democracys, nor are they “free”. You are there to learn and are given assignments you must complete and are graded on them. You are given choices within your ability to intelligently make them. Pick your own subject, but WRITE THE REPORT.

Privacy? You do not now have the right to have your own private arsenal or drug supply in your school locker. Same with porn on your computer.

Oh…BTW…We are a Republic, not a Democracy. They teach that in schools.

“Nanny state”. Nannys (are you Brit?) seem like a good idea for children (which are what you find in schools – not fully cognitive equiped adults.

Once your grow up and no longer require a Nanny or any supervision you can read what you want…but while your little pea picking mind is still without the ability to make critical decisions (happens about age 25) you will need and society will need some one to guide you and to protect itself. Yes, protect itself. Lots of interesting stuff on the Internet that someone without a real grasp of results and repercussions might just try out of pique, anger, or curiosity.

Judgement comes with age and experience and most teachers and parents have the goal of giving you experience but ensuring you survive the process. (and that they do too)

So… think and do as you wish… when you becomme and adult and fully understand the concept of consequences. Until then… Teachers, Parents and many others (the villlage thing) will try to protect your sorry ass from the more tragic errors.

Agree in the broad sense

In reply to Ben had it right.

It is accepted in todays society to legislate to protect people from themselves. It is becoming a too “protected society’ in some ways and a big business. This has come about in a cultural & attitude shift as a result of the big push for the individual to have rights above all else. On the other side the rest of us have to be protected from the individual.
In the old days of “book learning” the control was in the hands of the teachers & librarian. They filtered all available materal. This control has been taken away with the internet and they are faced with the realisation that they have to “teach self control” to those that do not want to be controlled as they believe they have inate rights to do what they want – they are very wrong and need to be educated to understand the ramifications of their attitudes.
The use of monotoring tools to show them what behaviour modification they need is nessary in todays world of abticated parenting attitudes.
The education system is getting bogged down trying to do the parental & social work of a large group of todays breaders – who are not parents in the real sense of the job. How we deal with this is an ever changing challenge that no one wants to own.
So each educational place has to undertake what they see is best suited for their social environment and avialable resources to deal with issue as best as they can.

Who are we to be critical of thier efforts – are we prepared to do it for them – No
So we should be supportive and provide a range of solutions that are free and work in these situations

Education

In reply to In larger interest

In most cases educating the users is the best way. If they get a better understanding of the situation then they can make their own choices and take their own risks (if that’s what they want).

What was it the Thomas Moore said in the play “A Man for all Seasons – ” . . and when you have torn down all the laws in the land to get to the Devil, where will you hide when he turns on you?” or something like that.

If you remove your privicy rights then anyone can have access to your life. Block trouble, don’t look for trouble.

Come on

In reply to Education

When you were in high school an had that neat adolesent mind, didn’t your curiosity start to peak. Now I’ll let you guess how old I am by my answer. When I was in High School the only sources we had were “girly Magazines” and health books. Now, with the internet, anything goes. My kids have more access to things than I could have ever imagined when I was a teen ager. My folks used to monitor my behavior by knowing where my brother and I stashed our girly mag’s. So what has changed. Technology has allowed us to look for the hiding places. Those who want to know what their kids are doing and use the information properly to foster the growth process of young minds are really with the issue. Those who want to punish need to rethink what it is they are doing to the future values of our society.

Trouble is Distracting, Education is conditioned respose

In reply to Education

If a married couple pay taxes and people with children recieve earned income credit on taxes, Who is paying to condition who’s children?
Get your hand out of my pocket and don’t blame me for the actions of others. I’ve ben punched in the face enough.
If I’m done with my job,I improve my surroundings, I don’t brag about how easy things are, I complain about how inadequate my methods are. I don’t look to someone for answers that are staring me in the face.
aren’t the schools in poor maintenace, TELL THIS FOOL TO GET OFF HIS ASS AND FIX SOMETHING.

Other considerations also apply

In reply to In larger interest

He didn’t specify, but if he works in a public school system, there are other points to consider:

Since most students are minors, they are legally incapable of making their own decisions, regardless of their actual capabilities. For these minor students, the schools act as the parent during the school day (what the law calls “in loco parentis”). Therefore it is the job of the schools to protect students like a parent would while school is in session, usually using blanket policies for things such as internet access.

Use of computers in schools is a PRIVILEGE, not a right; the student must use the computer wisely. Most school systems have some form of network use agreement signed by the parent and older students. This agreement specifies the conditions under which the student can use school computers & network access. Violations of this agreement can result in loss of computer privileges.

Classroom computers with network access divert student attention more often than not. When I taught computer repair, I often intentionally disconnected my classroom from the school network with no loss in instructional capability and great improvement in student attention.

Finally, as a taxpayer, I expect school computers to be used for school work. Email, chat, MySpace, games, and porn don’t have anything to do with school work.

Re:Other Considerations

In reply to Other considerations also apply

You couldn’t have said it better. School is school, you want to chat, e-mail, go to MySpace or Waste of Space then do it on your own time.

Porn is a time killer and doesn’t add any value to education. Furthermore it has no place in the Corp world.

No one disputes monitoring – just the method

In reply to Other considerations also apply

Keystroke monitoring is resource intensive and can be avoided by a knowledgeable user. Most corporations use simple software that works at the gateway and blocks access to sex sites, chat rooms etc. Since this is on a computer that the user cannot access they cannot get around it. It also uses much less resources than the logger approach.

Using a keystroke logger is the sort of approach a control freak like Stalin or Mao Tse Tung would use.

The intent is good the method is wrong.

I just remembered an old example of the gateway approach that a keylogger would never have picked up. Go back about 10 years and virtually all commercial web site were http://www.????.com, very few had the country code after them. A British publishing house calle Whitehouse registered http://www.whitehouse.com – they printed ‘glamour’ and soft pron magazines. Many schools had students access the govt website as part of learning to use the Internet – the intended web site being http://www.whitehouse.gov. However, many kids would type .com instead of .gov as they were more familiar with the .com addresses – result a soft pron web site. Some schools resolved this by entering a line on their school dns server which converted http://www.whitehouse.com to http://www.whitehouse.gov no problems after that. I believe the USA govt have since bought the .com address as well.

NB: some schools REQUIRE students to use computers for certain assignments – that makes it a right. I have heard of assignments being refused because they were hand written – the student came from a poor family and had no home computer.

good reply!

In reply to No one disputes monitoring – just the method

I agree with your post so whole-heartedly.

You put sweeties down at pushchair height at the supermarket checkout don’t act surprised when junior reaches out and grabs some.

Removing the temptation of porn sites, game sites, etc at the gateway is technically easy and removes the need usage snooping.

There is an argument “if its available then it’s ok”

In reply to In larger interest

It’s a bit like supermarkets putting sweets at the checkout at baby-in-pushchair height. It’s incitement!!!

If you want to bar people from looking at specific sites then bar the site at the server – the technology is there. There is no excuse for spying on people.

There is something wrong about a society that deliberately sets traps to see if somebody will fall for it – I always did have problems with that ‘apple in the garden’ story …

The “apple in the garden” is a deliberate hoax

In reply to There is an argument “if its available then it’s ok”

Imagine if legend had said “to not eat your own waste”.?
road apple was the translation

I hate the aspect of Monitoring – However we dont go to School to View Porn

In reply to In larger interest

I think the School has it right in principle, however the way the are monitoring Key strokes is nothing short of invasion of privacy.

Any X rated site should just not be accessible ? Every school, not just this one, should employ content filtering to both students and staff.

Before you start yelling at me, I dont think of ANY organization spends a great deal of money in providing the infrastructure, management and expansion so that people can view X rated sites OR have any type of access to chat rooms.

Just because we have the technology and the information that the Internet brings does not mean any school student and I would extend this to Business should have unrestricted access to it.

Where does anyone get it in their mind that unrestricted access to the Internet is essential or even an assumed right in a school or even a Corporate world.

I am certain those parents paying school fees for their children to be educated and those companies who are paying staff hourly to sit in chat rooms would have the same view.

We have been educating and conducting business since time began ? without the Internet. Now we certainly can learn a lot from the vast quantity of information to the students desk or in business communications,sales and advertising sharply more productive.

The way to keep it safe is NOT to monitor keystrokes, – that IS Big Brother.

Its not very difficult to employ very efficient content filtering and/OR restrict access. You can even install programs that have bad words dictionaries.

Quality of life, and the world as we know it is NOT going to grind to a halt if the Internet falls over.

Corporate rights – but very confrontational

In reply to “Big Brother”

The school has the corporate right, and responsibility, to see that inappropriate use of the system does not occur, but this is an extremely provocational way of doing it. There are much easier and cheaper ways to get the same result. The keystroke monitoring software will require a lot of someone’s time to check and is very invasive and denies any privacy.

The aims of the system should be to stop access to unapproved inappropriate web sites and abusive language, right.

Most mail client and web browsers now have built in controls to eliminate inappropriate language.

There are dozens of applications that can be placed on the gateway server that monitors website access and can easily be set to bar access to black listed websites. So when you see someone access one that is not appropriate you add it to the black list and bar future access.

There should be no need for staff or students to access chat or IM programs outside the school, so just block those ports at the gateway. This allows the use of chat and IM within the organisation but blocks exterior usage or access. The unaproved web based services like this can be put on the web site black list.

Even the students have a right to say what they like in their personal diaries or to use what passwords they want. A very common soft way of releasing anger re systems is to use abusive passwords, and that is really their business and no one elses.

The keystroke business can also lead to other problems. I once worked in a place where a fellow could not not send emails to a close friend in asia due to excessive monitoring and managing software – it eliminated the emails as abusive as the asian gentleman’s email address was ifuk@…. his name was Ian Fuk (and old and not uncommon asian name.) The system must have some way to allow sensibility of use. Excessive and confrontational controls like you mention are just a clear statement that they do NOT want the students or staff using the school system at all.

I would not be surprised to see the students rally and refuse to utilise the school IT system, and then where will the school be. The students won’t get as good grades as they should and that will adversely reflect upon the school and the teaching staff. Also the low usage rate of the system would ague against any future upgrades or expansion of services and staff – it would argue for reductions of them.

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to Corporate rights – but very confrontational

The normal process of assumption of innocence has been reversed in many so-called security related issues lately. We used to assume that everybody was inncoent unless caught doing something wrong, the current process automatically assumes guilt, and therefore everybody must be constantly monitored to prevent them committing crimes.

The basic security precautions should be taken as suggested above at the gateway, blocking udesirable applications and ports, after all you don’t leave the house unlocked when you go down the shops, but by the same measure you don’t have a private eye constantly watching your neighbours in case they step foot on your property.

The presumption of innocence is important to society, the presumption of guilt is not just Orwellian, it suppresses creativity, innovation and development. Basically the school is teaching the students to distrust everybody, but trust is an important factor in our social lives. Students grow and respond to responsibilty and trust and learn to become responsible members of society, the exact oposite happens when they are surrounded by suspicion and distrust. It is a very dangerous step to take, not just in terms of IT Security, but for social development, for which schools are very much responsible these days.

Forget the IT side for now and consider the social implications for the future.

Ernest, and making the STAFF look bad

In reply to Corporate rights – but very confrontational

I think your right about usage going down, but that will make the STAFF look bad for failing to “instruct” the students in using the computers without showing the root cause of their refusal.

The implimentors will be the ones to suffer, not the students.

While this is justified and legal, it does seem like the IT-Nazies running around on a power kick more than concern for the safety of the children.
[b]
I HATE IT-Nazies.

Too true – other options available

In reply to Ernest, and making the STAFF look bad

The idea of key stroke logging is clearly the thought of a control freak as there are so many other options available that would allow easy reasonable access to the Internet for approved purposes without being so intrusive.

As someone who has worked on secure Internet gateways and set up these systems I have had to deal with that classic arguement of what can and cannot be done on corporate assets. The basic line is that they belong to the owner and they decide what can and cannot be done as they are legally responsible for what they are used for to some extent.

However, in every work place situation you are also allowed some basic privacy, especially during breaks and can usually leave the premises at breaks (if time permits). Also you have chosen to work there and can always quit and leave. That is NOT the case for the majority of school students, they are made, by law, to go there and are usually not alowed to leave during the day. Despite this they should be allowed some measure of privacy for drafting personal correspondence in their free or break time. The keystroke logging invades this privacy.

Old to us, but new to every high school class

In reply to Corporate rights – but very confrontational

“Even the students have a right to say what they like in their personal diaries or to use what passwords they want.”

One of my students decided he was going to have some fun with the school network on the first day of school as everybody was signing on and creating their new passwords. Ignoring the instructions for creating an eight-character password, he spoke his new password out loud as he typed it in: P…E…N…I…S and pressed enter. The system response was (of course!): “Password too short!”

Passive monitoring

In reply to “Big Brother”

I manage computer networks for a number of schools in our area. One common thing we have implemented is Deep-Freeze which takes care of the spyware and virus side of things.

The second part of our standard practice is what is applicable in this case. We use a monitoring program which does screen captures sliding scale depending on amount of activity. it will go as often as 1 frame per second, or 1 frame every 5 minutes depending on the level of usage… ie no changes to screen, less frames shot.

These “movie” files are stored on the server in a controlled area and are “spot checked” by senior staff for possible problems. Also, in the event there is any problems with a student or staff member, the files associated with thier use can and are reviewed.

This practice has averted several predator situations, several bullying situations, and a few other incidents which ended up being turned over to local authorities.

I am a vocal proponant of privacy, however when it comes to our children, I think the fact that this program saved at least one (and in fact several) children from negatively life altering events makes the social cost worth it.

It should be noted that it is the policy of the programs I am involved it to not persue transgressions which are not life threatening and are otherwise legal. IE if a kid happens to go to a porn site, they are not going to have the system come down on them. (Although it is against the “official” accepted uses policy) However if that visit leads to inappropriat contact from a possible predator, then action is taken.

Your school allowes the site past the firewall – you are as guilty as the c

In reply to Passive monitoring

It is technically feasible to bar these sites at the gateway – if you do not you are negligent in your duty of care.

Who runs the school?

In reply to “Big Brother”

What’s wrong with “Big Brother” watching what’s going on with “His” equipment and money? Schools are there for learning. If the teachers and students want to go to chat rooms and X rated sites… let them do it at home on THEIR computers where no one will be watching them.

Who’s network?

In reply to Who runs the school?

The line we take with the students is that it is school equipment and that it is a priveledge for them to use it. This also goes for the storage of illegal MP3s on OUR servers taking up OUR storage space.

That is not really the case any more

In reply to Who’s network?

Here in Australia many schools require that the students use computers to research and prepare assignments. I have even seen cases where students got down graded because they did not have the Internet at home and were unable to use a computer to finalise a ‘nice’ presentation for the teacher. When asked about this the teaching staff, and school management, state that the students have Internet and computer access at school.

In such cases use of the equipment is a neccessity not a privilege, and in regards to technology the Australian schools usually follow that of the USA schools.

BTW how is the keylogger going to differentiate between the use of the word ‘sex’ in an electronic form for gender, or the use of ‘sex’ in a biology paper, or the use of ‘sex’ in any other context.

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to That is not really the case any more

The priveledge is freely given and would be denied to no-one using the school equipment for legitimate purposes. These do not include playing games, viewing porn or listening to illegal MP3s. The line is quite a clear one and I would have thought it is quite a basic principle that when using someone elses property you respect it.

More network monitoring is necessary in a school environment

In reply to “Big Brother”

I am sorry, but I have very little sympathy for your complaint. In response to your concern:

1) It is a ?corporate?, taxpayer paid, computers and network. They have a legal right to make sure it is being used for education and not entertainment or diversion from the task at hand – either teaching a child to think as well as a child or teacher to research or educate more completely. IM should be blocked completely.

2) In today?s litigious society, it seems that every reasonable technological protection should be employed. Barely a month goes by where the print media has some sensational story about a teacher having some sort of inappropriate relations with a student, child porn, etc. or a child bringing a gun or worse to school intending on harming someone or protecting themselves from a bully. If they intend on having computers in the school, this software is probably what is reasonable to protect themselves.

3) Unless you are doing something wrong, why are you complaining?

Slightly off topic:

Although there is a great deal of educational information on the internet, I am opposed to computers even being in schools as I believe it diverts the focus from teaching and learning – with some exception to some of the educational programs more likely on CD/DVD these days. There are exceptions where there is a teacher who can really use it as a tool, but this is often not the case. I know a number of teacher that are technologically inept, but very good at explaining/teaching. Google is not the only way to research and other ways are being pushed aside and may not taught. I believe in the ?Feed a person fish and they will eat well tonight, Teach a person to fish and they will know how to feed themselves the rest of their life?. Schools need to teach critical thinking, how to research, looking at multiple resources to find answers – not how to look things up on a computer.

A computer is a tool, no more, no less. As a teacher a number of years ago taught me, ?If all you have is a hammer in your toolbox, all your problems start to look like nails?.

RE: slightly off topic

In reply to More network monitoring is necessary in a school environment

I agree, teachers need to teach, not babysit while the students surf.

Big Brother Reply

In reply to “Big Brother”

I don’t think it is a bad thing to stop the students and teachers from entering such websites. I think that people that enter these sites at a work or school have something wrong with their heads.Even if you think that just chatting isn’t a concern it is how many of these teachers are married and if at college how many of these students are married? Well in case they don’t know it if they are entering into these sites talking about hooking up or flirting and or entering the xrated websites and they like what they see then they are in one form commiting adultry because to lust with ones eyes is the same as doing the deed. I am not some crazy spiritual Guy. But I belive that at certain places such as School,Work,and Government places there should be hard penelties for entering these sites and there should be a program to watch this also That is a good thing. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to give my opinion.

Not a crazy spiritual Guy my a**

In reply to Big Brother Reply

The hell you aren’t “some crazy spiritual Guy”. When you justify Big Brother actions as necessary to prevent moral decay (as you define it), then yes you are a dangerous religous nut case. A school/business is justified in restricting use of their equipment to defined purposes, which I doubt would include visting porn sites. But we don’t need nut cases like you trying to force your particular flavor of morality onto others. Live your life virtuosly as you define it, and others may follow your lead. My life life decisions are between me and my maker. He will “judge the quick and the dead”. As for you, mind your own business and don’t act as if you are the arbitor of God’s will.

Probably Least Intrusive Form of Monitoring

In reply to “Big Brother”

Though some of the details are missing, this sounds like the most unobtrusive means of monitoring.

I do feel the school has a responsibility for the way its resources are useand it is not acceptable for the school to do nothing. Having a computer system without a man in the loop monitoring activity seems to protect the privacy of those making legitimate use of resources. What is unclear is who is notified. Is the notification a pop-up to the user, a keyboard lock-out, a message to the system staff, or what?

Of concern to legitimate users would be the policies around access to the logged keystrokes. How long are the keystrokes kept? Are they stored on disk or sent over the network? Are they encrypted? Who has access to the keystrokes? Can the user purge the keystroke buffer? The keystroke buffer will contain user names, passwords, credit card numbers, and other identifying information. The system must be set up to adequately guard against disclosure of this type of information.

I think an approach based on automated monitoirng of keystrokes with adequate access control would be the most benign method of monitoring system access. I believe this would protect the rights of the innocent while admitting some are not quite so innocent.

Not so inobtrusive

In reply to Probably Least Intrusive Form of Monitoring

While I am a proponent of monitering, I do have a problem with Keystroke monitering as it opens up a huge liability and security hole. Specifically, if someone accesses thier bank account (including staff doing buisiness for the school) the account id and password are being recorded. This becomes a point of both liability if the information ends in the wrong hands, etc.

I much prefer the method I described above in my earlier post whereby passwords and so on are only recorded as the *** that they appear as on screen. The important info re activity is still being recorded without creating the potential for security problems.

Agree

In reply to Not so inobtrusive

The key stroke logging is not so great an idea.

Not so inobtrusive

In reply to Not so inobtrusive

In the system implemented where i work it only records key stroke combinations. If I was to type F U it would begin to record after the word is finished F U N it realizes that it is not an offensive word therefore no report will be filed. On the other hand if a perons password is offensive it will report that person.

School responsibility is no right to intrusiveness

In reply to Probably Least Intrusive Form of Monitoring

The school has a responsibility to protect inappropriate use of its assets. However that can be done with simple gateway controls not excessively intrusive keystroke logging. The trouble is that most schools will not set up a gateway and use only a modem router for Internet access – that has no security at all.

School students are required by law to stay on the school grounds when not in class (with very few exceptions) and they often have free periods and break time for personal activities. The schools usually allow the students to use the computers to write essays etc and also personal notes.

The system in the original post means that someone in the school is going to spend time looking at everything the students do on the computer, and inappropriate use of staff time, and thus breach the personal privacy of the students.

Simpler and easier is another computer as the gateway set to block access to IM, chat and inappropriate sites that are black listed. It can even be set to monitor what sites are used that are not on the ‘white’ list and they can be reviewed on a regular basis. This will stop the inapproopriate access on the Internet and not invade student privacy.

If they insist on invading student privacy then they should allow the students to leave the facility and go where they like when they do not have classes on.

No “right” of privacy at issue here…never was

In reply to School responsibility is no right to intrusiveness

There is no right…or reasonable expectation of…privacy at issue here. Implied, explicit, or otherwise, it does not exist. These students have no right to privacy while on school grounds (actually, they have no inherent right to privacy elsewhere either). As long as they have a parent, legal guardian, or someone standing in loco parentis (i.e. the school and its agents) that entity has the right to inspect, examine, pry into, spy, you name it. This is not new, this is not anything related to the internet, they never had the right to expect privacy to begin with.

You can not invade something that does not exist.

Anyone begging to disagree is more than welcome to engage in a dicsussion…but please bring something beyond your emotional “Oh yes they DO have a right to privacy!” with you when you come…like case law or some accepted interpretation of the constitution…

here’s an emotional response

In reply to No “right” of privacy at issue here…never was

my rights no more depend on the laws and constitution of a particular country than iraqi rights depended on saddam hussein’s constitution. elites create laws and structures to benefit themselves and use ideology to get people to accept things as they are. nobody would be willing to fight and die for corporate profit or dick cheney, that’s why it’s called “freedom” and “democracy” (respectively).

the nature and scope of rights is the subject of debate, but rights inhere in each of us by virtue of the fact that we’re human beings.

welcome to reality. i don’t want my kids not to swear or be exposed to sex. i want them to do it intelligently and when it’s natural and when they’re ready–not when the school is ready or i’m ready. and i sincerely hope to have taught them well enough to make good decisions and to swear at the right people, just as i hope that each day they benefit themselves and society by bringing good into the world.

i strongly expect my kids to be protected from predation, but not to have their keystrokes logged every time they type fcuk or p0t or whatever into instant messager. that’s called spying. if my kid’s keystrokes were being spied upon, i would do everything practical to stop it, while encouraging them to apply creativity and brainpower in figuring out how to circumvent, stop, or protest it themselves. i’m not raising sheep here. rather, i want to raise intelligent, critical, and active social and moral agents.

it’s the school’s business to educate and protect but not spy or limit a child’s use of language in private conversation. there’s even a limit as to how much it’s *my* business. i don’t care that other parents want their kids to not be exposed to sex or profanity until they’re 40. that’s not *my* morality, that’s yours, so keep it in your church and your trailer where it belongs and be prepared to use that college fund on therapy instead.

block p0rn and whatever else you want at the firewall and bring my kid’s other actions or violations to my attention so i can deal with it myself.

as for keeping files like mp3s on school HDDs, i would hope that educators realize that a good way to encourage kids to learn about technology is through some of the ways it can be used for fun. at the company i work for people make part of their living my ensuring the supply of streaming media (yes, even p0rn). on the other hand, a really superb and nearly foolproof way to discourage kids from learning is through the use of unnecessarily restrictive policy.

all right, call me a shocking moral relativist godless communist sex-crazed libertarian hippy now. i’m waiting. don’t call social services, though, since i don’t actually have any kids yet. but when i do, they’ll be little hackers. white hat, i hope.

(wow, my first post to techrepublic)

No, no phone calls to anyone…

In reply to here’s an emotional response

Just a simple reply, Peter…all emotion and rhetoric aside; until or unless the constitution/bill of rights/legal system changes, your little hackers will not have any legally protected expectations of privacy (except the previously bathroom rights…and those have limits) until they reach their legal majority or are emancipated by a court.

You may think it sucks, others agree with you. If you don’t like it bad enough…home school your little white hats 🙂

true.

In reply to No, no phone calls to anyone…

yeah, of course that’s true.

if i had to choose between home schooling and having their keystrokes logged, i’d take the logging, of course.

(i’d hope to be rid of them for at least a few hours a day 😉

but seriously, the origianl post does call up a lot of issues, at least to me, especially in the times we live in today. (phone & email tapping, cameras on streetcorners, DRM-equipped operating systems 😉 etc.)

i hope that increased ability to surveil (sp?) doesn’t cause more surveillance without good reason.

Here’s something to discuss

In reply to No “right” of privacy at issue here…never was

Go read the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, the writings of Jefferson, Hamilton, Paine, and Franklin, and then tell me you still think the Founding Fathers didn’t think privacy was an innate right. Go on, I’ll be here when you’re done. I’ve already done this, so I’ll be waiting on you to bother to read what they wrote instead of pontificating on what you thought they might have said.

The reason they didn’t explicitly delineate it in the Consititution is because it was something so fundamental that they didn’t think it bore mentioning–much like they didn’t think it necessary to include instructions on how to breathe–and because it was wrapped up in their concept of liberty, so they thought it redundant. In fact, many of the representatives at the Constitutional Convention wanted the word “privacy” put it so that if a certain moron stole himself an election two hundred years in the future, he couldn’t say that the War of Terror overrides an individual’s right to privacy (which, BTW, is one of the grievances they listed in the Declaration of Independence). They had already been through that kind of BS with King George, and they’d had enough of that attitude that they, “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, … mutually pledge[d] to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor”.

In other words, they were willing to die for something you cavalierly dismiss as nonexistent.

I’m glad to discuss that.

In reply to Here’s something to discuss

Provided that we also discuss the views of Jefferson, Hamilton, Paine, and Franklin on the meaning of the words “provide for the general Welfare”. Oops, wrong, that was “[b]provide[/b] for the common defence, [b]promote[/b] the general Welfare.” So, maybe they weren’t communists, would not accept the premise of “public schools”, and would point out that in [b]public[/b], privacy is not a right. The right to privacy exists only in private, not in public.

Not really.

In reply to I’m glad to discuss that.

That’s the Supreme Court’s interpretation, but that doesn’t mean that interpretation is right. That’s an attempt to have your cake and eat it too–pay lip service to privacy by saying that you can have privacy in private, but make sure the government still has all the power they want by saying that’s not applicable in public.

But, for argument’s sake, let’s say that that interpretation isn’t wrong. How do phone calls I make from my home and library books I read in my own living room fall under the rubric of “public”, as the Idiot-in-Chief claims? Just because I have to walk into a library to check a book out doesn’t –or, at least, shouldn’t–make that automatically a public matter.

Agree with your P2.

In reply to Not really.

I Absolutely will not defend that piece of ****.

Back to your first paragraph, though, that’s an interesting wedge. My position is that the word “public” literally means “available to all” or “collectively owned”. Maybe the first definition should truly only apply to un-owned or publicly owned spaces that are truly intended for the use of any citizen, while “public schools” and other collectively owned facilities that are intended for a specific, limited subset of the population require a different definition.

I do know that I’m not in favor of giving children free run of tools that are billed to me, but I won’t argue for unlimited government power anywhere, ever.

Good points.

So ABS under that definition of Public

In reply to Not really.

Do you realize that lot covers everything not directly owned or operated by your Government but everything that is available for the Public to have use of?

That of course would mean that it is perfectly acceptable to intercept every electronic transaction that is ever used be it E-Mail, Web Browsing, Chat Room activities or even your Local Banking when you ever use it right?

You have a far too limited sense of the words and meaning of [b]Public Property[/b] and need to drastically improve your outlook on life in general. 😡

Col ]:)

I realize that HAL

In reply to Not really.

HAL9000: “Do you realize that lot covers everything not directly owned or operated by your Government but everything that is available for the Public to have use of?”

Yes, which is why I am willing to even discuss this point: maybe I [b]was[/b] too general in that statement — maybe. But I think kids should be kept on a short leash when using public facilities.

HAL9000: “You have a far too limited sense of the words and meaning of Public Property and need to drastically improve your outlook on life in general”

My outlook will improve when my life improves. Nobody is more eager for that than I am.

Try “reading for comprehension” next time, eh?

In reply to Here’s something to discuss

Next time, maybe you’ll read the whole post in context before jumping in and declaring yourself to have answered a comment that was not made. In no respect do I maintain there is no right to privacy in the constitution/bill of rights (nor did I say anything like that), and it is in fact one of the freedoms I protected as a Marine.

I did say that those “children” do not have the right to privacy vs the rights inherent in parental situations…and in a school, the school stands in loco parentis.

Do your homework and read what I write next time, before you thoughtlessly reply.

Cheers

“in loco parentis”

In reply to Try “reading for comprehension” next time, eh?

I believe that was challenged a bit during the 60’s & 70’s, but in public schools, for kids under 18, I think it still stands. Any lawyers on the Internet?

No?

Hmmm. AMBULANCE!!!

No it still applies

In reply to “in loco parentis”

Particularly if there is any form of abuse involved. Even with late teenage children if any sexual act are entered into between someone in authority like a teacher for example and a student even though school College may have finished hours previously when the offense comes to light that will be the wording on the charge sheet.

Col

Maybe

In reply to “in loco parentis”

If I could tell what you “where” trying to say, I could decide weather I agree or disagree.

Key stroke logging is very obtrusive and

In reply to Probably Least Intrusive Form of Monitoring

the stopping of inappropriate use can be doen more effectively with less use of staff time via the Internet gateway blocking access to the unapproved services and sites. The use of key stroke logging is the type of idea a control freak or a stickky beak would come up with.

Yes the schools have a right to manage the use of their network but the situation is NOT the same as at a workplace as the majority of students are forced to stay on the premises during breaks and most schools ban the use of private computers at school. So if they wish to draft any correspondence for later sending they have no choice in what they use.

This draconian approach will discourage the use of the school computers.

And don’t forget that there is no point in keeping logs unless you intend to review tham and that will take up a lot of someone’s time.

Who monitors the monitor

In reply to Key stroke logging is very obtrusive and

As stated many times here, I can understand the need to protect our children etc. In the use of key logging I am having a big problem here. What if a teacher used a school computer to order some supplies from ebay and paid with a credit card. Who keeps that information safe when using key loggers? Remember key loggers record “ALL” key strokes. There is now a file that has all the credit card info or account info needed for someone who can access that to break and use for identity theft. This is just one example of how the use of keyloggers could create more problems than solve. Block sites, absolutly, key loggers, no way.

who’s computer is it anyway

In reply to “Big Brother”

why is it otherwise sensible people dont seem to realize you visit your personal favorites on your home computer and go to business related sites only when you are at the company workstations.

Network Admins have every right and infact it is their/our responsability to monitor what goes in on the network unter their care.

the proliferation of crippling spyware and firuses can be attributed primarlily to people going to unauthrorzed sites

As a matter of fact, they are mine…

In reply to who’s computer is it anyway

Computers “owned” by the school are on loan from the taxpayers who purchased them, thus making the decision as to keylog or not to keylog a democratic one. Unfortunatly, I am sure that the people that made that choice didn’t have or gave themselves the authority to do so, on behalf of the majority.
I am sure the people using those computers would not agree to have their passwords/usernames in the hands of people who claim “authority for your own protection”.
But that said, network security is very important, for the mere reasoning of “Who’s keylogger is it anyway?” If there are no protections in place, there are going to be keyloggers running around all over the network, intentional or not.
I am a huge advocate of privacy, and think that more descrete methods such as proxy, port blocking, and stateful packet monitoring are a much better way to go.

Damn Straight Up They Are!

In reply to As a matter of fact, they are mine…

.. And I pay dearly for them with 30 years of invoices to prove it!
And I expect they would be used to foster an intellectual curiosity in the students (idealistic as I am).

There are content blockers that do the required job just fine. If my son were using a forum or blog (like this one), the last thing I expect is a bunch of piss-pot beaurocrats eavesdropping on his posts via a keylogger and formulating their twisted judgements and opinions of him. I’ve sat in enough parent teacher meetings facing the combined onslaught of so-called professionals who are incapable of dealing with an outspoken student trying to coerce me into medicinally lobotomizing him.

Would you put a bet on whether the state implementing this is red or blue?

whos computers?

In reply to Damn Straight Up They Are!

Go ahead and try to tell the school system that they are your computers because your tax dollars bought them and that YOU want full access to use them. I bet you will have a cop escorting you off school grounds for TRESSPASSING before you are allowed to use the computers for ANYTHING.

Spend some time with your kids, as YOU should be the leader of their “intellectual curiosity”, not the school system. It is called “parenting”. An old fashion idea I know, but it is a classic. Try it, you will like it.

Think before inserting…..

In reply to whos computers?

OK, first off; in the corprate the mantra is black and white: The corpration is paying for the machines, paying for the bandwidth, and paying your salary so they have every right to do what they please on the network. Second, and here is where it gets a little sticky; in the public environment there is a perception the property is owned by the citizens and subject to their whims and desires. This is only partially true (an attorney needs to provide the exact term here as it escapes me), as in the public sector we have elected leaders whom we have given the moral authority to make decisions on our behalf. If they do not, we elect a different leader. Relating this to education most states have local and state school boards who have been granted the authority by the electorate to make decisions on behalf of the public. They make the policy on your behalf as you have elected them and in that mandate given them the go ahead to make the decisions related to running a school system. So, if they want to monitor the living daylights out of the system then by all means they should. I see no difference here between the sectors on this issue. Please by all means tell me when it is necessary for school employees and students to have access to porn, mp3 sites, etc. as I fail to see the reason. In essence you are telling me there is not enough work to do in the day for both the student and staff so they have time to burn surfing useless sites on the taxpayers dime.

one point wrong, Miles999

In reply to Think before inserting…..

[i]”we have elected leaders whom we have given the moral authority”[/i]

No, we have given them the [b]LEGAL[/b] authority.

I am slightly confused why your post is following mine though. Are you agreeing and reenforcing what I put, or is there a point I made that you are trying to contend?

hear, hear

In reply to whos computers?

Sometimes I can and sometimes i can’t say things better. This time it’s the latter one. :0

Even more I do agree with you. 🙂
What is even more astonishing. 😀

Rob

If I wanted a fight…

In reply to whos computers?

They’d have a hard time convicting me for tresspassing on public property. Just because law enforcment is behind them doesn’t make them right, and even if they did somehow convict, they’d still be wrong!

when you try it

In reply to If I wanted a fight…

don’t forget your foil hat, because your either nuts or just forgot to take your meds today.

Not everything that is paid for by tax dollars is open for your use.

Try to go borrow a rifle or two from the military. Walk into the cop shop and let them know you want to check out a few handguns because they were paid for with your tax dollars.

If you do not have PERMISSION to be in a public school, the police will be called and you will rightly be taken away and convicted.

Don’t you live a little north to be such a nut case?

Not Physically Ours But We Control

In reply to whos computers?

I would totally be expected to be arrested for attempting to sieze public property. As far as having control over that property, I am the public and would expect my elected officials (school board, selectmen) to put the keystoke logger ‘ultimate solution’ to a quick and painful death with a good dose of embarrassment in favor of a less intrusive option. Of course that is based upon the assumption that my fellow public has higher that average computer and technology literacy and leans a little more to the left, both of which I pay for in blood by living where I do.

I’m also under the opinion that unless a school combines a heavy dose of by-the-book curriculum with intellectual stimulation, it’s doomed to miserable failure. Being a product of a private high school, its painful to compare the public school curriculum to private school (local one is $28,000 per year, $21,000 if room and board not required). I have to shut up and entrust my son to public schooling and his peers during the day. My parental efforts are then consumed sitting on him when I come home to make sure he follows up on his homework assignments and is staying out of trouble. Meanwhile, he’s got all the freedom he earns.

Funny and scary at the same time!

In reply to Not Physically Ours But We Control

[i]”the assumption that my fellow public has higher that average computer and technology literacy”[/i]

What fantasy land are you living in? The Majority of people are lucky to be able to turn a computer on. Why do you think AOL is so popular?

[i]”leans a little more to the left”[/i]
Now THAT is a scary thought. Last thing we need now is a bunch of people insisting instead of concentrating on a good educational foundation, we need to get side tracked by having the schools teach social issues. ~~shudder~~

That is enough to keep someone awake at night! :p

Get Real

In reply to As a matter of fact, they are mine…

The computer system is not owned by the public and this is not a debatable issue.

We hire teachers and expect both discipline in the classroom and an education. Then we moan and groan because rules are established to do just that and we use the Constitution and “our rights” to justify our cry of censorship.

Are we stupid or plain dumb?

The computers were put in the school for a purpose. That is the purpose they should be limited to. Academia and valid research are ok but I don’t think these two items are related to pornography, chat rooms, My Space or games.

I recently took a course at a Community College and a student (unable to keep up with the class) complained about the quality of the teacher. The fact is, he spent his class time playing games, writing Email and other computer work unrelated to the class. Why then should he complain? The same is true in the public school system. My son failed English but is a pro at on line computer games. (His school does not monitor.)

If we will not support an educational system, then anything those great ancestors said about freedom and liberty is so much B.S. Un educated populations do not remain at liberty very long. We are losing ground internationaly in education and we are arguing about our liberty to ignore the teacher and be on line doing “our own thing”.

Certainly there is a relationship between the two.

If you want to maintain a good social structure it must be educated. Education is not cyber- surfing. The kids do not go to school to cyber- surf, they go there to learn. If we do not allow the administration to use the tools at hand to teach and maintain classroom discipline then we are cutting out own throats and bleeding to death and are to foolish to recognize the fact.

It has nothing to do with research or academia, it has everything to do with teaching and learning about the required subjects.

At a school

In reply to “Big Brother”

Teachers should be teaching the curriculum, and students should be learning it. Anything not related to that curriculum should be eliminated.

As the computers are school property, there can be no expectation of privacy.

Re: At a school

In reply to At a school

adunlap wrote:
As the computers are school property, there can be no expectation of privacy.

Hmmm. . . Bathrooms at school are school property.
Should you expect no privacy in one of them?

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to Re: At a school

There are laws covering bathrooms. There are laws covering telephones. These laws do not cover computers.

You’re right BUT

In reply to Reply To: “Big Brother”

Laws covering the use of telephones are VERY thin when it comes to company phones. In MOST cases, it is completely legal for your employer to listen in and record your calls as they so choose to.
I have worked quite extensively in Telecom as a quality assurance manager for CRTC and with the FCC, many people feel they have complete privacy on a company phone, but they usually don’t. It’s a common complaint but VERY rarely sees a courtroom as it just doesn’t stand up.

BS

In reply to You’re right BUT

You can not record a conversation unless you explicitly inform both parties the conversation is being recorded. This is the reason why every helpdesk you call has the “this call may be monitored or recorded”.

If people have the expectation of privacy, and you are vilolating that without notification, you are going to be having legal problems.

IE. I know of one company who monitors thier employees with video camera’s (extreeme, I know) However, the camera’s in someones office run only when thier door is open. If you shut the door, the camera turns off. Why? Because when the door is shut the people in the room belive they have privacy. You can not violate that without informing people.

You can record phone calls in 39 States

In reply to BS

The phone call laws in the US are generally misunderstood. Federal law allows recording of phone calls and other electronic communications with the consent of at least one party to the call. A majority of the states and territories have adopted wiretapping statutes based on the federal law, although most also have extended the law to cover in-person conversations. Thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia permit individuals to record conversations to which they are a party without informing the other parties that they are doing so. These laws are referred to as “one-party consent” statutes, and as long as you are a party to the conversation, it is legal for you to record it.

Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping.

Regardless of the state, it is almost always illegal to record a conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent to tape, and could not naturally overhear.

Misunderstood is an understatement

In reply to You can record phone calls in 39 States

See my reply in a later (chronologically earlier) post. While you may be entitled to record a conversation in which you are a party without having informed the other party of having done so. You better be VERY careful about what you then do with the recording. For the most part such recordings are NOT admissible in a court proceeding without meeting some pretty stringent exceptions. The use of business lines and business equipment to engage in such communication changes the rules. In this day in age that particular facet of law is in serious flux.

What’s your point?

In reply to You can record phone calls in 39 States

The fact that you CAN do something doesn’t make it RIGHT. I CAN buy a gun and shoot someone–that doesn’t make it RIGHT.

In some states

In reply to BS

both are required to know, in others only one party is required to know (and this applies to ANY conversations, not just telephone conversations). Of course, the standard “Your call may be recorded for quality assurance purposes.” is sufficient legal notice.

The law is a little behind the times when it comes to video. In a lot of places, it is still legal to record video without a person’s knowledge, as long as it is “silent” video (subject to other laws of course). The laws are catching up in this area though, many having recently been or are about to be changed.

No REOP on conversation

In reply to In some states

In a public place with the exception of a bathroom or a phonebooth. Wearing a wire to record a conversation is distinctly not the same as recording a telephone conversation where the Supreme Court – both US and in most States – have assigned an expectation of privacy. I challenge anyone to find codification that prohibits the recording of conversation in a public place. If that were true the Police would need a warrant to put a wire on an informer which they do not. The subsequent evidence from such a conversation is frequently used in court.

Informer

In reply to In some states

If he is visibly present at a conversation, he is legally party to it. Hiding behind the curtain, however, is a different story.

Wrong

In reply to BS

Aslong as ONE party is aware of the recording it is legal. This just ensures that a third party cannot secretly record a conversation. I have watched that law enforced quite a few times.

So…

In reply to Wrong

Oz_Media: “As long as ONE party is aware of the recording it is legal. This just ensures that a third party cannot secretly record a conversation. I have watched that law enforced quite a few times.”

When you “watched that law enforced”, were you the third party, the second or the first?

Recording private telephone conversation

In reply to Wrong

I don’t know what state you’re in but in Washington State and most of the other states in the union under both State and Federal Law a taped telephone conversation may only be introduced into evidence if, and ONLY if, ALL parties participating are aware of the fact that the conversation is being taped. In Washington State that is RCW 9.73.030.
You try to use a taped phone conversation as evidence in a court proceeding without the aforementioned caveats being met and you’ll find yourself on the wrong end of a liability suit.
I think you may be talking about the wearing of a wire in a public place where there is no reop (reasonable expectation of privacy) or a message left on an answering device. Both of which are completely different scenerios from that of a private telephone conversation.
Better do a bit more research and be careful not to offer legal advice without having passed the BAR….

re:wckall

In reply to Wrong

Actually Washington is one of only 10 or so states that has the requirement for ALL parties to be aware. The federal requirement is that only one party has to be aware.

It seems logical. If you tell me something, it is apparent that you wanted me to hear it, and that I can do anything I wish with the information (there are certain restrictions: Clergy, spouse, doctor). There is no logical difference between me telling someone what you said, or producing a recording of the conversation.

There’s a saying: Two can keep a secret … if one is dead 🙂

Reply to “BS” (90 of 254 as of this writing)

In reply to BS

In many states calls can be recorded as long as ONE person is aware of the recording; two-party notification states require an intermittent beep on the line.

What the idiot is REALLY missing

In reply to Reply to “BS” (90 of 254 as of this writing)

I am not even IN the USA. LOL.

Read his whack idea of office cams, because people THINK they have privacy…they do? This idiots been fooling himself too long, or living in Canada where you actually get some personal privacy rights, unfortunately most people take that security blanket way to far too.

You have to feel sory for people like that though. It must be so depressing to get up in the morning and see yourself in the mirror, then just sigh to yourself, “Ooooh, not YOU again!”.

In most states

In reply to You’re right BUT

an employer can listen long enough to determine whether or not the call is personal, and if it is, he should stop listening. That’s not to say you cannot be disciplined for making personal calls on company time.

Don’t be an idiot

In reply to Re: At a school

Of course one doesn’t lead to another. You PERSONAL privacy is protected by your country’s constitutional laws and this includes school bathrooms, where nothing BUT your personal privacy is involved.

Your privacy when using another person or institutions equipment is NOT guarunteed at all, in fact you have NO guarantee to privacy at all when you are in a classroom or using their educational hardware.

As the last poster said, just like any company you work for, they can track the way you use their business equipment anyway they want to.

Re:At a School

In reply to Re: At a school

Actually NO, and I don’t think we are talking about cameras etc. You have the right to use the facilities for what they were intended for. Likewise, one should use the computers for their intent; school work, study aid, research. NOT WasteSpace, Porn, Games or the like.

Property of the School (and therefore the State)

In reply to At a school

It has been litigated time and again, and time and again the corporations (and schools and state agencies) that own the computers win. You have no expectation of privacy on any device that is owned by the corporation, and they can monitor you any way they want.

Nobody so far has come up with the solution that I like to use. It is unobtrusive, there is no software to install (at the workstations), and it can’t be worked around or hacked!
Use a white list for Internet access. Only put on the sites that you want to allow the students to access, and they can’t go anywhere else! You can have another white list for faculty that might open up some sites that they might want. Our system includes a method for adding a site that a student wants; they must show educational benefit and have the teacher and principal approve it. Believe me, this is infinitely easier than trying to keep track of all the new ‘social-networking’ sites or web-proxy sites that pop up every week.

If you want to allow the students to use/learn the ‘technologies’ of the internet, use your own in-house IM, Chat, E-mail, and Blog server and let them run wild! (Of course, since the data is on your own servers, you have complete histories…)

White lists use less processing power, less manpower, and are more secure than ANY filtering software that I’ve ever seen.

P.S. In Oregon, the ISPs of K-12 schools are REQUIRED by law to filter porn sites, and other types of sites are in the legislative works. The white list means I don’t have to add new porn sites every week to block.

white list

In reply to Property of the School (and therefore the State)

would be a hard thing to keep up with if the computers are used for research, but for grade school that is more learning HOW to use the technology it would be fine.

I would hate to try to keep up with one in a corporate structure though. Everytime you got a new client or needed to find a vendor you would have to have someone ready to jump to add this in.

As for the orgeon, this would be the same as the arguement used in Michigan to remove many cigarette machines from public places that aren’t monitored, because kids could access them to get smokes. (did that myself back in the 70’s, a few times. enough to know I didn’t want to smoke!)

If your making it accessable, you are providing it.

The same should be true for a library to a point. No one should be allowed to surf porn on any public computer, ever. Buy your own or go buy a playboy.

Corporate white lists – easy

In reply to white list

White lists are much easier than blacklists to manage, even in the corporate technology workspace.

We have different whitelists in varying degrees of ‘severity’ for different groups. The whitelists are available for download (just as are many blacklists) and have categories assigned; shopping, warez, porn, children (meaning SAFE for children), etc. We apply them as ACL on the outbound router and POOF! nobody gets where they’re not supposed to go!

Now, how many business users need to access new vendor sites in an organization? How many NEW web sites have you visited in the last month? (For me it has been 6, because I keep track) If you put the request into the corporate e-mail system to the IT department, they can cut and paste URLs into the whitelist in 16 seconds and reset the cache. All other users get .gov and .org type sites only!

It’s a good system and I obviously need to toot my horn more on these discussions about it.

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to Property of the School (and therefore the State)

Sounds like a winner!

An excellent reply

In reply to At a school

direct to the point, without the emotional BS liberal weenies will try to throw in the way.

You do NOT have a right to do ANYTHING on school computers except for homework.

Anyone that wants the “freedom” to surf when and where they want only has to buy their own computer and pay for their own connection.

Next thing you know, some clown will ask if you should have privacy in a bathroom. sheese! I bet they don’t allow you the privacy to do drugs or smoke in the bathrooms, huh? ~~ sniff sniff ~~ Or did you know there are LAWS against changing your cloths in a public restroom?

You have the “privacy” in the bathroom to do the TWO things it was designed for. number 1 and 2.

And as long as people KNOW that the systems are monitored, there is not any privacy issues about spying because there is a difference between spying and watching.

Bet in the grade schools they still have monitors out on the playground during breaks. Bet they still have hall monitors to watch the halls.

Funny how stupid people get just because it is on a computer.

Same question 10 years ago

In reply to An excellent reply

My former employer sent me to a seminar on privacy on the web about 10 years ago, held at a university. The speakers included the province’s privacy commissioner and a supreme court judge.

A few students attended and asked the question regarding the right of the university to block or monitor. The answer was, the university is a corporation and may do what it needs to do. In this case, the coproration’s right to protect students from harassment trumped the students rights to look at porn in an open computing lab. The students were not happy with the response, but no matter how they asked the question, the answer was the same.

James

in libraries here

In reply to Same question 10 years ago

it has been argued AGAINST filtering out porn as discrimination against the poor who can’t affort their own computer and internet connection. (some people are so stupid)

Then the argument is taken to extremes to try to justify their need for porn, by saying this might block someone looking up breast cancer or whatever BS excuse they could find.

The RABID liberals in America today really disgust me sometimes.

jdclyde, you’re usually better than this

In reply to in libraries here

I’m not a liberal, I’m a libertarian, but your comment about rabid liberals is moronic. It’s surprising from you, because your posts are usually of a higher quality than the ones you’ve had here.

It’s not the liberals you’ve got to worry about, it’s the neocons. Did Bill Clinton ever get 2,400 Americans killed by lying in order to push us into a war, spy on Americans in their own country, give a $10 billion no-bid contract to one of the most corrupt companies in the world so they could charge the Army $35 per gallon for gas, fiddle while New Orleans drowned, or sell 300,000 acres of national forest to logging companies?

Oh, that’s right–he lied about an affair he was having as part of his PERSONAL life and was impeached for that. Seems to me like you need to turn off the Rush Limbaugh and look out the fscking window. The country is collapsing and it’s not the liberals who pushed the detatonator button. The Constitution has become, to quote Dubya, “[J]ust a goddamn piece of paper” (I didn’t make that up–that’s a quote straight from George W.’s mouth) and you can’t blame that on the liberals.

Impeach President Cheney and his little sidekick Bush.

How ironic

In reply to jdclyde, you’re usually better than this

In a discussion titled “Big Brother”, TechRepublic took it upon themselves to filter out the word “g-dd–n”, even though it was part of a direct quote. I’m so glad that TR knows better what I meant to say than I do. God knows I’m too stupid to know what’s best for me–that’s what Republicans are for.

TR just did more to reinforce my point than I could with 1024 more words.

dude

In reply to How ironic

it is automatic.

type it again but with a space in the middle and it flies right through. That is why in my divorce discussion, whenever I refered to the ex as the adulterous W H O R E she is, it required spaces to keep from looking like whore.

just for the record hawk

In reply to jdclyde, you’re usually better than this

clinton DID give no-bid contracts to the same company you know and loath because they are the company that can do the job.

and you must have missed it in my other posts, but I don’t listen to Rush.

And even if for the sake of argument I were to conceed to every one of your points, it does not change who it is that is in favor of porn in our libraries. Went on not long ago in our local libraries.

So your post, while showing that you hate Bush and everything he does, it does nothing to counter what I posted?

We can get into the Bush bash later. Too much of a sinus headache right now….

Oh, and thanks for thinking some of my posts are of higher quality. (I assume that was intended as a compliment?)

Sorry to take so long.

In reply to just for the record hawk

I figured you were having a bad day or something. You usually make a lot of sense, so, yes, that was a compliment on your post quality.

I believe Halliburton started getting the big no-bids after the Republicans swept into office in 1994. In a free market economy, if there were $10 billion contracts to go around, you can bet there would be dozens of companies offering those services–unless, of course, not all is on the up and up and a certain company (whose CEO was Dick Cheney–who still has a deferred salary and unused stock options from them) was using its influence to keep competitors out of the market.

I probably did miss your posts about not listening to Rush. I drift in and out of TechRepublic based on how much free time I have, so I don’t get to read as much of the discussions as I’d like to (it’s why I took a few days to respond, too). I apologize if I accused you of listening to him, but your comment about rabid liberals sounded almost exactly like something he’d say. Then, when a caller points out that most people don’t think like that, he’ll try to weasel out of it by saying something like “I wasn’t talking about all liberals, just the _rabid_ ones.” Of course, you’ll never hear him do the same thing with the right wing by claiming that all neo-Nazis represent the majority of Republicans, but he does it on a daily basis with the left wing. I listened to Rush for almost nine years. Once Dubya got into office and I heard Rush have nothing but praise for the biggest idiot ever to steal an election, I woke up to the fact that he is a fraud.

As for the topic at hand, if I had to choose between erring on the side of “safety” and erring on the side of liberty, I’ll take liberty 100 times out of 100. I’m not saying porn in libraries is a good thing, but censorship is a thousand times worse. If you want to protect children from porn, have separate computers with filtering software installed for them, and leave others in a separate section without it. That’s what most of the libraries in my area do, and you don’t see any sex-crazed kiddos walking the streets because of it.

It’s a non-issue anyway, driven by the same media hype that had people wearing white masks when a couple dozen out of over six BILLION people came down with SARS, terrifies parents into thinking that blogging sites are visited routinely by predators just because ONE person in a country of almost three hundred million was stalked, and gives more time to ONE runaway bride than to 2300 mothers and fathers whose child was killed in a hideously mismanaged war. There weren’t libraries packed with shifty, trenchcoat-wearing men leering at porn before the “family values” idiots saved them from themselves. It wasn’t a problem then, it’s not a problem now, and it won’t ever be a problem because that’s not how 99% of people are. In any case, you shouldn’t make laws based on media hype, but that’s exactly what we get nowadays: poorly-thought-out legislation that makes for great sound bites and campaign speechifying.

TechRepublic’s censoring my quote from Dubya when he swore about the Constitution is a nice example of something that sounds good having unintended consequences. It’s the only time I’ve ever sworn in over 100 TR posts (well, actually, I wasn’t the one doing the swearing, but that’s beside the point), and there was a legitimate reason for it. But since someone else took it upon themselves to decide what I can and can’t say, when that legitimate reason appeared it was squashed. That’s the kind of thing that happens when you start monitoring other people, looking out for thought crime.

Americans swallow this “If it bleeds, it leads” BS whole because they’ve lost any sort of critical thinking skills, and they’ve become soft, stupid sheep who can’t trade away their freedom fast enough if it’s in the name of a War with a capital W: the War on Drugs, the War on Crime, the War on Terror, etc.

To sum up my philosophy: “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.” I’d love to be able to lay claim to those words, but Thomas Jefferson beat me to them a few years back.

Thing is, given enough time and statistics …

In reply to in libraries here

… one could devise an argument in favor of allowing porn in order to support the porn industry, one of the last few industries in the US that has not been offshored wholesale to India or China.

(I seriously NEED that writer’s retreat this year …)

that depends

In reply to Thing is, given enough time and statistics …

can we add a tax on everytime you view porn on the net?

That would get congress to take interest!

Funny how stupid people get just because it is on a computer.

In reply to An excellent reply

Indeed, even management gets that way. The’ll give a guy a rep for checking scores on the computer on company time, but the guy that calls his buddy on company time to get the scores gets a walk.

Also, the Supreme court

In reply to An excellent reply

has repeatedly upheld communities’ rights to determine what is and isn’t acceptable for public consumption within their community. Whether it be selling alcohol or adult material, to determining what books the library may stock, or even the language of television shows broadcast in their area (networks have been fined for violating LOCAL decency standards). Public computers would be no different.

school social studies

In reply to At a school

Y’re right, school is about learning stuff that kids should learn to prepare for life, and teachers should stick to that.

The problem comes in when the social/medical/artistic studies come in. Still these are within the curriculum of what is to be studied but can be just on or a bit over the line that is accepted by our society. Special if they are about sexual issues relating to the “dark side” of community.
Then there are the artistic interpretations and freedoms we endure from some artists as Spencer Tunick etc. Not to mention the painter-artists we “all” admire so much as Picasso and others.

But I think these are the exceptions.

Rob

There are defined criteria

In reply to school social studies

in every state for what [b]must[/b] be taught, with local school boards having a broad say in anything additional. The courts have historically been loathe to interfere with community standards, doing so only when absolutely necessary. Probably the most prevalent examples are “dry” communities, where alcohol is not allowed to be sold, and the different standards for obscenity from place to place. These only apply to what can be sold or shown to the public, however, and not to what you can use inside of your own home. You just have to go somewhere else to buy it 🙂

Then do we agree or don’t we

In reply to There are defined criteria

As I can’t make out of your answer/post wheather you do agree with me or not that certain tasks given by tutors can make the student go cross a line/law/school rule.

Special as tutoring is about makeing the students aware that they have to search for the “true’s”, of what is right/good or false/wrong in live and always ask the why of it.

Rob

Agree?

In reply to Then do we agree or don’t we

“wheather you do agree with me or not that certain tasks given by tutors can make the student go cross a line/law/school rule.”

I agree that it does happen, not that it should.

Really?

In reply to At a school

If you need to use the bathroom at work… forget it?
Life/school/work – it’s not that simple.

Really?

In reply to At a school

If you need to use the bathroom at work… forget it?
Life/school/work – it’s not that simple.

who’s computer is it anyway

In reply to “Big Brother”

why is it otherwise sensible people dont seem to realize you visit your personal favorites on your home computer and go to business related sites only when you are at the company workstations.

Network Admins have every right and infact it is their/our responsability to monitor what goes in on the network unter their care.

the proliferation of crippling spyware and viruses can be attributed primarlily to people going to unauthrorzed sites

so if it aint your computer expect to be monitored
that is part of reasonable network security

Ownership

In reply to who’s computer is it anyway

I tend to agree with this statement.

What is a reasonable expectation of privacy when using a public accessible computer, at say a school or public library?

I like you last statement, it really rings true.

It what most Germans thought in 1932

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think went we begin to try and control every aspect of life that we are destined to be controled by another hitler an the Third R…. Ask yourself is it wrong ? We can never eliminate the dangers that exist in this world but we can surender all of our freedoms to those who would convince us that they can.

What?

In reply to It what most Germans thought in 1932

Two totally different situations here. I am talking about the safety of kids. I know we will never eliminate the dangers of the world but, at the end of my day I can go home knowing that I did all that I could to prevent KIDS from becoming a victim to some lunatic on the internet.

Besides I am not taking away their freedom they don?t have to use the state owned computer they can go home and use their personal computer if they want.

The appearant problem is that the method

In reply to What?

is seen more as control and not protection, especially when there are other ways that provide a more effective method of protection without the intrusive controls. I think nearly all, if not all, in the thread agree and approve with the intent but some disagree with the way it is being done.

Hypocrites Who Teach The Constitution…

In reply to What?

…then effectively urinate on it. Sets a good example for the future leaders of our country.

It makes me sick to watch as every overzealous control freak nut job with an agenda can simply state ‘its to protect the children’ and the mindless sheep that make up mainstream America just roll over and toss the constitution in the trash. Access control gateways, even proxy servers have been around forever – they perform the necessary function. The decision to use keystroke logging to filter profanity(?) is a smokescreen for another alterior motive.

YOUR agenda blinds you Johnny

In reply to Hypocrites Who Teach The Constitution…

because it is clear you don’t understand how the constitution in the US works, or where it applies.

You have NO rights to anything other than what is told to you that you do when you are using someone elses systems.

While this IS going over board by an ego maniac, it is by no means ANY violation of ANY chonstitutional protections.

Maybe a refresher government class would be in order for you to understand the constitution?

Maybe A Little Stretch

In reply to YOUR agenda blinds you Johnny

But not much. Keystoke logging is the same as wiretapping and eavesdropping.

While we’re at it, a few other things that would make our kids safer (and would be welcomed with open arms by a significant percentage):

Record all phone conversations placed on school phone system and private cell phones (the call was placed from school property)

Listening in on any conversation on school property using hidden microphones. (keystoke logging)

A follow-up to one of the enduring Reagan legacies, random urine tests of anyone on school grounds. (OK, another stretch – but I’m betting a significant percentage would accept anyways)

Video cams in private areas like bathrooms and locker rooms (those would never be misused)

Where are you getting your source?

In reply to Maybe A Little Stretch

A company AND a school system has EVERY legal right to record all communications going in and out. This has long been an established legal fact. Are you new to the whole tech field?

This is NOT a violation of ANY civil rights as it is THEIR communications to tap as seen fit.

As I have said further up, just because you are ALLOWED legally to do something doesn’t mean you should do it. Stong arm tactics rarely works.

Just please don’t get delusional and act like you have ANY right to “privacy” on your company phone or computer. The same is true for school systems.

I have NEVER heard of video cameras in bathrooms so again please state your sources.

You are letting your political bias shade your views on things that are not political in nature and the one has nothing to do with the other. There is no comparison between the government listening to people that are talking to known terrorists, and companies listening to conversations on THEIR phone system or email.

Go back and settle down. The law is on the side of the schools and private property owners, not visitors.

Urine testing on school grounds. of students? of staff? for illegal drugs? steroids?

Anyone that is a transporter, be it bus, train or plane should have regular testing.

Anytime there is suspect of steroids or substance abuse, there should be testing.

Everyone has the right

In reply to Maybe A Little Stretch

to anything they want… including the prevention of others from exercising their rights on them! In society, we have these things called laws to sort out whose right takes precedence.

Employer Not Same As School

In reply to Maybe A Little Stretch

I’m compensated by my employer for doing what I’m told. If I don’t like the terms and conditions, I can quit and starve.

I pay for the schooling of my son, including the equipment used in the process of that education.
I expect one of the outcomes of my expenditure be that at his intellectual curiosity would be stimulated. (so I’m over-idealistic, but one can hope)
A useage policy for school computers that stipulates they can only be used for homework is unacceptable.
A major aspect of courses like social studies is to encourage an interest in current events and an awareness of alternative arguments on issues.
There are many internet blogs and forums which, if my son were visiting, could provide a positive learning experience. (as this forum does for me)
I expect that, given current technology, inappropriate content would be blocked and that the access attempt would be logged.
I do not expect that the details of his participitation in any forum or blog, be it liberal weenies or bible thumping nut jobs, would be eavesdropped upon by a keystoke logger and used by the school administrators to formulate opinions and judgements regarding my son.

The example about bathroom video cams and universal random urine testing were hypothetical and out of context.

and…

In reply to Employer Not Same As School

“I pay for the schooling of my son, including the equipment used in the process of that education.”

…you elected a school board to oversee the operation of the school and its equipment.

“A useage policy for school computers that stipulates they can only be used for homework is unacceptable.”

I agree, it should be “they can only be used to access material that is approved by the district school board.”

Children do not have the same rights as adults (if they did, many of them would be eating cake for breakfast and ice cream for supper every day, and they’d never have to touch peas :)). Locker searches are a good example.

fair enough

In reply to Employer Not Same As School

because the video/testing had me scratching my head wondering if you were REALLY nuts or just KIND OF nuts! ;\

Like I said, I agree the school has the authority to put the keystroke loggers on, but I disagree on if they should do it. The white list as well as content filters would be in MY NOT SO humble opinion the best route to go.

Not because of privacy issues, but because this is intentionally making a hostile computer environment on the part of the IT Nazi in charge. He/she is just on an ego trip and should be releaved of duty.

As for blog surfing and such, the kids should not have the TIME in their day to be doing this type of activity. Want them to surf and experience? Set them down at home after their homework is done. The schools are doing a poor enough job teaching the basics of Math and reading as it is, without taking time out for them to “be stimulated” this way.

Just like all other school property, it is for school use. That is why the tax payers paid for the school to have it.

We disagree, because I don’t see it as the schools job to teach anything but the topics that prepare them for college. They are NOT there to mold their political views, or social understandings.

Liberty

In reply to YOUR agenda blinds you Johnny

“Every law is an infringement upon liberty.” Jeremy Bentham

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Benjamin Franklin

re:liberty

In reply to Liberty

Liberty and society are incompatible.

What are going going on about “TOO OLD”?

In reply to Liberty

every law we have that allows people to live together are all giving up of some right or the other and is required to have a civilized society. Are you saying you would rather have a lawless society where it is again “might makes right”?

Not being able to do as you please on someone elses equipment is NOT you giving up anything, because you never had ANY rights on anyone elses equipment other than what the owners of that equipment have decided to give to you.

Your quote has nothing to do with this discussion, as no one was even talking about security issues!

Care to try again to explain what your point was?

Constitutional Law and Precedence

In reply to YOUR agenda blinds you Johnny

In our court system, once a precedence has been set, right and wrong effectively no longer matter. The precedence will be referenced, unless the ruling is set aside, and the precedence is overturned. Today people mention the FISA court as though it has constitutional standing, and it doesn?t. It was created by congress — Fiat Law.

The real issue becomes when a law, on top of the maze of rulings that the courts have already made, and what arguments can be made within that particular framework of laws, regulations (which may have no legal basis, but real teeth, read IRS regulations some day), and precedence. One real issue is that a clear law eliminates the need for lawyers and judges to interpret it.

In Ohio, we have someone who is trying to get on the ballot a very simple anti-eminent domain amendment to the State Constitution that says no governmental entity (city, state, township, etc.) can use eminent domain to confiscate your property for any private use even with just compensation. Eminent domain may only be used for public use (roads, schools, bridges, public buildings, but not public housing) and not for anything that would be used for any private use (condos, upscale housing, and commercial use). This person has been threatened, and had to change their phone to an unlisted number?

This amendment to State Constitutions should be enacted in all 50 states, since the Supreme Court justices decided that it was a States rights issue on the Connecticut issue that came before them.

thank goodness that court has shifted

In reply to Constitutional Law and Precedence

Now that it is less “left” TILTING, we can hope the court will go back to enforcing the laws instead of trying to write them (which IS unconstitutional!).

The courts can do one of two things. Enforce and existing law, or strike that law down as unconstitutional. If unconstitutional, then it is the job of CONGRESS to go back and write a new law to replace the existing law or to let it die.

Funny thing though, from the hearings for confirmation of the new judges, you would think the only thing that this court does is decide if abortion is a grand thing to have or not. I think for the sake of our country, this should be a lot further down the list of concerns.

Kids need Protecting?

In reply to What?

Well maybe… but logging keystrokes to see if the kids are visiting “unacceptable” sites?? C’mon kiddies…is “sexy sweethearts” more of an unacceptable site tnan Joe Cartoon? (check it out sometime) Just another example of the screwed up sense of what is acceptable for kids to see and what is not. I don’t advocate porn for all, but look in your own living room for gosh sakes… look at the nightly fare on the TV set.

A society that dictates gratuitious violence and daily killings on television as being somehow so much more acceptable than Janet J flashing her tit for a microsecond at the Superbowl? The whole country writhed in indignation on that one, and the FCC fined just about everyone they could think of for indecent exposure… and the Europeans laughed their heads off.

What fox is guarding the morality chicken house here?

Here in Australia some wondered if there

In reply to Kids need Protecting?

was finally anything of interest in a Superbowl telecast – the few who saw it said it was nothing. Many said that the FCC were making a mountain out of a very small ant’s nest – did not even qualify as a molehill.

Our local school is very strong at blocking sex sites but more so at blocking manga sites – talk about gratuitous sex and violence. I have not seen much manga but what I did see was bad. And some of the anime is almost as bad.

Key logging

In reply to “Big Brother”

In the system implemented where I work it only records key stroke combinations. If I was to type F U it would begin to record after the word is finished F U N it realizes that it is not an offensive word therefore no report will be filed. On the other hand if a persons password is offensive it will report that person.

Web filtering

In reply to Key logging

Your original post makes it sound like the key stroke software is being used to make sure kids don’t go to pornographic sites. Why not use web filtering technology for that instead, at least for that purpose? We use it at my office and it blocks access to porn, “offensive” sites, etc. Whatever we set it for.

Bottom line: Policy

In reply to “Big Brother”

The bottom line on this issue is whether or not the school (or perhaps entire school system for that area) has a written policy on this topic.

First, they must have a written policy – often titled: Internet Usage Policy or Appropriate Use Policy – that users of the systems (teachers, administrators, students, etc.) agree to use the computers and internet connections for “business (education) related activities only” and are subject to monitoring.
Next, everyone using the systems must be apprised of this policy. Many companies that i work with require everyone to read and sign this policy annually and copies are kept on file. There is nothing wrong with requiring students to be responsible for their decisions and actions and have them read/sign this document as well. Seems to me like an excellent part of their education actually.

So – now everyone is educated about what is expected, what behavior is acceptable and tolerated. This all eliminates the “Big Brother” situation – no one is spying on you without your knowledge. No one is trying to trap you. The school system owns those computers and they are intended to be available for the benefit of the teachers and students – not for idle surfing and playtime – save that for your time at home the way the rest of the corporate world is expected to.

One other comment – i happen to remember a time when we did NOT have computers in schools except in limited quantities and for computer-related coursework only. Don’t forget that an excellent education is completely possible without a computer on every desk and in every classroom.

Bottom Line: Policy

In reply to Bottom line: Policy

Excellent!

Protection

In reply to “Big Brother”

I say they are doing a good thing. As a parent of underage children, my concern is that my child could access pornography or other web-sites that could be a potential hazard to their well-being such as chat rooms and myspace. Having these closely monitored makes me feel better as a parent. I praise the school that is taking such action to protect my child.

My employer also has safe guards in place. We aren’t allowed to access pornography or gaming sites or install chatting software such as msn messenger. This is their equipment, this is time they are paying me for doing my job, NOT playing games online or chatting with friends.

There is such a lackadaisical attitude anymore in the workplace. If people had the right ethics in the first place, there wouldn’t be a need for these types of practices.

One apsect we have been overlooking is

In reply to Protection

that key logging is a reactive process not proactive while gateway blocking is a surer proactive process. Keylogging works in one of two ways;

a. log the keystrokes for examination later – thus it is well after the fact – and most of the damage done.

b. log the keystrokes and run them through a monitoring program immediately prior to committing them to the application. This causes delays in the preparing and processing also it relies totally on keystroke or word matching. Most of which can be gotten around via slang or other substitutions.

Years ago someone in Sydney, NSW registered a car with a number plate of 6UL DV8 most people who saw it laughed at the pun – after 8 years of use someone in the motor registry picked up that it violated their registration code and banned it. The matter went to court and the judge held since they thought it was OK for 8 years the owner could keep it – they should have shut the gate at the start. The point being it got past their computerised ‘abusive plate’ program as it did not match anything in its database.

Another point is that some of the words that are likely to be in the ‘inappropriate word’ database are words that could properly be used in some classes to do with biology, drama, or English literature. The key logger would eliminate them and thus impact the students’ ability to do their assignments at school during free periods.

Yet the whole issue could be avoided by a properly set up gateway that restricted access to only the approved sites. Very little hands on maintenance, not invasive and easier to ensure it is up and running at all times. Any keystroke logger would need to be saved to each computer and updated on a regular basis – and could possibly by circumvented by a nerdy/geeky/(whatever is current) computer literate student; a gateway could not be so easily overcome.

Your company can do it, why not the school?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Any company can legally an drightfully record and copy every email and keystroke you enter in its machines. Why not a school? Yes, I would like the educators of todays youth to pay very close attantion to what they are doing whie in school.

It would be pretty stupid not to.

Exactly

In reply to Your company can do it, why not the school?

Schools have a duty of care to their students. They have more than a right, they have a responsibility to protect those students. Its not the porn surfers I am worried about, its the young girls who walk by and see this stuff.

I agree that keyloggers is not the preferred method, but it is fully within their rights.

As for the computers belonging to the taxpayers – make me laugh. If they did belong to you, you could walk out with one. In a democracy, we have a process – if you don’t like what the school is doing, you can complain to the staff and or the school board, but you don’t have “rights” over the computers that they bought and operate. What a non-starter.

James

gov’t entities are not private companies

In reply to Your company can do it, why not the school?

A private company has broad, but not unlimited, rights to monitor how its equipment is used. IIRC it mostly comes down to notification, esp. in office environments out of the public view. A good analogy is private use of the telephone — many of us think nothing of using the office phone to make a doctor’s appointment or to get a call from our kid’s school nurse.

In contrast, government entities such as public schools must be extremely careful when restricting adults and near-adults. Esp. when the public system (at libraries and schools) may be the only place where the individual can access the resources of the internet.

It’s so, so easy for us to focus on the misuses, but what about the teenager (or child) that believes that she is being sexually abused or assaulted but isn’t yet comfortable discussing it with a teacher? What about the sexually confused teenager who is considering suicide since he knows his family would reject him and he feels alone?

We must also always remember that some HS students are adults — they’re either 18 or legally emancipated. HS students have the right to control their own health care… and that doesn’t just refer to abortions and birth control. In most states older teenagers can be tried as adults and they need to understand that their criminal acts may not always be dismissed by kiddie court.

No one has a right to the internet

In reply to gov’t entities are not private companies

And Internet providers, including schools, have a right to control what they provide. Because they have a duty of care, they must make sure that by providing internet they are not doing anything that may cause harm or contravene any of their other policies like their harassment or human righst policies.

Schools are no different just because they are publicly funded. And as I posted in another message I have heard a Canadian Supreme court judge make that argument with my own ears.

James

concept is the same, just the “owner” is different

In reply to gov’t entities are not private companies

“A good analogy is private use of the telephone — many of us think nothing of using the office phone to make a doctor’s appointment or to get a call from our kid’s school nurse.”

That is a technical issue. It would be prohibitively expensive for a company to ‘prevent’ an employee from making a personal phone call, but they have every right to discipline the employee for doing so.

“In contrast, government entities such as public schools must be extremely careful when restricting”…

Not on school owned computers. I elected my school board to manage what my child learns. They had better do it, or I will replace them.

…” adults and near-adults.”

You either are an adult or not.

“We must also always remember that some HS students are adults — they’re either 18 or legally emancipated.”

Differs by state. In Ohio the parents are required to support a child until he is “19 or until graduation from high school, whichever occurs earlier”.

Like it or not, the community, through their elected school board, state what they want taught in their school. If an “adult” student doesn’t like the restrictions, he is free to not attend that school.

Who is using the data collected

In reply to “Big Brother”

I would not go into the argument about the “rights” of the corporate entity to monitor or collect information in their network, we cannot agree on that at the top levels of our government. I am sure these systems are put in place with the best of intentions to protect everyone involved. HOWEVER once the process is in place and the data is collected the problems will begin to surface. for example:
1. Your whole password security system is compromised as anyone who logs into these machines has their password recorded including Network admins, Upper level Exec’s and EVERYONE. so whomever has access to the collected data can access EVERYTHING on your network!
2. Politics, Witch Hunts, Vendetta’s, We all work with someone who is not above this type of “dirty work” and some climbers will stop at nothing to gain the “competitive” advantage.
3. Try and picture this not from a “protect the children” point of view but from a “security nightmare” point of view.
4. What will you do when your boss tells you that “the board” has decided they want to personally review ALL of the records themselves? how will you do this without compromising everyones security?
Yes the world is a nasty place but if your users are going to go to these places they will go there anyway from home, from a friends computer or at a cyber cafe and this is nothing but feel good campaign.
Kids, teachers, administrators are all part of the general crossection of personalities that make up our world and there will be people attracted to all sorts of differeent strokes and the internet has just made it easier. if you are really interested in “protecting the children” then sit down with them and educate them in how to protect themselves from the threats and instill the “values” that will keep them from falling prey to the scum.

1 reason we do it

In reply to “Big Brother”

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cipa.html

The Children?s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) is a federal law enacted by Congress in December 2000 to address concerns about access to offensive content over the Internet on school and library computers. CIPA imposes certain types of requirements on any school or library that receives funding support for Internet access or internal connections from the ?E-rate? program ? a program that makes certain technology more affordable for eligible schools and libraries. In early 2001, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued rules implementing CIPA.

——————————————————————————–

What CIPA Requires

Schools and libraries subject to CIPA may not receive the discounts offered by the E-Rate program unless they certify that they have an Internet safety policy and technology protection measures in place. An Internet safety policy must include technology protection measures to block or filter Internet access to pictures that: (a) are obscene, (b) are child pornography, or (c) are harmful to minors, for computers that are accessed by minors.

Schools subject to CIPA are required to adopt and enforce a policy to monitor online activities of minors; and

Schools and libraries subject to CIPA are required to adopt and implement a policy addressing: (a) access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet; (b) the safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of direct electronic communications; (c) unauthorized access, including so-called ?hacking,? and other unlawful activities by minors online; (d) unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personal information regarding minors; and (e) restricting minors? access to materials harmful to them.

this is not the whole page

This can be done without keystroke logging

In reply to 1 reason we do it

Any well set up Internet gateway would include software to do all of that without using keystroke loggers.

CIPA is all about Internet access and thus has no application to any other use of a computer. The only way you could use CIPA to justify using a keystroke logger is if you had a school network that was NOT connected to the Internet and then a second network that was Internet access only and you loaded the keystroke logger on the few computers that were Internet access only.

Some schools here in Australia have a general network and a small Internet access network – others have one that do both. Most have properly set up gateways and I know of none that use keystroke loggers. Yet we do not have any reported problems of the type you seem concerned with. Those that are reported all come from home or Internet cafe usage.

criminalize children to secure funding?

In reply to 1 reason we do it

Then, do I understand, that in order to secure important funding and comply with CIPA, you prefer to take the approach of monitoring activity, so that you may impose punishments, in leau of simply restricting that activity? Shall I pass a dangerous toy to a child, and criminalize that child for any CIPA perceived abuse of said dangerous toy?

As others in this thread have implied, there are ways to simply keep the child out of harm’s way. Your IT methods expose the child to potentially greater harm.

Shaming a child is a low form of discipline. How can you justify disciplining children, as a means of meeting *your* CIPA requirements? This compliance is *your* responsibility. You should be ashamed, not the children.

I also agree that dynamic learning environments, yes, do exist. And they needn’t (aren’t) reserved for higher education. Children should be exposed to technology, and yes, that dirty three letter word that gobbles so much disk space – art. Music, images (they’re big too – don’t whine, just do your job), video …

“Protecting Our Kids” = The New McCarthyism?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Way, way, WAY too much time and effort are being put into entraping, finding and creating whole new classes of sexual criminals. (Well, in the US, Canada and Great Britain anyway … other countries don’t seem to have this problem.)

Maybe we need to revive the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations or the House Un-American Activities Committe to help figure out how many “potential predators” are in schools, government, walking around town? Perhaps we need to write a book called “Perv Channels”, with about as much truth as the histronic “Red Channels” from the 1950’s?

and remember: Big Brother is Watching

A bit off topic

In reply to “Protecting Our Kids” = The New McCarthyism?

I don’t think that the initial post was about sexual deviants and the US hysteria on the subject, yet I find it more to the point than debating (uselessly) if school computers should be monitored.
This reminds me of the SouthPark episode where all the parents are taken to jail because the kids figure out that telling the police their parents molest them makes the parents go away.
And, btw, weren’t homosexuals in the past in the same position pedophiles are today? Maybe this is the outlet for all the hidden politically incorrect homophobia, blame it all on the pedophiles.

Political Correctness and Other Countries (OT)

In reply to A bit off topic

You are right in that today?s pedophiles are yesterday’s homosexuals who were the day before’s hippies … and on it goes.

I don’t have the sociology grant to study this yet, but I postulate the theory that prudishness about inter-generational sex as reflected in our laws creates the bigger problem of killing of young children, and that other countries don’t have this problem as they allow for the possibility of such relations being consensual.

And before you start flaming away, (a) it’s just a theory; (b) it needs much more study than can be given here; and (c) the “at what age” argument can be answered by taking stock of out-of-school dress.

If the girl is showing an acre of belly, hip-huggers down the THERE and so on, she pretty much has figured out how to attract the attention she wants. Same with the guys showing off butt-crack and wearing a too-tight tank top to attract other guys.

So “we” in our infinite wisdom, criminalize ? the participants, but let the other half off with “s/he didn’t know better because they were only 12-17”. Ptbth!! They either know or they are so stupid they need to be confined to a strait-jacket.

(I shoulda been a sociologist instead …)

Yikes!

In reply to Political Correctness and Other Countries (OT)

“If the girl is showing an acre of belly, hip-huggers down the THERE and so on, she pretty much has figured out how to attract the attention she wants. Same with the guys showing off butt-crack and wearing a too-tight tank top to attract other guys.”

More likely they dress that way because their peers dress that way.

Methinks …

In reply to Yikes!

“More likely they dress that way because their peers dress that way.”

Methinks that this is a difference without a distinction.

There’s a big distinction

In reply to Methinks …

between dressing so you fit in with your friends and dressing to be sexually attractive.

The other difference …

In reply to There’s a big distinction

I was thinking of the difference between dressing to fit in with your friends (or the “in crowd”) and being so stupid they need to be confined to a strait-jacket.

(Discalimer: I quit asking my daughter “If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you jump too?” when she started answering “Yes”.)

Ah, I see.

In reply to There’s a big distinction

“(Discalimer: I quit asking my daughter “If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you jump too?” when she started answering “Yes”.)”

Mine always answered it with “How high is the cliff?”

(You spend the first two years of their lives teaching them to walk and talk, and it seems like the next 16 telling them to sit down and shut up :))

Think before making rash suggestions.

In reply to “Protecting Our Kids” = The New McCarthyism?

If you are 2 old 4 it ? then you should also know that the liberal rightwing is listening and would be thrilled to see your suggestion become reality.

See EU’s take on our BB activities:
http://europa.eu.int/abc/doc/off/bull/en/200109/p103027.htm

“We know now, that in the first years of the 21st Century …”

In reply to Think before making rash suggestions.

Freedom, as we know it was abandoned …

(I could write a book)

Perhaps…

In reply to “Protecting Our Kids” = The New McCarthyism?

“Way, way, WAY too much time and effort are being put into entraping, finding and creating whole new classes of sexual criminals.”

…if it was your 12 year old daughter that some perv talked into meeting him, whereupon he raped and killed her, you’d feel differently. Granted, the parents should be monitoring their children so that this doesn’t happen, but their failure doesn’t justify the perv’s actions.

” (Well, in the US, Canada and Great Britain anyway … other countries don’t seem to have this problem.)”

Perhaps in those other countries, it is perfectly acceptable to have sex with 12-year-olds. Here it’s not.

Difference WITH a Distinction

In reply to Perhaps…

You bring up two crimes (rape and murder) for which the early part of the 20th century had already defined punishment for. (Maybe not elegantly, maybe not fairly, but that is a discussion for another day.)

It did not used to be a crime to obtain, and sit in the privacy of your own home and look at pictures of scantilly clad (or unclad) waifs who may or may not be 21 years old. Now you get branded for life, have to wear the Scarlett Letter, (and so on) for this. All of this while the unsolved violent crime rate ambles along at a brisk clip, because it is just that much easier for the police to grab a feeble old guy looking at dirty pictures than to face down a violent individual (my “unintended consequences” argument). The police can show statistics to “show” that they are “doing something about crime” when the REAL offenders are still walking the streets, unfettered by any retribution for thier actions. (My “intended consequences” argument.)

(Disclaimer: No disrespect intended for the hard-working members of law enforcement who get out there every day working on violent crime, and occasionally kill a bad guy in the process, thereby saving the state the expense of a trial.)

Times change.

In reply to Difference WITH a Distinction

Since it is against the law to take such pictures, it is only logical that it is also against the law to view them. “The people” have declared it so.

I agree with one part. It is not uncommon for an agency or department to create or enhance its own statistics showing that it is a good use of the money it costs. I mean, I used to be evaluated, in part, by how many problems I fixed per day. I had a problem with that particular measurement from day one, first because it treated handing someone an ink cartridge the same as rebuilding a server that went down, and two, it seemed to me that one could pad one’s evaluation by “creating” problems to fix (I’m glad the fire department isn’t evaluated that way :))

Padding the stats

In reply to Times change.

The peoblem with the police (aided by the legislature) padding the stats, is that whil it all looks good on paper, your city spirals out of control into a fetid, lawless, burning slum.

Yes, you have gotten rid of the New Criminals, the most harmless ones of the bunch (who are just sitting there “oogling the goodies”, to steal a movie reference). You have [b]not[/b] done jack about the gangs who are blowing up “da hood” … and anywhere else for that matter … for control of the drug trade, the pimp trade, the whatever trade. This while all the other murder rape and mahem goes on unabated.

I think if most law enforcement worked on what was on the books up to 1967, they would have their hands full.

Ditto!

In reply to Padding the stats

“I think if most law enforcement worked on what was on the books up to 1967” they would deserve a fair day’s pay. But they don’t, so they don’t.

I slipped a gear for a moment …

In reply to Times change.

… and forgot to remind you that taking pictures of girls under the age of 18 naked is [b]not[/b] a crime everywhere on the planet.

It is in the United States, but by global standards we are a bunch of prudes anyway.

Please get in touch with me I would like to implement something similar!

In reply to “Big Brother”

Hi lovicott

Could you please get in touch with me psmith1@educ.somerset.gov.uk.
I work in a school and I would like to know what software you installed and if its working well.

Thanks in advance

Paula Smith
Robert Blake Science College
Brigdwater, UK

What is education about?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Education certainly deals with the concern of getting our childs abide by the law and protecting them for the dangers of life.

However, it might be even more important to help our children our to cope with the inherent choice any human has, even children, between licit & illicit, between right & wrong, etc. And the choice is not always easy beacause life is not black & white.

But this implies that we teach them how to make wise choices, to know what is good for them and for the others, rather than just enforcing rules.

And can you achieve that without trusting them?

The way to teach kids

In reply to What is education about?

that the pan on the stove is hot is [b]not[/b] by burning them!

Big Brother

In reply to “Big Brother”

About the X-rated sites on a school\employer desktop it’s easy, ban those sites, it is not your pc. The other sites, as long as nothing bad comes from those site’s, privacy should be leading. And the users must be aware that they are being monitored and what the consequenses can be.

Moot…

In reply to “Big Brother”

Big Brother is here.

Get used to it kiddies.

What can you do? Very little.

In truth, though, every “real” IT pro on this board knows that a little effort will get you past any attempt to monitor activities.

If you think that the tech savvy generation coming along behind us isn’t as capable as we were in our youth then you are kidding yourselves…

How many times did you walk into a Radio Shack and see a monitor stuck in a loop program displaying so and so “is God” or such…

The more Machiavellian or Orwellian things get the craftier those who wish to defeat these tactics will become…

“Let Freedom ring.”

The Black Box

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think that monitoring users is a good idea especially in a school environment to protect users from sites and from predators on IM programs. The school I work in has several ways in which we control and filter what users can view but the best is the black box (securus server) which takes screenshots when a user visits any site that contains a banned word or set of banned words. It also works when typing into applications such as Microsoft word and outlook etc. It is a very useful piece of equipment to trace violating users and allows us to filter more websites that may be deemed Inappropriate.

Privacy issue

In reply to “Big Brother”

Isnt Keylogging items classed as spyware/virus type activity? When there are other ways of dealing with web access to websites, why is something that most of us have had to clear off a computer being used?
Yes, it is their system to implement this on, but something like this is far too open for abuse, an alternative would have been to look at the network traffic and check the websites accessed.
I can understand their concerns with wanting to prevent access to these websites, but if a user is looking something up about something personal, that is similar in wording to the phrase/words in the keylogger system – then the reviewer would know which user was looking up this, and by that, have the ability to misuse the information.
The admin of any network is the most trusted person in the user structure – they have access to everything on the network they are responsible for.

My 2 Cents

In reply to “Big Brother”

I say, let the kids get their “spank on” because then they won’t have enough juice left or desire, to knock up your daughter and turn her into another teenage pregnancy statistic and your son’s into another “my baby’s daddy.”

You are the bad guy.

In reply to “Big Brother”

There are much more efficent ways to achive the same goal without pistol whipping peoples privacy. Not to mention the overhead it must take to be activly or passivly monitoring every keystroke, or the cost of whatever solution you have implemented. Myspace is a cesspool of pedo’s and market research, block it at the perimiter. Spend the time to create a white list of url’s. Poll the teaching staff and find out what sites people would like thier students visiting.

keystroke loging is just silly.

Why are you breathing?

In reply to You are the bad guy.

Are you even in the IT feild. On a network all the computers are connected together. like all the printers. This “filter” is on the network it monitor the network by itself. reports are ran via printer and there you go you can see the log in of a person that violates the parameters that are set up with in the “filter”. Last I checked we did not pay anybody to monitor anything.
“keystroke loging is just silly”
The only time a person is flagged is if they use offensive language or visits an offensive web site.
also when you block a web site there are these thingys called PROXY servers that allow people to go aroung the “filter” to get to the web site that they desire to visit.

The teaching staff needs to worry about teaching not what web site they would like to visit.

A little harsh….

In reply to Why are you breathing?

That was a little harsh, don’t you think.

It seems to me, the original intent of the post you are replying to was to point out that keystroke logging to filer objectionable web sites might be just a tad bit inefficient. For example, it wouldn’t stop me from clicking on a link to an objectionable web site, and I don’t have to type anything obejectionable in a search engine to get a nice buffet of objectionable choices to click.

It seems a filter at the proxy would be more efficent. You mention you can go around filters by changing proxies, but if your access must go through a proxy to get out, then this just isn’t so – if it were then how are the thousands and thousands of businesses that block porn sites pulling it off? We do not log keystrokes here, but I can’t get to a site the business doesn’t want me to get to.

As to using profanity in a password; I wonder why anyone really even cares. Its not like anyone can see it – and I question the value of password security if you’re reading everyone’s password. In a publically owned company (I know you’re an educational instituation) it would even be a violation of Sarbanes-Oxley since passwords cannot be recorded. Back to the point, so what if a kid uses the “f-word” in his password? Its not like anyone else can read it. Sure, he might tell his buddies, and they’ll all get a good giggle out of it, but still no harm done – its the equivilant of him passing a note to one of his buds with the same word written in it. In fact, it seems to me a lot of tax dollars were spent on a solution that seems to have some questionable utility. You haven’t stopped porno surfing entirely, and you have stopped “naughty passwords”, but how much value was there really in that?

Now, having said all that, remember that my reply is based on only the limited information that you provided – which included nothing of your systems architecture.

George

Protect or prepare

In reply to “Big Brother”

I have no difficulty with any organisation that filters out X rated sites, provided the filter works properly and doesnt block legit sites.

Im certainly uncomfortable with monitoring people’s chat activity for several reasons and freedom of speech/privacy are not included.

Having lived through the misery that follows from having a child-molesting monster mess up one of my step children, I can say with some authority that those that think they are protecting kids are very often wide of the mark.

There is no simple solution when it comes to protecting them but putting them in a world-proof box is probably as bad as not protecting at all.

The people most likely to abuse your kids are more than likely already in your home or visits regularly. You have already been duped.

Chat sites are great but perhaps we should ask why we need them. Apart from specialist interest sites, what is it that is lacking that generates the need?

Forget about looking for signs of pretatory perverts….you wont see them.

The day eventually arrives when our kids have to cross the road alone. We drill them ,coach them, watch them and in nearly all cases (thank god) they get it right forever.

Making our kids aware of potential dangers that are difficult to understand (the why) or explain, present an even greater challenge.

Paranoia driven web snooping is not the answer. It points the finger at too many suspects and distracts us from the real bad-guys that are generally too damn smart to get caught that way anyway.

Kids

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think the school does have the responsibility to the children to prevent them from accessing websites that are not appropriate. The method chosen I think is a poor one. There are any number of filters and traffic loggers to log where a user goes, but to use a key logger that loggs everything typed goes a bit to far. One thing many of you suggest is that the children have a right to go where they want on the WEB. Actually they don’t! I say that as a parent. We, as a society, restrict a childs right to buy porn magazines, and other “adult” products. This is the same thing. Many children typically do not exercise good judgement and do all sorts of things that get them into trouble. As a parent I restrict my childrens access to many things that can hurt them that I my self may enjoy. I drink adult beverages, I watch movies I would not let them watch, etc. If a child, using poor judgement, accesses a chat site and ends up meeting a pervert somewhere and is raped or worse there is a problem. The child does not realize the danger. Many kids have the attitude that “I know what I am doing” but they don’t because they do not see the danger. We as a society have a responsibility to protect kids from themselves. Hopefully, and in most cases it is true, that by the time they reach adulthood they are wise enough to keep from getting hurt.

Big Brother

In reply to “Big Brother”

This is truly a double edged sword (or maybe a triple or quad depending on the situation). I don’t want my grandchildrens to be allowed access to these sites and I surely don’t need to see them either. It’s too bad the rules of good conduct and decency are not observed and such monitoring is even required.

Now we’re getting somewhere

In reply to Big Brother

The reasons why we have internet filters in schools:
1. The US federal government mandates it if the school/library wants to receive funding.

2. The Technology Departments of school systems routinely receive calls from teachers wanting to know what sites a student visited and the date and time. We also receive calls from supervisors wanting to know what sites their employees visited and the date and time. Sometimes these requests are for ‘bad’ sites and sometimes they are for time management reasons.

If we did not have these we would not have any filtering/monitoring. I for one would love to just say that we can just teach kids right from wrong and not have filtering/monitoring of the network. But, the first time that an unscrupulous teacher shows a porn web site to a kid and see how many taxpayers come screaming at the school doors demanding filtering/monitoring.

It is indeed sad that ‘the rules of good conduct and decency are not observed’ in this world and especially in the US anymore.

No one disputes monitoring – just the method

In reply to Now we’re getting somewhere

Keystroke monitoring is resource intensive and can be avoided by a knowledgeable user. Most corporations use simple software that works at the gateway and blocks access to sex sites, chat rooms etc. Since this is on a computer that the user cannot access they cannot get around it. It also uses much less resources than the logger approach.

Using a keystroke logger is the sort of approach a control freak like Stalin or Mao Tse Tung would use.

The intent is good the methodology is wrong.

I just remembered an old example of the gateway approach that a keylogger would never have picked up. Go back about 10 years and virtually all commercial web site were http://www.????.com, very few had the country code after them. A British publishing house calle Whitehouse registered http://www.whitehouse.com – they printed ‘glamour’ and soft pron magazines. Many schools had students access the govt website as part of learning to use the Internet – the intended web site being http://www.whitehouse.gov. However, many kids would type .com instead of .gov as they were more familiar with the .com addresses – result a soft pron web site. Some schools resolved this by entering a line on their school dns server which converted http://www.whitehouse.com to http://www.whitehouse.gov no problems after that. I believe the USA govt have since bought the .com address as well.

No one disputes monitoring – just the method

In reply to Big Brother

Keystroke monitoring is resource intensive and can be avoided by a knowledgeable user. Most corporations use simple software that works at the gateway and blocks access to sex sites, chat rooms etc. Since this is on a computer that the user cannot access they cannot get around it. It also uses much less resources than the logger approach.

Using a keystroke logger is the sort of approach a control freak like Stalin or Mao Tse Tung would use.

The intent is good the methodology is wrong.

I just remembered an old example of the gateway approach that a keylogger would never have picked up. Go back about 10 years and virtually all commercial web site were http://www.????.com, very few had the country code after them. A British publishing house calle Whitehouse registered http://www.whitehouse.com – they printed ‘glamour’ and soft pron magazines. Many schools had students access the govt website as part of learning to use the Internet – the intended web site being http://www.whitehouse.gov. However, many kids would type .com instead of .gov as they were more familiar with the .com addresses – result a soft pron web site. Some schools resolved this by entering a line on their school dns server which converted http://www.whitehouse.com to http://www.whitehouse.gov no problems after that. I believe the USA govt have since bought the .com address as well.

NB: some schools REQUIRE students to use computers for certain assignments – that makes it a right. I have heard of assignments being refused because they were hand written – the student came from a poor family and had no home computer.

Right?

In reply to No one disputes monitoring – just the method

Some schools do require students to use computers. This makes it a right to browse porn sites? Some universities require students to own laptops. Does this gives the students the right to waste the university’s bandwidth browsing porn sites, downloading from their favourite file sharing applications?

An very long and strange leap from requiring students to use computers for some work to believing that blocking what the school considers as inappropriate use violates some right.

While I consider using keystroke logging as being overkill and unusable — you want the job of checking all the keystrokes posted by ALL the students and staff at even a medium size school? — it’s their computers and their right to manage them how they will. If the parents, teachers and students disagree, they have their right to try to convince the powers that be (board of trustees, school board, whatever else you call them locally) that this is an unacceptable abuse.

Key logging does not block – it is witch hunting

In reply to Right?

Most key stroke loggers block nothing, they just allow some one to examine what you typed at a LATER date, after the fact – good for a witch hunt.

Properly established gateways with web management software will block porn etc and stop this inappropriate use and downloading.

BTW I did not advocate that it was OK to watch pron or chat on a school network.

You state that parents can complain until things are changed – that assumes that enough of them know enough to understand the issue and methods used, and that the beaurocracy is open enough to change later.

Many schools and corporations have been managing this successfully with properly set up gateways for over a decade, why can this school not manage it that way. There is only two reasons I can think of for using a key logger over a gateway solution.

1. The person in charge is a control freak, and all that goes with that. Emphasis on the freak.

2. The tech staff do NOT know enough to properly construct and secure a gateway but do know how to load a key logger program

NB Key logging violates the user ID and password security so you can no longer hold them accountable for the mis use of IDs and passwords. Secondly if the keylogger is the only method you use how do you deal with people who plug a personal laptop into the network? You can not load your key logger onto that so they go straight past your poor security.

Federal Funding and CIPA

In reply to “Big Brother”

The US Government, through the FCC, requires schools and libraries that wish to receive certain funds and Universal Service discounts to comply with the provisions of the Children’s Internet Protection Act. Read it at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cipa.html. Few schools and libraries can afford to lose that funding. The decision to monitor belongs to the ones who pay the bills. (Background – 36 years in public education, 23 years in IT administration.)

This is a GOOD thing!

In reply to “Big Brother”

The PC’s these people are using are the property of the school, and therefore the school has every right to protect itself from improper and potentially damaging usage. And, call me crazy, but is a SCHOOL the appropriate place for people to access X-rated sites?!?!? Not at all. I have managed PC support professionals for 10 years, and the policy at our company has been very big brother oriented – users have to login in to Web Trends to access the internet, and we track, record, and report on EVERY site they go to. Prior to having users log in there would always be one or 2 guys (even a woman) who would access a porn site at their desk and everyone could see it. Our CIO actually walked by a programmer’s desk, saw him viewing x-rated material, and fired him on the spot. That was why we started the big brother approach.

Also, from a legal perspective, by someone viewing x-rated material in the workplace there is a potential to create what the law calls an uncomfortable work environment, and those offended by their colleagues viewing habits can sue the company for this. Not something your legal folks will want to go through.

So keep in mind that the equipment belongs to the school, and they cna lock it down or monitor however they want. Don’t like it? Get another job.

No one disputes monitoring – just the method

In reply to This is a GOOD thing!

Keystroke monitoring is resource intensive and can be avoided by a knowledgeable user. Most corporations use simple software that works at the gateway and blocks access to sex sites, chat rooms etc. Since this is on a computer that the user cannot access they cannot get around it. It also uses much less resources than the logger approach.

Using a keystroke logger is the sort of approach a control freak like Stalin or Mao Tse Tung would use.

The intent is good the methodology is wrong.

Ownership = Control

In reply to “Big Brother”

Whoever ownes the computer has a right to control it. I own 5 computers in my home and I have every right to control how they are used. A school has every right to control how its computers are used. A county council has every right to control how computers in a library are used. Some people think ownership means nothing.
Some people think that schools and libraries are places where the authority of parents to control what their children get involved in is voided. Parents have total authority over any content that their children may be exposed to — in the home, at school, or in the public library. Too many people want to distroy parental authority and give it to either the school or state. You need to wake up to the fact that our society is doing everything possible to erode this parental authority and guidance.

What do ‘they’ want to hide?

In reply to “Big Brother”

I see no problem with monitoring in the school. Today you can’t be too careful and if only one child is saved or one ‘bad bean’ teacher is caught, it is worth it. What do the parents say? I would be happy if my children were protected. Until all the idiots are caught and the web made safe for everyone, we have to do what we can. That isn’t “Big Brother” that’s smart! R

School is for schoolwork…

In reply to “Big Brother”

…not surfing. I don’t even file this under “big brother”. In this case, it seems pretty obvious that while at school, both students AND teachers should only be doing the school’s work/agenda. It isn’t a cyber-cafe, for pete’s sake.

Too far

In reply to “Big Brother”

Key stroke recording & input filtering are both wrong. The first being a security violation, and the second being censorship. If you can monitor a student’s keystrokes and gain their password, then you can emulate them and frame them for anything and the one protection they should have had from the system is null and void. Profanity is the vulgate. What may be rude speech today may be high class tomorrow; speech is fluid and ever changing and evolving. Anyone remember when “gay” just meant “happy”? You kill profanity then you kill all the potential Shakespeares of the world.

You want to block specific porn or hate sites from elementary or high school, that’s fine. College, nope, it should be wide open. College students are supposed to be adults in that sense anyway.

“School” What level?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Are you taling about an elementary school? Middle/junior high? High school? Community college? Four year college? University?

Since you talk about pervs meeting under-age kids, I must presume you’re referring to a junior high or high school.

Through high school, it’s sure as hell appropriate (and maybe not severe enough). The institution is functioning in loco parentis and as such it’s Dad and Mom watching, not some elder sibling.

The “Whose system is it?” arguments don’t become relevant until you hit college level.

Cheers!
El Geeko

Educating instead of Monitoring

In reply to “Big Brother”

This is an old discussion. And it is really useless either way. And it has been this way since the begining of time. Today is the net, yesterday was the phones, faxes or whaterever is used to comunicate.

If you forbid something, then you are extrangely promoting it. Funny, right?

Ok, It sounds nice to regulate what is going on in the school and what the students ant teachers are looking at. BUT it does not work in the way the BIG BROTHER say it is intended.

The data will be misused. The students and employees will chalenge the authorities and, at the end, the school will have expended a lot of money doing anything but education.

Try instead to show how to use the net, e-mails or anything available in a proper way. And please be confident with the people. Spying is not the solution.

Educating instead of Monitoring

In reply to Educating instead of Monitoring

Education is a nice idea, but it’s just not realistic. Without proper monitoring and filtering, kids are going to go to whatever sites they want.

Not to mention, we all know what a litigious society we live in. If a child is hurt, or worse, by a predator and the communication is traced back to a school computer, the school board will be held liable. And then parents will be screaming for more monitoring and filtering.

Perhaps key logging is not the best method for reasons already mentioned in this thread. That is something that has to be decided on a case-by-case basis, but something needs to be in place.

Unfortunately, in today’s world, you have to balance idealism with realism.

Educating instead of Monitoring

In reply to Educating instead of Monitoring

One more point:

I believe that having proper filters in place can be an educational point in itself. Let kids know that when they are in school (or later in life, in the workplace) that there are rules to be followed. There is appropriate behavior to be observed. What you do in the privacy of your own home is your own business, but in school (just as in the workplace) you have to abide by certain guidelines concerning appropriate behavior.

It all depends on how it is Implemented

In reply to “Big Brother”

While it is a good idea to make sure students and/or teachers do not visit the xrated sites, it is also important how it is implemented.

Definitely using technology is helpful. But choosing the right type of technology is also key. Instead of using Key loggers, web filters that block certain sites may be more useful.

Taking the people into consideration and confidence is the next key element. If the technology is implemented without informing the targeted audience (in this case the students and teachers) the whole thing will fail. Being upfront is not optional. It is mandatory. One of the most important reasons why this is important is: any technology has its own bugs, limitations. When you take the people into confidence, these limitations will be tolerated and taken in the proper light, than when they were not informed upfront.

Also, when they are informed upfront, they know what to expect. Most people will backout on their own. Meaning, they will not visit the sites in the first place. Few others will hope the system will not work. The remaining very very few will actually try to defeat the system.

In terms of communicating the strategy upfront, something on the lines of “It has come to our notice that some students and/or teachers are visiting x-rated sites. In the interest of the general community health, we are taking steps to block these sites. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated” would help.

Computer use Policy?

In reply to “Big Brother”

What school would condone student using inappropiate language or visits porn sites?

The computers are not private and hence the school should be allowed control. This was not a covert operation, and hence people need to make a choice. Follow the rules or get busted.

Agree, but do it differently

In reply to “Big Brother”

I agree that we need to monitor the activity children partake in online at school. Educators are responsible for making sure kids aren’t getting into trouble. I don’t agree with logging every button the child presses, however. A better method in my opinion would be to have extensive filtering of words and sites. Same results, without the “Big Brother” feel.

The Bad Guys are Everywhere

In reply to “Big Brother”

I have heard “stupidity” and “insanity” defined along the lines of doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome.

The problem is that a majority of the members of the human race generally can be classified as:

1.) evil – driven by their own selfish lusts and desires, having no regard for the rules or those that made them;
2.) stupid – expecting to get away with bad decisions, and expecting no repercussions for stupid choices; or
3.) both – more often than not… maybe the two a mutually dependent.

Fortunately, most Americans are deterred from following their heart by laws, statutes, rules and yes, “Big Brother”. Some of us even behave and refuse to do “what comes naturally” because it is the right way to act.

As long as people disregard rules and laws, and place more emphasis on feeding their own passions for power, money, sexual gratification, etc., we will need “Big Brother” standing in, deterring most of us from being and acting as stupid and evil as if he were not watching. Who, but a fool, dares to have their surprised look on their face when they choose to breach the rules and are faced with the wrath of Big Bubba?

Do I like “BB”? No, I don’t. I hate “BB”. Do I find comfort in knowing “BB” is there, serving to deter some of my peers from doing their own thing, or to pounce on my peers who dare to break the rules? You bet I do.

A few posts in this thread suggest that disclosing the monitoring program should be a requisite. That is absurd as expecting policemen to announce their presence when they are around criminals so they will be on their best behavior and not commit any crimes until they can find a time and place to get away without being caught.

Big Brother should not be expected to make his presence known, nor warn any of us he is watching. It should be expected that he is, and everyone should expect him to start kicking booty and taking names the moment anyone crosses the line or breaches the boundary of what commons sense would indicate is acceptable use.

Several posts also pose the question, “Whose computer is it anyway?” You are so right. The courts say you’re right and so does anyone with half their whits. Let the teachers and kids fill their own smut boxes with spyware, trojans and other malware, not the computers that the self-behaving teachers and students need to use to get their work done.

For those ninny’s that whine and complain about loss of privacy, get a life and go whine to someone who cares what you think. Thank God those with such a flawed way of thinking are in the minority.

Who owns controls

In reply to “Big Brother”

The school own the equipment and pay for the access, why should they not control what is done with it?
Want to waste your life? Do it on your own time and use your own honestly earned money.
Otherwise, no sympathy from me pal!

At Schools in the US Filtering Mandatory in Some Cases

In reply to “Big Brother”

I used to be the system administrator at a parochial school grades K – 8. In order for us to be eligible for any federal funding we had to be in compliance with certain items as set forth by the federal government. One of those items was that we MUST filter websites/internet usage or run the risk of losing both federal and state funding for the school. Part of the filtering software was the ability to see exactly who was doing what on computers, including ALL websites visited. I see nothing wrong with keystroke logging or monitoring internet usage. Speaking from the point of someone that implemented policies, unfettered use of a resource that could cause potential harm to the user is a huge liability. Users were informed that the network was subject to monitoring and informed of the consequences. If they choose not to comply that is their problem. The computer, network and ultimately the internet access is owned and controlled by the school. I don’t know the grade levels the school in question in this post is, but I am surprised that it took that long to implement the keystroke logging. Perhaps someone should start putting up signs that say “Welcome to the real world people, big brother not only monitors your computer and internet but your cell phone and credit card purchases as well”

It’s SCHOOL — keep the focus on Academics

In reply to At Schools in the US Filtering Mandatory in Some Cases

As the IT director for a K-12 district, I’m responsible for creating, implementing, and enforcing policies governing use of our IT resources. My focus is always on the educational use of our resources, specifically on academics, and it’s pretty easy to justify our policies to teachers, parents and students. We are required to filter our Internet (and do so), we are running an Internet Safety curriculum to give our students the tools to make better choices online, and students do not have email access at school. Are our policies restrictive? You bet. But these restrictive policies make it much simpler to spend our resources on academic support, and to provide the best possible facilities and resources for our students’ education.

At last!

In reply to It’s SCHOOL — keep the focus on Academics

someone that understands why the computers were put there in the first place AND what their purpose is as an admin of those computers.

Thank you for your post.

good topic

In reply to “Big Brother”

This a good, relevent topic. We just started Internet filtering here at the school I work at. Most people do not have a problem with it, except kids trying to use MySpace, Facebook, etc. And some teachers who use Ebay. (yes we blocked Ebay)
The only downside so far is some legit sites get blocked, but we can create rule exceptions for them so it is no longer a problem. We have everyone sign a usage agreement, so legally we cover our butts. We’ve already caught a few kids by monitoring the logs, who’ve bypassed the filters by using proxy sites, and one who tried running a program to gain network passwords – he was expelled.

Bottom line

In reply to “Big Brother”

The bottom line is that when it comes to business you do NOT have the same rights as at home. You have freedom of speech, freedom to live your life the way that you want, but when it comes to getting paid by an employer, you DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to surf anything except what your employer tells you is ok. The same at school. If your parents allow you to surf porn, chat rooms, etc., at home, that is their problem. Schools and businesses have complete rights to limit content, and monitor. Is a kid allowed to go down the hall mouthing profanities? I think not. What gives them the right to do so on the internet at School? And anyone saying to teach them about safety on the internet, Yes that is a good idea, but is ludicrous and namby pamby to think that kids will follow anything preached at them once they get on the web. They get bombarded with sex and violence for 5 hours every night on TV, you think they won’t pursue it on the web, especially once they accidentally bump into it or are curious what some word will bring up. Home and personal life, however, is a different thing. We need to be active against such things as the Google intrusions into our private lives, THAT is what we need to protest, THAT is real big brother.

If they own the computer

In reply to “Big Brother”

If they own the computer they have the right to dictate what it’s used for. At least you have internet access, for may years the company I work for (a fortune 500 company), we didnt have it.

You better believe it!

In reply to “Big Brother”

If you have people students or staff that are surfing x sites they need to be fired! You cannot tolerate that kind of corruption in the workplace either business or school. Chat programs are notorious for inducing spam and wasting time. Are the tax payers paying staff to chat with friends or spouses? Not so. The students are there to learn not spend time chatting up their friends.

From an Educator Perspective

In reply to “Big Brother”

IT is not the evil that people think it is. Yes, there are a lot of ways that Information Technology can be scary to people who don’t understand it. On the flip side of this coin, protecting and educating children is a top concern for this country. I work in the IT field and understand the whole picture of security and freedom of privacy and information. Please allow me to share some of the lesser known background elements that drive the “Big Brother” curse that the general public thinks is bordering censorship in our educational facilities.

First, the issue of school funding. The federal and state governments can withold school funding if the school does not conform to the guidelines that are set forth regarding internet monitoring and filtration. Do you want to have to start paying for the books and other necessary educational tools that schools now provide for your students? How about increasing the classroom size because the school missed out on funding because of the supposed “rights” of students to access whatever they please on the internet including rated X websites. I know that this is a tough pill to swallow, but come on shouldn’t we have more respect for our students that don’t want to have to deal with the profanity and porn so that they can concentrate on what matters most which is their education. I attended a public school and university. There were vast differences in values at both places. I feel that this monitoring and filtering of the internet is in the best interest of the students.

Second, from a technical standpoint, this type of device is good for the health of the network that allows students to access that educational information for studies and research. I look at the health of the network at the place that I am employed and the health of the network at a location that is not so tight on monitoring and filtration of the internet. My network is healthier and has more uptime than the network that is not filtered or monitored. This results in fewer hours of overtime on our network technicians and the administrator. This allows for the proactive nature of our network staff rather than reactive. Would you rather have a network that is up, giving you access to materials that you need to do your job, or would you like it if your network was to be down at a critical moment when your students need internet access to work on a research paper or project during class?

I think it is clear cut. Each school should have devices as these to ensure that our kids get a quality education. If the students want to access porn, chat, profane materials, and other unnecessary non-school related items… Let them do it on their own time at home or some other place. This goes for educators as well. Focus on what is important here! That focus should be on EDUCATION.

The non-issues

In reply to “Big Brother”

Wow is this not an issue.
Thei is not a moral issue.
This is not a big brother issue.
This is not a protecting the kids issue.
This is not about sex, or profanity or wasting time.

This is simply a case of an organization posting rules about how their resources can be used. Neither the teachers nor the students have ANY right to use the school computers for anything the school doesn’t like. The computer resources are at the school for learning. Period. They may get used for other things, but that’s a freedom the school can allow or dis-allow at their discretion.

People seem to forget that the ability to do something doesn’t give them the right. The students and teachers in this case don’t have any rights that are being infringed upon. The have specific priveledges the school allows and should be thankful for that.

Illegal in Norway

In reply to “Big Brother”

Even with a written acceptance from students and parents, and a general policy for attending the school, you would not be allowed to do this unless the police is connected when criminal activity is suspected – and they would be in charge of doing the surveilance and logging.

The Problematic First Amendment

In reply to “Big Brother”

http://acan.gohotsprings.com/

Nothing places the “Fear of God” into a politician, lawyer, or judge as the power given an American citizen to openly and freely express his opinion on the government.

The Federal Elections Commission will decide Monday whether political blogs (personal web pages) should fall under the McCain-Feingold Bill and should be forced to register with the FEC.

User Rights vs. Organization Rights

In reply to “Big Brother”

Any organization needs to have a usage policy, for their equipment. That policy should state that “we monitor” activity.

If someone does not want their “extracurricular” activities monitored then they have a choice of not doing them on the organizations time, money or equipment. Do it at home.

People in organizations when assigned a computer get an overwheling sense of ownership….”thats my computer” meanwhile it is the organizations and the organization is liable. For software piracy, etc….

Why is privacy such a big deal anyway?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Call me crazy and un-American. But I’ve never seen why privacy in use of technology has ever been such a big deal. Well, obviously financial data should be kept confidential or it could be seriously abused. But seeing that most schools consider it their responsibility to keep viewed content and such “clean” and “appropriate”, why is it such a big deal to watch over students and teachers? (I say this with the understanding that the teachers and students are fully aware that they are being watched – and perhaps “We’re watching you” signs would be a good idea.) But I honestly don’t see anything wrong with the administration knowing what kinds of unwanted sites teachers and/or kids are accessing. A school is an institution; and like any institution, it has the right to do what it sees necessary to keep its members “in line” and watch over them.

On the other hand, those who are “up in arms” certainly have reason; in my opinion, there should be no reason that their “secret meetings” need be secret. Can people stop assuming that someone has to be the “bad guy” and try to compromise by drawing up some definite technology policy?

Technology Chipping Away at Personal Liberty

In reply to “Big Brother”

Personally I don’t want to wake up some morning in a world populated by “Ned Flanders” characters from the Simpson?s show. Every time we justify the use of technology that undermines our most personal expressions, even when justified, it opens the door for society to be accustomed to such intrusions. No one would argue that Teachers and Children should not be using profanity or visiting X-rated Web Sites, however there are other approaches to solving these issues. Unfortunately technology allows us to take a very lazy detached approach and let the computer do the policing for us. The results are as binary as the methodology. 0 or 1, you committed a crime, you go to jail, you are good, you get rewarded. How about coping with the underlying issues here? What is motivating young people to seek out pornography or use profanity? The lazy PC police will never deal with the underlying issues and therefore never solve the problem. How is it parents are just beginning to understand that a pc needs to be in a public space in the house to allow parental oversight, yet the schools aren’t able to physically interact with children online? To answer your question, the bad guy is anyone who allows children to grow up in a vacuum. I’d rather the kids get 50% less computer time and 50% more adult interaction. Children who grow up in a sterile Orwellian society will either rebel completely or come to accept such intensive and intrusive monitoring as matter of fact. That is not a world I want to grow old in.
I’m sure there are many who will take offense, so please remember, this is just my humble opinion.

The Seven Dirty Words

In reply to Technology Chipping Away at Personal Liberty

Thanks BJ for the reminder of the consequences of Orwellianism. Before you know it we have yet another branch of neo-government deciding who’s naughty and who’s nice, based upon whimsical standards weilded by the squeekiest wheel of society. It isn’t long before you lose freedom of thought, along with speech, and you don’t need to look far for examples in history.
Ask yourself what constitutes unacceptable speech? The seven words you can’t say on television? If you bow to the zealous censors it will require a revision of the dictionary and not only religious extremists, but politically correct moguls will set the standards, confusing the masses and rendering free thinkers as pariahs of a bygone era.
Consider the consequences of far reaching policies and don’t succumb to the lemming effect.

There’s loss of privacy and then there’s censorship…

In reply to The Seven Dirty Words

Keep in mind Bodranman,
There is a difference between LOSS OF PRIVACY (the issue here, I think) and CENSORSHIP. These students – are they really being censored? Is their freedom of action being restricted? I think not; administrators are simply enabled to be aware of what the students are doing. But censoring them? Well, if it gets to that point, I’ll side with you.

Thought Police

In reply to The Seven Dirty Words

“It isn’t long before you lose freedom of thought, along with speech, and you don’t need to look far for examples in history.”

1950’s to be exact. McCarthy, Roy Cohn, etc.

Is This Leadership By Example?

In reply to Technology Chipping Away at Personal Liberty

Chipping away at our civil liberties is indeed the issue. Site blocking is one thing which I think we can all relate to and accept but eavesdropping and wiretapping are unacceptable.

If these behaviors constitute our example of leadership, hopefully complete rebellion will be the future scenario rather than full mindless subjugation.

The fourth amendment regarding illegal searches without any probable cause is constantly disregarded:
The leaders of our country are currently performing criminal activities regarding domestic spying and are yet to be held accountable.
We routinely accept being required to submit to bodily fluid searches (urine) for even the most menial jobs, any refusal being defined in written policy to be construed as a positive result.

As more and more activities such as this are accepted, the downward spiral towards an authoritarian government is inevitable.

Are we still living in a “democracy”?

In reply to “Big Brother”

ABSOLUTELY NO! I do not think that it is right to spy on anyone (less in the school environment)when we are taugh that is not only ethically but morally incorrect. What is going to happen next? Are we going to have litle tiny cams recording what we do in the privacy of our homes, to make sure we take showers, change underwear, do not cheat on our spouses, maintain the house cleaned? Wouldn’t it be nice to have IRS record all your actions to ensure they can suck every tax penney they can for whatever you do at home because they suspect you are working from home and not reporting your earnings? Germans live in that type of world. Believe me, I know; I lived there 35 long years and it is not a pretty sight! Let’s face it, everyone, and I really mean EVERYONE (from the most highly educated to the less educated)has a little bit of a crook in him/herself; it’s just a matter of digging deep enough to find that dirt! We understand that, for a cop to enforce the law sometimes he must breake the law, but I think electronic survelliance of teachers and students at school is just unnnecessary. There are more than one ways to keep people from visiting those sites. These can be done through the administration of user rights and your local security policy.It takes a little time and effort, but it can be done, and it is legal and, moreover, morally and ethically correct!

WAAAA

In reply to “Big Brother”

Waa Waaa Waaah
There is definitely both sides of this issue
A) people think porn is bad (someone please define it for me)
B) no one should be stupid enough to give up their liberties as guaranteed by our Constitution (which currently is disregarded by the Administration)
I think blocking sites and / or content is censorship which I personally cannot support an inkling of.
Recording keystrokes is spying, which used in certain circumstances can provide valuable information
Bottom Line
Its a public school and the rules should be set by the public that sends their children to that school. If they want to raise little NAZI’s who am I to disagree?
I would not work for a company that monitored my email, online activity or anything else that was personal, as to my keystrokes etc.
People are sheep
Accept the fact that security is a STATE OF MIND
NOTHING IS SECURE and no amount of Nazi isms will make it secure
Freedom is also an illusion anyone who thinks they are truly free is an idiot
Privacy is another illusion, no such thing anymore.
What we need is BALANCE……….
Ron

No secrets there

In reply to “Big Brother”

I take it that the staff and students have been made aware that this monitoring is being done and that the computers being used belong to the school/school district. If so, IMNSHO, there is no basis for any complaints. The school is acting to protect the students if only from themselves and to protect the school from potential liabilities when little Johnny or Jenny says I met the perv in chatrooms when I was browsing Internet chatrooms instead of using the computers for school related work. As for the teachers, well, last time I looked the right to browse porn sites was not on anyone’s list of basic human rights.

Just my tuppence worth.

YOU are pure evil.

In reply to “Big Brother”

Honestly, how far up an employee’s butt do you and your administration feel you need to climb?

What about the teacher who needs to do a little lunchtime online banking? By logging keystrokes, you now have their login and password to their bank account(s). How are you guaranteeing that this informatiion will be ABSOLUTELY safe in your hands? I bet you can’t.

There are much less invasive methods to block the students’ access to certain web sites while leaving the adult employees some of what few freedoms we still have. I’m guessing you’re a real fan of the “Patriot Act” too. Are you familiar with the term “Facist Theocracy”? You should be. It’s you and people like you who are nudging this once free Republic in that direction and you should at least know what the destination looks like before you plan a trip there.

I truly hope that your liberty-stealing little spy plan fails miserably, and that you and your entire administration all end up in court over this. Shame on you.

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to YOU are pure evil.

> What about the teacher who needs to do a little
> lunchtime online banking?

The place where you work is not the place you should be doing your “lunchtime banking” or anything else for that matter that you consider to be private. If you want to do things involving privacy, go home and do it there, where it belongs. You go to work in the morning so that you can WORK, not so that you can do your personal errands.

> I’m guessing you’re a real fan of the “Patriot
> Act” too. Are you familiar with the term “Facist
> Theocracy”? You should be.

Perhaps you should look up big words like “theocracy” before you decide to try and impress someone and end up using it incorrectly. What the hell does theocracy have to do with THIS particular discussion? The answer is simple: it has nothing to do with it. But I suppose if you knew what the word meant, you would already have realized that.

> I truly hope that your liberty-stealing little
> spy plan fails miserably, and that you and your
> entire administration all end up in court over
> this.

ROFL.
Go back to your ACLU with the rest of the quacks, and leave us sane people here in the real world.

Go home – most are not allowed

In reply to Reply To: “Big Brother”

I know lots of teachers and most are not allowed to leave the school yards during their lunch break. Those that are usually have to go through some large hoops to do so, getting permission and telling people when leaving and when you got back – real hassle.

Also most employments have Internet use policies that allow staff to do basic surfing and personal business during their own time – thus Internet banking at lunch under such policies is OK.

The rest of the arguement I will leave alone as I see it as irrelevant to the main topic.

grace

In reply to Go home – most are not allowed

“Also most employments have Internet use policies that allow staff to do basic surfing and personal business during their own time – thus Internet banking at lunch under such policies is OK.”

That is by the grace of the employer. They are not obliged to allow it. Disturbing is the mentality that believes they are. Maybe school administrators will do the teachers’ grocery shopping for them too, or… oh!, I know! maybe they can hire people just for that purpose! Maybe the teachers’ union should strike to get that added in 🙂

Yes it is grace

In reply to grace

and where that grace is given it would be a major breach of security to use a keystroke logger. I noted that you totally avoided the point about many schools not allowing staff to leave the school during their lunch break – this is because they require the staff on hand to supervise students during said lunch break – this varies depending upon the size of the school and the number of available staff.

I didn’t avoid it,

In reply to Yes it is grace

I just don’t think it’s relavent. The teacher can do her online banking on her own time, just like she does her grocery shopping, her hair appointments, or having her little yip-yip dog groomed, none of which an employer is obliged to accomodate.

People really do lose their minds when it comes to computers!

But lunch is supposed to be their own time

In reply to I didn’t avoid it,

and the mployer, in many cases, does not allow them to leave the premises – although staying on the premises during lunch is not a term of employment.

However, the point that I was making when I first spoke about them being allowd to use Internet banking during lunch was –

That some employers DO allow staff to use their equipment during their lunch break for Internet banking and responsible Internet use.

I never said it was a right, just that some do permit it, for various reasons. In such cases the use of a keystroke logger would be breach of privacy as well as a breach of security.

Lunch

In reply to I didn’t avoid it,

It can’t be both. If they won’t let her leave, it’s not “her own time”.

“I never said it was a right, just that some do permit it, for various reasons. In such cases the use of a keystroke logger would be breach of privacy as well as a breach of security.”

So are employers who permit it supposed to unblock porn sites during lunch? I don’t think so. There is no expectation of privacy, nor is any employer ever required to provide it.

response to adunlop’s lunch post

In reply to I didn’t avoid it,

Could not reply to your post as it had reached maximum depth.

Teaching is a profession and, like many other professions, you do not always get your lunch time to yourself or have as much freedom at lunch as you would like. It is common for teachers to have to have their lunch whilst supervising students, and other work related activities. During the day, like the students, they are required to stay on campus unless they have approval to love from senior management – then they have to notify the front office whent hey leave and when they are back.

Also allowing access to a banking site is not the same as allowing access to a porn site.

Lunch cont’d

In reply to I didn’t avoid it,

“Teaching is a profession and, like many other professions, you do not always get your lunch time to yourself or have as much freedom at lunch as you would like.”

The employer is requiring it, so it is the employers’s time.

“Also allowing access to a banking site is not the same as allowing access to a porn site.”

Agreed, but it all falls under “personal use of company property”.

What is your basis…

In reply to YOU are pure evil.

“What about the teacher who needs to do a little lunchtime online banking?”

… for thinking any organization computer can be used for personal use at any time?

Your “freedoms” do not include converting someone else’s property to your own use without permission. That usually falls under the ‘theft’ section of your particular jurisdiction’s laws.

Gee, why can’t the teacher just borrow a school bus and drive to the bank?

Big Brother

In reply to “Big Brother”

Another fine example of you are damned if you do and daqmned if you don’t. I think in this instance it is the school board and the parents that should support the monitoring. If they don’t then they should be prepared to accept the consequences if some one abuses the system.

“Big Brother” in K-12

In reply to “Big Brother”

I work as a computer tech in a K-12 school district. We had teachers and parents complaining about the children seeing “other students” going to inapporpiate web sites and called Administrators and Board members voiceing their complaints. We added filter software and made everybody go through a Proxy server so this would not occur. A school environment is no place for these children to go to anyway. They should be using Technology for “Learning”, not blogging or going to X-rated web sites. We still have student who make attempts to get around our efforts and it is a struggle to keep up with that because we have enough to do already, keeping the computers and the Network to be used for teaching/learning situations.

Are you kidding me…..?

In reply to “Big Brother”

They just busted a ring of sadistic people worldwide having relations with children (never mind the infant that was also shown). Do you people only think of yourselves? They are talking on CNN about the justice in US giving out your personal information. I am an IT person. I still don’t bank on the net, don’t let my kids use the net without me being around (I can explain things much better), don’t socialize like a hermit online, etc. What is it with people that they have moved from the fresh outdoors and decided that the only way they can get anything anymore is by using just the net? We have become a world of paranoid people. Parents have to closely watch their children because preditors have moved from just across our street to into our homes through the internet and people with delusional thinking feel that their freedom is taken away. Shame on you that you feel so deprived while children and young adults are being abused all over the world.

It’s the breadth and scope

In reply to “Big Brother”

It’s not the blocking of x-rated sites (if their concern was really
for the students, they would block them instead of just reporting
them) that gets most people up in arms. It’s the keystroke
monitoring. Treating everybody like criminals to catch the 2-5%
who might be takes us that much closer to a police state, and
also is just plain rude. How would you like it if your neighbors
asked you to keep your blinds open all the time and leave your
doors unlocked, just so they could know if you were smoking
pot in your house and report you to the police.

Back to the site blocking, there are a number of people out there
who feel that a government entity (like public schools) should
not censor anything. That it is just plain wrong. I tend to agree
with them, with the caveat that things that government doesn’t
have to give access to things that are against the law to begin
with. Giving minors access to pornography is illegal.

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to “Big Brother”

This issue has come up many times already, and in each time, the answer remains the same: if you don’t like the policies being implemented at your workplace, then go somewhere else.

Your employer has every right to expect that you’d actually be WORKING while being paid, and not browsing web sites, chatting with your friends, or watching the latest Girls Gone Wild video.

As the employer, they can tell you exactly what is or is not allowed to be done on company time. This isn’t about “freedom” anymore than the moon landing was about science. The issue is clear and simple, and if you don’t agree with the rules being put into place by your employer, then go work somewhere else. But I think you’d be hard-pressed to find any employer in his right mind that would just give you free-reign to do whatever you wanted on company time.

And the fact that we’re talking about a school here is all the more reason why these practices are perfectly legitimate. Yes, it’s all fine and dandy to theorize and dream that kids will never do anything bad or stupid just because we teach them. But in the real world, children will ALWAYS do stupid things, and in the internet age, stupid things can easily get them killed. So for that reason, yes, you have to monitor them and place far more restrictions on their activities in school than what you would’ve had to do 20 years ago.

You want freedom? Wait till 5 o’clock, get in your car, then drive home. There you’ll find all the freedom you could possibly desire. But don’t expect it in the workplace or at school, because that’s just incredibly naive and way too unrealistic.

I see two issues

In reply to “Big Brother”

I would say whether I’d be upset or not hinges on two issues. The first would be who owns the computer the students are using. If the keylogger is being installed on property the school doesn’t own then I have an issue as just because you go to school there doesn’t mean the school owns the student or the student’s property. The second issue has to do with the whole keylogging issue. If the school has a problem with students using their networks to surf porn sites they need to block those sites. There are a number of decent firewall products which include webfilters. The only time a keylogger should be allowed is when the entity placing the keylogger on a machine owns the machine that key logger is being installed on. If it’s a question of network use there are better and simpler ways of accomplishing that end. At my company we just log what websites our employees go to and we block anything we deem offensive. That is our right as we not only own the computers but the network and net connections the employee is using. We don’t feel the need to log an employee’s keystrokes to accomplish that. In fact we seach systems for keyloggers as they are a security issue as they log passwords and other personal information.

It is right of the School Owner or H.M

In reply to “Big Brother”

I work in a lot of PLC companies and univeristy and we do the same , to block music donwloading , x-rated sites, and every thing that make the people play not to work, it is legal right of any property to do that to protect its own targets. There is no bad guys, if they want to play simply they play @ home or in cyber cafee, but working place is a descent clean place that should not be miss-used. Have a nice day , continue the good job 🙂

Where your at makes the differance

In reply to “Big Brother”

Internet access at work, school, church, or even a public hotspot – is subject to the provider to DICTATE what that connection is used for. So if your employer decides you should be working, instead of chatting, checking your bank account, or checking sports scores – then what’s the question. The issue of access “rights” is out of hand. If you aren’t paying for the internet connection that you’re using – you have no “rights” on that connection.

The issue that’s important in all of this is whether or not “Big Brother” has the right to evesdrop on what we do in our own homes, on our own property, with our own stuff.

Some assumptions

In reply to “Big Brother”

I’ll start out by stating that I think the key loggers are a bad idea.

Here’s the problem though. I know in two school districts thousands of miles from each other that neither school required students to have individual accounts. With that in mind, key loggers are the only way administrators would know who was on what computer at any particular time.

Appalling, I know.

What ever happen to education

In reply to “Big Brother”

We’ve become so infused as a nation into sex; do ya think there is a direct coalition with the uneducated product that the education system is putting not to mention we have plenty of teacher sleeping with students. As a parent, myspace is blocked at home, so I wouldn’t have a problem with it being blocked at school. If we know that our end user at work aren’t educated on potential dangers who is educating the children. In terms of Big Brother, did they not get a briefing saying that the equipment at work is monitored?

oh PUHLEEASE

In reply to “Big Brother”

As the IT guy for 400 of YOUR students, and 40 of YOUR neighbors/friends (our teachers and administrators)Do you want them looking at PRON when they should be studying or working with YOUR son/daughter? I spend about 20% of my day monitoring the net use. Every user signs a terms of service, before they are granted access. We have filtered net access, and block sites the we feel are not in the “mission” of our school.
When little Johnny’s mommy calls me to ask why she pays 10K a year, for her son to be banned for a few months, I simply ask her if she would like to see the pictures that her little angel was printing out and passing around on campus. That usually ends the discussion about that.
so, buck up, suck up, dont like the ride? get outta the car, or in this case.. off the information susperhigway. My network, MY rules. period.

what if Johnny brought a magazine instead ?

In reply to oh PUHLEEASE

“When little Johnny’s mommy calls me to ask why she pays 10K a year, for her son to be banned for a few months, I simply ask her if she would like to see the pictures that her little angel was printing out and passing around on campus. That usually ends the discussion about that. ”

the problem is that savvy computer kids can frame Johnny and his computer use — make it look like he did it.

Framing isn’t all that easy

In reply to what if Johnny brought a magazine instead ?

If little Johnny gets framed it’s going be due to his allowing access to his system. When you’re issued a system and an ip it’s like your being issued a car. If you allow that car to be stolen or used in a robbery you’re going to be liable for that misuse of the vehicle. This is the same principle. The punishment isn’t years in jail it’s restricting little Johnny from going out on the net without a nanny for a few months. I would suggest that is part of the learning process that when you enable to somebody to break the rules you’re going to be punished as well.

Key stroke logging makes framing dead easy

In reply to Framing isn’t all that easy

for anyone with one gram of computer savvy. The ID and password are stored in the logger file and can be extracted. Then used to seem to be someone else.

Keystroke logging is one of the biggest security no-nos in existence.

The moment you load such a program you are absolving anyone from responsibility for any use made of their ID and password as you have just breached the security and confidentiality of that information.

Using your car example you can not hold me responsible for the misuse of my car if you give me one with a starter button and no key or it has the same key as all the others in the fleet.

ok.. and??

In reply to what if Johnny brought a magazine instead ?

If little Johnny is careless enough to give his password out to his freinds, then HE is STILL responsable for the outcome, the same as *I* would be accountable for MY giving out of passwords to the admin account.. Responsibility is the key, most kids are not capable of policeing themselves, if they were the filtering companies would not exist. Another thing, is when you know who the kids are, you know the ones to watch.

IF is the key point in your post

In reply to ok.. and??

You are correct in any normal situation where the only source of the password information is little Johnny, then he is totally responsible for what is done by anyone using his password. However, the original post was about the use of a keystroke logger, and that immediately breaches the security around the password and anyone with access to that machine can get little Johnny’s password. Thus the moment you install a keystroke logger you make the use of passwords redundant and you free little Johnny from any responsibility regarding the use or security of his password as you have breached its security.

No one, at the most very few, disputes the need for security or the blocking of inappropriate Internet access, or the monitoring of web site visits. What they object to is the idea of trying to manage this by keystroke logging instead of by proper software at the gateway. Gateway management stops the garbage at the perimeter, keystroke logging allows it to happen and gives you info for a witch hunt – no protection at all.

Witch Hunt?

In reply to IF is the key point in your post

Reality check…. whitch hunt is when you don’t know, when some Little Johnny logs in and says he is going to blow away his classmates that is not a witch hunt. Specific singular person, specific singular stated threat. At the very least a private consuling session is in order.
That or take the chance and bring lots of paper towels to sop up the blood and wring your hands and say “if only we could have known”.

Yes witch hunt

In reply to Witch Hunt?

If there is no way that anyone else can get Johnny’s password without him giving it up, then you can blame him for what happens under that ID and password. However, the use of a keystroke logger breaches that security and you no longer have any surity that it was Johnny.

Example. Assume that a keystroke logger is in use.
Johnny logs on and does some legit school work. Another student with a bit more tech savvy who does not like Johnny, lets call him Pete, sees which machine Johnny is using. When Johnny logs off and leaves the machine Pete goes over and accesses the file directory locating the file where the keystroke entries are logged. He can copy this to a floppy or print it out, or spend time studying it there – lets say he copies to floppy or USB drive. He takes that home and studies it at home, locating and writting down Johnny’s actual ID and password – he can even duplicate the work just done. Then Pete goes to school the next day and logs on as Johnny and starts surfing porn sites, possible as the keystroke logger does not block access. Then when the investigation starts it is Johnny who is asked questions about the porn sites that he never visited but were done under his ID and password. The investigation in this case is a witch hunt as the security breach caused by the keystroke logger means that you can not be sure who did it.

NB if this was say years 1 to 3 it is unlikely to happen but as they get older the probabilty increases.

Yes, Witch Hunt – still no

In reply to Yes witch hunt

A witch hunt is still when you don’t know who did what and you just guess. Key loggers and those that install them are not so stupid, they run off locked servers or report to a locked file on that server and you can seperate who did what and when. Poor Johnny could not have done it since he was in detention at the time but the other jerk couldn’t have screwed with the file anyway. Yes, if it was installed by a moron and never secured that could happen but then without the horrrid key logger the jerk could also have just walked into the vice principal (aka hatchet man) office and declared that dumb johnny surfs porn. Johnny is still screwed. No computer involved in the screwing.

If so, F’jar, then key loggers would be excellent.

In reply to Yes witch hunt

If the key strokes are logged on a server, which only the admin can access, then the security breach of Ernest’s argument doesn’t have to happen just to use a key logger. Does anybody know the name(s) of commercial tools that fit this description? That would settle this whole argument to my satisfaction.

Great idea!

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think as long as the school is supplying the computer systems, they should be in a position to monitor what is sent and received online by both students and faculty!

Quit

In reply to “Big Brother”

If you feel some sort of a civil liberty violation is occuring, leave your position.
Tell the boss you have to find employers not interested in violation of civil liberties regardless of how they are cloaked. Once these things start the have a tendancy to grow like a tumor. Encourage your bosses to ask student body to please restrain themselves and police themselves.
That is what free people in free society’s do.
You need not work there, it is up to you, and you must remember that a lot of people died protecting our liberties and your employer is doing a great disservice to our veterans.
Do not let neconish right wing agenda’s intimidate you, and beleive me, digital snooping on your very own computer is no different than having someone in your living room, observing your private behaviors and then passing judgement and punishing you wihout any legal proceeding. This is somewhat akin to Sharia (Islamic) Law, those guys are the real mind police.
Our past and current US administrators love having corporations enforce civil liberty violating rules, it keeps the government free of having to enforce an illegal big brother agenda, they just let conservative corporate heads make up rules to do it for them. I.E Mandatory Drug testing, keyboard loggers etc … is just one way they pry into our lives, funny thing is our leadership does not have to “pee in a cup” for any reason, because politicians will not vote that restraining, civil liberty violating legislation into their own lives, leaving plenty of room for corruption to flourish.
Your computer is your property, if it belongs to the school that is their computer, so be aware that when you log onto someone elses computer, they can watch you all they want and be well within their legal rights, whether you are aware of the snooping or not.
The only way we can fight this type of thing is to register and vote for legislation that outlaws digital trespassing on our own personal computers.
BTW
There is the question of on line porn and pedophiles…I personally believe that they (pedophiles) should be put to death, or at least jailed for life with no chance for release. The jail population will take care of the death sentence.
I am sure that this (pedophilia) is a concern at the school…and I cannot blame them for it.
ed

Waste of money and time

In reply to “Big Brother”

You bring up a good issue. But I think in time, there will be no feasible way to use and manage the data collected and therefore someone will be wasting alot of taxpayer’s money wading thru data, all for the sake of “knowing” what someone did on the internet. Is there not a real person (i.e. TEACHER ) that is supervising ? Isnt part of education learning to work with directions from the teacher ? Just because a kid uses a computer does not give me reason to think there is anything more evil going on there than out on the playground. I happen to work at a college where their is always a tight line between Academic freedom and security. We do not log keystrokes, but we do log everything else as part of daily network maintenance, not because we have issues with certain web-sites. If we find abnormal computer behavior on the network, we simply notify the person in charge of that student/computer. We as network admins cannot agree on which web-sites are appropriate , so the administration and faculty have to stay on top of it, just like they used to when we all used books. We have been told that Homeland Security is going to require colleges and other institutions to give them a connection to internal networks for 24×7 surveillance. THAT is scary but will also be a waste of time because once they start trying to sort the data , they will be overwhelmed.

“Big Brother”

In reply to “Big Brother”

The guy who owns the computers, the keyboards, the bandwidth, the screens, the mice, the rest of the stuff gets to be the bad guy if he wants (please excuse the gender specific politically incorrect “he” in this case but I could truly care less) simply because he owns the stuff. Just like in the real world: if you want to use equipment for other than what it is specifically provided to you for – in this case education – use your own.

keylogging sounds horrible

In reply to “Big Brother”

It is OK, and right, to block out bad websites at schools. Checking everytime someone uses profanity in an e-mail, password, word doc, etc. may be a bit overboard. Nonetheless, by telling everyone that there are keyloggers on their machines takes away all privacy, completely. Now, it is the schools property and I’m sure legaly they can do it. However, rather than keylog everything, I might suggest using something like websense to block out bad web sites, if that is your goal. I’m sure that would be better accepted by users.

No Key Logging – Great Idea – reality check!

In reply to keylogging sounds horrible

Little Johnny email/chats to little Billy saying that Big Butch and his friends are going to “get it” tomorrow in the lunch room. “Got my dad’s 38 and I’m going to blow them away like you see on TV. Big black holes in their guts. They’ll be sorry then!!!!
No Little Johnny, they will be dead then and you will spend your precious life in prision and feel a horrible guilt for the rest of your long life.

The tools aren’t perfect but you work with what you have and save the lives and minds of those you can find. That is reality.

Notice that no websites were accessed in the commission of this act.

If I thought it would save a few young lives, I would put radio xmtrs on them and so what if I interferred with their “Keg Party” or “sniff this stuff” party. They are CHILDREN and I want them alive to bitch at me about their freedom being taken away. I’m and ADULT and can excuse and forgive their sorry little tantrums. If they are bitching, at least they are alive and their brains are not too fried to be able to speak.

Johnny is one of 1200 students at a school

In reply to No Key Logging – Great Idea – reality check!

“The tools aren’t perfect but you work with what you have and save the lives and minds of those you can find. That is reality.”

So many people on this thread are “sensationalizing” by talking how we can catch Johnny doing this or that or save a life by using a keystroke monitor. Please advise me, how do you find Johnny’s specific e-mail in the context of millions of keystrokes , thousands of e-mails? How long does it take ?

Key logging is nearly useless and no more

In reply to No Key Logging – Great Idea – reality check!

than entrapment it does not prevent the process and only allows for a witch hunt later. Those realy up to something bad are more likely to rely on face to face communications anyway.

No school environment that I know of needs a chat service – thus the chating is closed by closing thsoe ports. Any decent email server has a scanner that can check for content as well as virus scanning. And inappropriate web sites are very easily blocked and web usage monitored at the gateway. Thus using less time and trouble than a keystroke logger.

A well built gateway does the job much more effectively and much cheaper than any key logger system. The reality check is that the only people interested in key logging are control freaks – almost forgot key logging is also a major security no no as it allows anyone with access to the log file to get IDs and passwords.

what kind of reality is that

In reply to No Key Logging – Great Idea – reality check!

The goal of implementing the keylogger, as defined by the poster of this discussion, is “stopping students and teachers from visiting xrated, My space, the favorite chat programs, and many others.” There are better, more user friendly, ways of doing so than keylogging.

Now, if your goal is to “save the lives and minds of those you can find” I suggest talking with security professionals and finding a solutiong to the problems you speak of. But nonetheless, yes, everyone needs freedom, lest we forget all of those throughout history that have died to preserve their freedoms. And no, we are not only talking about children here, the teachers are being monitored as well. We’re also not talking about your children. We’re talking about other people children, without their parents approval.

If I were you, I would suggest spending millions of dollars on an underground facility for your children that has it’s own air renewability and water supply. You can feed them through a trap door, but yes, that will ensure that they will be alive at 20 to bitch about it. Where does it end?

Issue has been turned upside down

In reply to “Big Brother”

The original poster wrote:

“I work at a school that just implemented a new device that records key strokes and notifies of profanity and when a user visits a xrated website.”

Then the poster asked (disingenuously) a rhetorical questions about “…is it a bad thing” to protect kids from porn and predators. The answer to the question asked is certainly yes–but there’s no logical connection between that question/answer set and the key stoke logging policy comments that proceeded it.

The follow-on string of posts mostly discussed how it was goodness personified and righteous to do that (protect kids), and besides it was school time, school property, and these were kids!.

The action (key stroke logging) is not directly related to the goal. If site blocking and chat blocking were the action, then the discussion (and the policy) would make sense.

But key stroke logging is NOT preventative. The porn gets viewed; the predator chat happens.

Flagging kids for after-the-fact investigation based on a key word list means a lot of grade school and high school kids researching biology topics are going to get flagged for using anatomical terms, or for researching sexual reproduction in flowers, or for searching for information about prophylactic drugs.

And if they are using the web to search for healthy sex education information to confirm or deny the silly little stories about how our bodies work that circulate in the bathrooms and hallways, they’ll be tagged too.

And then there is the security issue of IDs and Passwords stored in all the key stroke logs. As soon as some poor little sucker gets tagged, those logs are going to be reviewed by any number of people.

I am all for protecting the little kids and keeping them focused on school work, but key stroke logging is not the answer–it’s far too intrusive and doesn’t prevent anything–it just generates after the fact reports based on a key words list that has no contextual reference.

As for higher education, network based key stroke logging has no place. Think: Adults, Academic freedom, Diversity of research issues. If you don’t get it, try viewing the issue in the medieval perspective–burn or hide the books to “protect” everyone. Now roll forward to today. The most current information on virtually every topic is most often web-based. Discourage research by instituting key stroke logging? Unwise, unproductive and educationally irrational.

We’ve had a lot of this hold-up-a-good-goal and link it to an unrelated policy logic in this country lately. I expected better from this group.

[My comments are my own and not those of my employer.]

This is a question of…

In reply to “Big Brother”

… Private Property Rights.
Who owns the equipment? The school?
Who owns the network connections? The School.
Who pays to fix the equipment? The School.
Who pays to add additional bandwidth for all of those MySpace site downloads that probably do nothing to contribute to the students’ education? The School.

If you want to screw up your own equipment by going to web sites that promote spyware, then pony up the money big boy and go for it.

If you want to buy additional bandwidth for useless MySpace crap then have at it.

If you want to talk about privacy protection then Why even use MySpace? That is the biggest joke I have ever heard. Let’s see, I am going to complain about my right to privacy, but I am going to tell the world about my self in MySpace. Makes alot of sense, doesn’t it?

Who is being smart and taking a proactive approach to network security and protecting the students at the same time? The School.

The school is NOT being smart

In reply to This is a question of…

if they are using a keystroke logger, a technology that breaches security. Such logging is only ever useful after the event, it is not proactive.

A smart scholl uses the technology that has existed, and successfully used, for over a decade – gateway control and management via web monitoring and blocking software and port closures. Mind you such systems require a knowledgeable person to set them up, but can be maintained by almost anyone once established.

Keystroke logging is the sort of answer a control freak or some with no gateway building skills would suggest as a viable option.

A good gateway would block MySpace, chat rooms, IM connections, porn sites. Can even be set up to block anything that is NOT on a list of approved sites.

A non issue

In reply to “Big Brother”

I am sure the School has an Internet policy. People who are browsing the Internet are doing so on computers owned by the school. IMHO, anything the school does to enforce this policy is fine by me.
Go there and do that on your own time with your own computer.
If it prevents ONE kid from being abused, it’s worth it.

exactly

In reply to A non issue

If anything happens to any of the 400 kids from some online predator, and its posted from *MY* school, I would somehow find it my mission in life to find every last one of these jerks, personally. We are currently working on a seminar for parents about the dangers of online predators. If anyone cares to contact me off list for more information please do.

TRUST

In reply to “Big Brother”

Sure our schools in the UK have protected viewing servers, the more so for younger pupils, but it is cumbersome to ask for viewing right to sites that are actually ok, but get blocked by the screening servers. BUT we need to learn to use TRUST and be able to act sensibly, rather than have BB block us at every turn. If we filter EVERYTHING, then many GOOD things get blocked too.
Then there is the level of blocking, who decides? It only takes a small change in political will, for the new and latest boundary of ‘political correctness’ to be changed.
Trust me, I worked in a situation where having any views and opinions of my own was derogated, let alone discussing any views or opinions of my own with others. I was not supposed to teach about Internet Crime in any form. HOW CAN YOU PREVENT OTHERS FROM BEING CAUGHT IN INTERNET SCAMS ETC, if you aren’t allowed to mention these to WARN others?
Then again is any level of BB retaliation for infringements. Large retaliation for small offences, it often works that way.
BUT TO BLOCK ANY INFRINGEMENTS that is to BLOCK INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM. Much good (and bad!!) can come from testing boundaries.
BB BB BB BB BB Big Brother decides ?????
OR are WE allowed to decide as individuals?

If you do no wrong you have nothing to fear.

In reply to “Big Brother”

Its as simple as that. Who is agraid, shy, concerned, agrieved, agitated, upset by such measures have or are doing wrong.

If what you do or about to do is correct and within the bounds of the restrictions placed upon you, be it, corporate, government, school or whatever controlling body then they can monitor away and it would not affect you.

If such restrictions are so binding or worng then FIGHT the restrictions or laws not the monitoring. Privacy laws cannot be violated when you have done nothing wrong and someone monitoring happens to find out you have done nothing wrong.

As long as I am law/rule abiding I favor monitoring. When I want to be a criminal I want my privacy and my rights and THAT is THAT.

MONITOR AWAY but you must have everyone who uses the system read, understand and sign that they accept that the system, traffic etc. is property of the institution and as such waiver their rights to privacy and agree to continual and or random monitoring and any such actions or punishments that stem from any wrong doing. YUST TO COVER YOUR BUTT on privacy issues in most constitutions.

Make sure that you may deny access to those who will not sign or provide them with access to offline screened information only, as denying a person access to information/education can be in violation in some countries.

Deny access if they don’t sign

In reply to If you do no wrong you have nothing to fear.

That is not always a feasible option at school – some school subjects it is required that you use the school computers, you have no choice. If your tech skills are so bad that you can not set up proper security at the gateway and resort to using a keystroke logger you are no longer in a position to come down on anyone about anything as you have just breached their ID and password security.

Blocking inappropriate websites etc has been done at gateways, with great success, for schools and corporations for over a decade. Why use a method that does not stop anything, it only provides infor for a witch hunt, that breaches security and ensures nothing.

I agree with appropriate monitoring and blocking, but where it is most effectively done and where it maintains security – the gateway with a web monitoring, site blocking and port closure for chat etc.

Big Brother?

In reply to “Big Brother”

This is not really “Big Brother” watching…. This is the admin/network staff watching, in a publicly funded school, right? I think this is fine! My tax dollars should not be used to view porn, chat, whatever while students and teachers are at the school. There is plenty of time for that FROM HOME. If the kids wanna see porn, go to a public library.

Now, should we be discussing the use of censorship at a public library, then my views immediately go to the other extreme. NO CENSORSHIP AT ALL should be tolerated. But we are talking about a school. The teachers are getting paid to TEACH our children. What they do on their own time, and in their own homes, whatever, is THEIR business.

The IT issue

In reply to “Big Brother”

I’m all for privacy, but not at the risk of someone elses security, reasonably of course.

It is well know that a lot of viruses, Trojans, spyware, etc. come from adult sites (X) and exchanges of programs, data, etc. via IM programs. If the computer is on the schools network (and the equipment is not a loan, just as the teachers salaries are not a loan)then the whole network could be at risk if infected.

ALso remember that a teacher is a paid employee and therefore must follow ‘company’ policy. Also, kids are not adults. They are restricted from doing a lot of things (voting, drinking, etc.). If an adult wants to go to an adult website, they can, as long as its on their time and their computer.

No Brainer

In reply to “Big Brother”

Keyword – Work

You work for a school. Tell me where it says your work requires you to log on to an adult site. Tell me where it says pornography SHALL be brought ito the school.

Secondly it has been proven the porno sites are riddled with criminal types that infest them with virus and other privacy and commerce interupting programs. Show me where your employers says they want this in their system. Talk to your own IT person. Do you want students to know what your doing? How do you tell them no when your saying yes? Your private time and space is yours and none of that is at your employers.

liberty or death …

In reply to “Big Brother”

This is the age of the dominator, the essence of hunanity that is responsible for untold human suffering.

We live in the age of the tyrant, as only a tyrant would fail at both teaching right and wrong, and then attempt to disguise their personal failure through brute domination of their own progeny.

Why pretend to be other than a tyrant? You teach tyranny, not correct behavior.

Privacy

In reply to “Big Brother”

So what happens when they record the password to your bank account or to your private e-mail accounts? The school needs to use websense, not keystroke recorders to block access to inappropriate sites.

rad

Get the “rights” issue correct.

In reply to “Big Brother”

I’ve read several posts fuming about how this denys the students their right to choose, freedom of expression, etc. Most of the “rights” discussion centers on the student’s rights.

Okay, this is a rights issue. But, in terms of rights, the only rights question is why some people believe that the school that owns the computers, should not have the right to decide how the computers are to be used. Want to talk rights? Okay, but focus on who REALLY owns the rights associated with the computers. It isn’t the students.

Technical comment on this – then general

In reply to “Big Brother”

Keylogging is totally unneccessary, invasive, contraversial and confrontational. over 10 years ago I helped install a gateway that included software to block ports and web sites whilst monitoring all web traffic and note who accessed what web sites. This type of arrangement it standard in any decent corporate gateway. It also makes keylogging totally irrelevant and unnecessary.

Another way to manage this is to have the main school network NOT connected to the Internet and restrict that to a few machines in a supervised location.

School computer usage is not the same as corporate as many teachers now require assignments to include some research done via the Internet and most require them to be prepared on a computer. This makes the use of computers at school more mandatory than a privilege. Here in Australia we have less computers in schools than in the USA, yet I have seen students’ assignments down graded with comments about insufficient research as “more was available on the Internet, see the list of recommended web sites supplied with the assignment outline” and an assignment refused as it was hand written. In the first case the students had no home Internet access and the second the student did not have a home computer at all – restricted access at school meant that they were being academically punished for be poor.

Big Brothers Rights.

In reply to “Big Brother”

If they own the computer and it is for a particular use then should it not be their right to restrict from anyone the sites that are not part of their Scholastic?

You idiot!

In reply to “Big Brother”

I can,t believe that you are so deprived of moral fortitude that you would post such garbage on the internet.
Since when did rights become more important than the people they protect.
In addition to your spelling I think you need a better eductation.

ok, but with conditions…

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think I agree with it but only if the users, and this is in any case, not only for schools, if they are informed before using the systems, that a system is in place to monitor the internet behavior of the users. Because, imagine if somebody checks his bank account and later detects a bank fraud, who would be the most suspicious person ? YOU ! because you captured his passwords with your keylogger. I’m living in Belgium, and I’m sure you would go to jail by doing this whitout informing the users, even if they are kids.

Why Not

In reply to “Big Brother”

You might as well get them use to it. In the corporate world you know that management is watching, and visiting and unauthorized or unapproved website could cost you your job.

Big Brother

In reply to “Big Brother”

I’m in a similar position to you as an IT Manager in a school. Remember their is a “Duty of Care” to protect the students from this sort of stuff. And as far as the teaching staff are concerned, it is a corporate network after all and they don’t get a say in what is allowed or not allowed on the network. Surfing through porn is a sackable offence where we are in Australia here.

Tech Stuff

In reply to “Big Brother”

Fellow Geeks,
I’ve installed a wide variety of this sort of thing at both the host and gateway levels. It occurs to me that if thought was given to this, that the host level would have been ruled out. It’s way more expensive to implement and, from my experience, more likely to cause issues with trust and resentment.
In the corporate world, companies own the machines and networks. This means they -can- monitor keystrokes, block at the gateway level, station a spook standing behind you, etc etc should they want to and be able to afford it.
What generally happens when companies get too invasive is that higher ups get a sense of security, thinking they control everything. What also happens simultaneously without exception is that people that aren’t just standard drones (read: the organizational talent) starts heading for the exits. Why is this, you ask? Let’s explore, shall we?
The first thing that generally happens is that unqualified HR dinks want access to the controls. Following this, they start hammering on people or harassing employees because their magic box told them something happened. Because they don’t get the tech end, they assume all false positives are the real deal. This causes major embarrassment and hassles to people that did -nothing-, even if they are cleared later. Getting back a good name after a person has been smeared by authority is virtually impossible.
Technology isn’t a panacea, folks. It’s fallible, you’re handing it to morons that think it’s PFM (Pure Fucking Magic), and they are dicking with people’s lives. Just because a kid is 14 doesn’t mean the damage is any less severe.
Before you go and deploy something, think first.
And if your boss wants a magic box, make sure and put in the costs about 100K/year for a security guy to admin it. Otherwise you desktop sorts are doing the general public a great disservice.

On the philosophical level:
Yes, you just became Big Brother. Read 1984 and contemplate sometime. Tyranny is incremental. If you grow up with it, you’re less likely to rise up against it. It’s too late for society as a whole. We’ve already given away the controls to tyrants. All -you- can do as techs is on a local level. Think before you do anything that later you’ll wish you hadn’t.

———————————————–

As a footnote, the sorting on many of these magic boxes drops people into some pretty nifty categories, like: porn, gambling, violence, mental issues, and religion. There are many others, but I want you to consider that most of you would get dropped into it at some point. at that point in time, your fate is dealt with by whatever HR type retread that has machine access. Is your religion the right one?

Cheers,
K

Rights? Free Speech? – your joking.

In reply to “Big Brother”

I as part of a team of 4 also manage an educational LAN and monitor all web activity with a proxy server, however I do not use a keystroke logger, yet.
I can understand why this may have been implemented at this school however.

I have noticed that a lot of the kids that come into my network are a lot more tech savvy in a script kiddie way which is truly worrying, they also like to use net send as a means to chat with each other during classes which is unacceptable.

Now we do not want to disable the messenger service as too many other things depend on it so we can manage my network and associated services.

Students are now cottoning on to HTTP tunneling software to bypass proxies and firewalls over port 80 which is also a major concern as this basically renders all security between the red and green zone null.

It was only last week as I was going through the logs which I do daily, that I noticed a couple of new sites show up megaupload.com and some other that allowed one gig attachments to an email.
Then i noticed that the student who had accessed it had sent, not downloaded but sent from my network over a gig of data in a six hour period in small blocks, trying to hide his actions I think.

So now we have a filter in place to block all upload type sites.
The result is my institute has to PAY for that data transfer over the link and that cost gets passed on to my section.
The implementation of the proxy is to reduce costs and ensure that we meet our duty of care to the students and ensure that they access content that is directly related to purpose “LEARNING”.
As well as the needs of the business.

We dont need to key log as we also have Master Eye installed on all our desktops so that I and other teachers can monitor in real time what students are doing with their systems.

Invasion of privacy? I dont think so, network security and ensuring delivery of learning is taking place and that the parents money is well spent? yes.
Suppression of students rights? no! its our network and our institute rules and the rights and priviledges given by those rules are what they have when using OUR resources and what we give we can take away.

We do not want a visit from the BSAA wanting to audit and finding Warez stashed on my servers or being downloaded over my link.
Because then we are responsible for that and we are not taking a fall for anyone’s actions but my own.

So those of you who are on them, get off your “RIGHTS” and “FREE SPEECH” soap boxes especially if you are a network administrator or security operator, you are supposed to be IT professionals, your job is to ensure that policy is met and enforced and if this means monitoring then so be it.

If you cant accept that then look for another job, not that we would want someone on our staff who felt that proxying was an infringement of the employees rights because that makes you a risk to our business.

School is the perfect place for limits, but…

In reply to “Big Brother”

I’m all for filtering programs and email monitoring at schools because things that we wouldn’t allow to happen at school outside a computer we shouldn’t allow to happen on the computer.
My only concern is a keystroke recorder. It is very easy to steal passwords with applications like that and who is to say some one won’t do that.

What was the thought process…..

In reply to “Big Brother”

…..or lack therof? I pay taxes for my children to receive an education. I do not pay taxes for someone to collect keystrokes, especially when said keystrokes may contain passwords, account numbers, or email addresses that are no one’s business. I also do not pay taxes for some self-professed “authority” to determine culpability for a real-or-imagined “offense” based on out-of-context “analysis” of said keystrokes.
Yes, the objectionable sites should be blocked; use a white list to limit the amount of maintenance required.
“Big Brother is watching?” is Room 101 big enough to hold everyone?

Reply To: “Big Brother”

In reply to “Big Brother”

When I saw this article on my newsletter,I was shocked! Cause I can’t imagine myself at the principle room in charge of visiting X rated site. I think no one should trace/monitor children’s or adult’s daily activities to just teaching to be a GOOD GUY.At some point such devices and technologies may be a part of our life and even governs want to monitor citizens at home to prevent crime,terrorism,prostitution,…. I don’t mean such devices are always harmful adn bad. In case of high security,it may be helpful to detect bad activites. But the point is we don’t expect to monitor all people with monitoring devices!!!

No cause for alarm

In reply to Reply To: “Big Brother”

The location of these keyloggers has not been reported, therefore it’s logical to assume that they were invented for the sake of a discussion.

So defense of an intractable hypothetical situation is ok then?

In reply to No cause for alarm

Bah…

That depends on the particular fictional situation.

In reply to So defense of an intractable hypothetical situation is ok then?

This one, I am willing to support. When you use my property, you do so according to my conditions, which may not coincide with your wishes, kiddies. These conditions are my right to impose, not yours to refuse. No exceptions. Since my property is used to finance public schools, I’m also willing to defend my right in that situation to make rules as strict as I please. If you don’t like it, send your kids to a private school if you can afford it. If you can’t afford it, don’t blame me, I know I didn’t impregnate you, or your ugly wives!

Wrong implementation…

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think that the school’s role of protecting the minors is to block access to content bluntly objectionable.

After that, in regard to protecting them against predators and so on, I think that monitoring is not the correct way. I think that it is way to intrusive in regard to privacy. I think that students / pupils of that age should follow an compulsory class on the dangers of today’s internet and point them out that their actions could have grave consequences.

I have kids myself too, and I understand the feeling to want to protect them, but we also should teach hem to protect theirselves.

Wrong for who?

In reply to Wrong implementation…

may be wrong for your kids but what about the kids next door are you going to teach those kids to protect themselves or the kids around the corner. Do you honestly thik that all kids are going to care about what you tell them reguarding internet dangers. Not to mention that not all parents think the way you do. so if we just start kicking kids out of school for their behavior then we are being too strict on them.

Where does it end?

ISafe.org

In reply to Wrong implementation…

We recently had a teacher workshop in my District using the Isafe.org curriculum. There is some fantastic student and faculty created material there instructing about Internet safety.

As with any approach to security, a blended method works best – both software and education – to provide the highest success levels.

http://www.isafe.org

Who’s the bad guy? Not the school.

In reply to “Big Brother”

I work in a School District and I’m directly responsible for the maintenance of the filter servers. Before I began here, I never would have imagined what went on.

We had same/similar experiences – one group of High school kids even started a resistance group with secret meetings and websites to try and share methods to circumvent the filtering. We’ve heard arguments from students about free speech and so forth.

The way I consider it is as follows:

Most of the problems we have are with High School students. They are the students that most extinsively use computers and are aware of the content the Internet provides. Much like your Parents(or maybe Grandparents or Great-Grandparents) with telephones, computers and cell-phones have become a social tool “necessary” for teenagers to communicate. Since High School is designed to (supposedly) prepare kids for a post-secondary educational environment, whether it be the military, college, business/trade school, or work-force, we should be doing exactly that.

What would happen to someone if he/she was caught looking at pornography at work? What would happen to someone if he/she was found to plagarize work from the Internet? What would happen to someone who rushed through a job to get back to their online poker game/chat room/MMORPG/Online Dating service?

Based on the web reports from our labs it is easy to say that almost 75-90% of the instructional time is spent by students surfing on the Internet, playing games, etc. Whether they’re simply neglecting their work, or covertly playing games and minimizing the browser… it’s like trying to have class at the carnival.

Aside from the aforementioned, schools are required by the Children’s Internet Protection Act to have some kind of content filtering in place.

Good luck with your situation, and I will close by saying the following: I had the opportunity, thanks to the adminitration at one of the schools to sit down and speak with the “leader” of the “student resistance” about what we do and why. The student believed very firmly in the position that the group took. He had printouts from other anti-school-filtering websites which supported his position, and some well developed arguements. I explained our position, showed some network diagrams, and detailed how irresponsible behavior on the network can negatively effect other users not only at a school level, but at a district level as well. It was like a light came on for this student.

Information is the key, if your users are drawing the wrong conclusions, educate them to draw the correct ones.

Yes the school is the bad guy

In reply to Who’s the bad guy? Not the school.

You are obviously taking the right approach by blocking at the perimeter. You also talk about students who object to blocking and your response there is correct as well. However, the original post spoke not of blocking, not of informing, but only of using a keystroke logger as the method to detect people who have accessed wrong sites or typed ‘bad’ things. This is not protecting the network, this is recording information for a witch hunt.

Many have responded saying that the keystroke logging is wrong and that they should use servers to block at the perimeter, as you do. The approach used in the original post is wrong and the type used by a bad guy.

This isn’t about Free Speech.

In reply to “Big Brother”

It isn’t about speech at all. It’s about 2 things: whether an intity has a right to control & maintain it’s own property and whether parents & educators should protect & teach children. I wonder how many of the responders here actually have children. Would you tell your 14 or 15 yr old child, “You should be home by 11, but use your own best judgement” and then do nothing when they show up at 2am. Oh, & be sure to tell them not to use drugs, but don’t dare watch for behaviors that might indicate whether they do or not. Would you let your child hang out with anyone they wish without knowing anything about them – like whether it’s a same aged classmate or a 50 yr old porn producer? Yes, I believe in parents & educators taking some reponsibility and setting limits for children and knowing where they are & what they while in their care do. Not only do I believe the school has a right to ristrict how school property is used, but I expect them to protect my children while they are on school property. I don’t think a key stroke logger is the best way to do this, though. Firewalls can be configured to prevent access to most unsavory sites and there are other filtering programs that block access to certain types of sites across the board without spying on individuals. You know, an ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure.

Still, I have to wonder about a society that thinks monitoring one’s own equipment is such an atrocity, & yet is is perfectly OK for the RIAA & MPAA to monitor the activities of private individuals on their own computers. They monitor what adults do on their personal & private computers that in no way belong to the RIAA & MPAA. Then they are allowed to take people to court with fragments of information gained by illegal search & seizure.

So have I got this straight now – It’s ok to monitor what adults do on their on personal property, but it’s not ok to have any control over children and what they do with other people’s property.

Correct the original discussion is not about

In reply to This isn’t about Free Speech.

free speech, nor about whether we shold deny children access to pron, mp3 sites, chat rooms etc. Most agree that we should restrict Internet access at school only to those sites needed to enhance the educational experience. Access to the IM, chat and bad sites can be easily blocked at the gateway.

What is under discussion, by most of us, is the use of a keystroke logger to detect who has breached policy AFTER they have accessed such improper sites and start a witch hunt. The post says nothing about blocking software being used to stop access, only about detecting usage afterwards. Thus no protection at all.

RIAA and MPAA do not monitor people’s own computers but the actual Internet traffic, once they detect a violation (or suspected violation) they then udnertake further investigations and action. But the matter is initiated by trolling the Internet highway, much the same as police patrol the vehicular highway for speeders and drunks etc.

Definitions Please!

In reply to “Big Brother”

Ok…a lot of people are talking about the blocking of these sites as violating free speech. It is not. VIEWING things posted on the web is NOT SPEAKING. Or publishing or posting etc.

If the school was preventing kids from POSTING things out on the web, THAT would be curtailing free speech.

And even that would not be curtailing free speech because the students are MINORS! Minors have little to no rights when it comes to free speech. Until they are 18 years old, their parents get to decide what they see and don’t see, post and don’t post.

The school is protecting it’s assets (taxpayers thank them!) and protecting it’s minors (parents AND taxpayers thank them!).

Clarify please.

In reply to “Big Brother”

Are you “working” in the IT department at a school, or are you a teacher, janitor, bus driver, ect. at this school? Is this school a college or a public school?

“a new device that records key strokes and notifies of profanity and when a user visits a xrated website”

What is the name of this device? How do you know it records keystrokes? (not likely, in my opinion, since you called it “A” device, whereas a keystroke logger would have to be installed on every computer, and you would have called them “these new devices”.)

Good questions.

In reply to Clarify please.

LOL

RE: Big Brother at school

In reply to “Big Brother”

Well then, you had better make sure your kids don’t cross any streets! They are likely to be hit by a car while crossing the street.

Also, You should be sure to search every last one of them for drugs.. we all know how teenagers and drugs go!

While you’re at it, charge their parents for their drug possession! Yep, we need lots more folks in jail! That’ll solve everything!

Are you screening for any references to Bin Laden? Al Quaida? The Koran? Molitov Coktails? Spud guns? You might have some little terrorists too!

If that spew had any relevance

In reply to RE: Big Brother at school

to the topic at hand, you MAY have even made a point.

As you clearly have no structured thought process with which to voice your opinions, why even bother typing at all?

Long List of Convictions…

In reply to RE: Big Brother at school

Boy oh boy do I ever agree with YOU! When you think about it, and there’s not much actual thought necessary. If the findings of this scrutinizing software were turning up such evidence of radicals and, as several posters suggested, witch hunts then ensued – WHERE ARE VOLUMINOUS and extensive lists of individuals who’ve been hauled up on charges for such egregious crimes???
You know what I think, I think there’s more than a little guilt in the minds of the opponents of the keystroke monitoring software and the like that THEY are going to be found out for spending other people’s tax dollars, employer dollars or what have you in the pursuit of their self-centered little indulgences while on the job.
For the paranoiacs – if you’re REALLY worried about all this – build yourself a school or start your own business, install all the computer hardware, pay for internet access and IT then let anyone do anything they want with your stuff and you’ll be a HERO!!! (in your own mind) See how long you stay in business….

Two reasons for no long list of convictions

In reply to Long List of Convictions…

1. Few schools or public entities like the sort of adverse media attention they get if involved in any sort of legal proceedings, so they work hard hard dealing with the matter without the courts – expulsion is the common school method for bad behaviour.

and the most important reason

2. Most schools work on a process of using a server to block access instead of trying to witch hunt people after they had done the wrong thing.

I have worked closely with some schools and in each their gateway was set up like the corporate gateways I have worked on. Servers did anti-virus checks on mail, blocked all the ports that were not needed for the services that had been approved (thus blocking chat and IM), blocked unwanted web sites, and did daily or weekly reports of web sites visited that were not on the white list with details of who accessed them. The sysadmin then checked the sites on this list and if found useful on a longterm basis they were added to the white list, if found unsavoury they were added to the blacklist, if neither no action was taken. If the sysadmin noticed someone constantly accessing new sites that ended up on the blacklist they would then have a word with them.

The concept being to enable appropriate access with minimum trouble and minimum confrontation.

Keylogging is not needed to find out who is doing what on the net or protect students from net predators as claimed. It is only needed to find out what the users are doing when typing documents of their own and their is no educational need or justification for doing that.

Long List of Strawmen is more like it

In reply to Long List of Convictions…

What it boils down to is:
A) Starting a school is quite hard as the barriers to entry are quite high.

B) Many on this board have run or are running their own business.

C) It isn’t about letting employees or students do “anything,” it is about key logging for not apparent reason. Why keylog to monitor web surfing? That’s like f’ing for virginity. A proxy/firewall solution or a simple host.deny solution is the only thing that makes sense.

D) Nice way you put the ol’ “you must be guilty because you don’t like it” hat in the ring. How about those that don’t like it actually KNOW BETTER and know that key logging has NOTHING to do with monitoring web surfing.

Perhaps

In reply to RE: Big Brother at school

if a few parents were jailed for their children’s anti-social behaviors, the rest would get the message and [b]become[/b] parents.

Yeah and what rights do the parents have

In reply to Perhaps

to chastise a child. Nowdays the laws are such that if you hit a child on the rump hard enough to stun a fly you can be arrested for child abuse and brutality. If your teenager does not liek the restrictions you put on everyone who lives in the house they can get government assitance to move out, they can even divorce their parents.

The government has passed laws making it all but impossible for parents to control any really difficult children, and some do have difficult personalities, then you want to make the parents totally responsible for the kid’s actions – get real.

Yes, I do recognise that parents need to be responsible for their children but in today’s society that childhood aspect ends when they are arouns 11 or 12 years old. And yes not all countries and states are the same laws, but most modern western societies are very similar.

What a real fright have a close look at the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and see how the parents could do all that and still provide any chastisement or control.

A common misconception.

In reply to Yeah and what rights do the parents have

“Nowdays the laws are such that if you hit a child on the rump hard enough to stun a fly you can be arrested for child abuse and brutality.”

A common misconception, spread by liberals. Genuine discipline has never been successfully prosecuted in the US.

The same as your children:

In reply to Yeah and what rights do the parents have

You have the right to not be beaten, but not the right not to be chastised.

adunlap What planet do you live on?

In reply to Perhaps

If a parent makes their child do something that they don’t want to the child has been taught how to run to the Welfare Department and ask a Social Worker to be removed from the Violent household that they are currently living in.

Because they know how to work the system and insist that there is Violence involved no Social Worker will investigate as they are not to be subject to possible harm so they take the word of the child and remove them for their own safety. Then allow the children to do as they like.

Sorry but you can’t have it both ways if you want the parents to have control you must allow them to have control and not be in constant fear of being charged as [b]Child Abusers.[/b]

If I remember correctly wasn’t one woman charged with Child Abuse recently in the US for smacking a toddler that was playing up in a supermarket? If I remember correctly this incident was witnessed by a total stranger as the mother gave a short sharp smack to the child in the car and she reported this to the police with the Rego Number of the car which the police followed up on and attended the house with a Social Worker to remove the child and subject them to a medical examination for signs of Abuse both Physical and Sexual.

If you want the parents to take control you have to allow them to have control not be all touchy fealy and allow their children to do as they please and then tell them to reason with their children. Without a form of punishment that does little harm how are you supposed to control your children’s actions?

Today I would no more consider having children than flying unassisted to the Moon it’s just not worth the trouble.

Col

Kids,

In reply to adunlap What planet do you live on?

Nah, I wouldn’t trade them for anything. I’ve raised quite a few (although biologically I have only one) and I freeely admit to spanking, and even a little tap to the mouth on occasion. One child thought that I wasn’t allowed to do that and threatened to call the police. I dialed the number for her. The police came, heard both of us out, and told her I did nothing wrong.

But that’s the Police

In reply to Kids,

The Child Welfare Agencies are a totally different matter and if you’ve never actually dealt with them you are in for a massive shock.

One example that I can give you is a kid who lives on one of the tourist Islands on a nice sunny summers day he decided that he didn’t want to go to school that day and would prefer to go to the beach so he walked straight up the the Head Teacher and told him to F*** OFF. He was suspended for a week and the school being the good little baccarats that they are sent a letter home to his parents telling them why he had been suspended and asking them to ring the school to discuss the matter. Of course if he had of been injured at school they would have rung his mother to let her know but that’s not the right way to inform them when something serious happens.

Well the father works at a mine 21 days on and 7 days off, The mother holds down a full time job and while she makes the kids lunch and does everything else unfortunately she isn’t there when the post arrives so the kid just lifts the letter from the school and no ones the wiser. Of course because the school gets no response from either of the parents they list them as Uncaring because they haven’t bothered to even ring up to find out what had happened.

Are you getting the idea yet?

Anyway the child then decides that he’s not overly happy with the current situation so he goes to the Local Child Welfare Office and swears out a Complaint and gets an allowance for living away from a Violent Home. But this is where it gets interesting he doesn’t settle for just one complaint for 3 days running he attends this same office using different names and gets the allowance 3 times while he is really living at home and even sees the same Social Worker twice and she pushes the paper work through without even realizing that she’s been had. One day A social Worker visits this Abused Child’s home to see how’s he getting on and finds his mother there so she beats a hasty retreat and returns with the Police and has the mother arrested for Stalking her child and lying in wait to abuse him when he eventually arrives home.

6 hours latter when the Police release the Mother as she has by then proved that she actually lives there and is in no way Stalking her child they report this to the Child Welfare Department and guess what happens to the child Zilch Nada Nothing because he’s only 13 so can not be charged with any offense but his payment is stopped under that name and he continues to receive the payments under the 2 remaining names.

It’s a sick joke and only took 2.5 years to finally sort out and because the child was underage they could do nothing about it as when he originally made the applications he was considered as a [b]Legal Minor[/b] who can not enter into any Contracts or be held responsible for his actions all of which he had been taught about by Visiting Social Workers to the School.

If you think that children are little Angles and Butter wouldn’t melt in their mouths you are living in GA GA Land. And what’s even worse is that they are taught how to take advantage of the System and it’s really only hurting the Genuine Cases where the Child is actually being Abused.

So next time you are told that you have acted inappropriately don’t ring the Police ring the Child Welfare Department and see what the response is you’ll be in for a rude awakening.

Col

A system so easy to abuse

In reply to But that’s the Police

should be eliminated.

Since children are not little “Angles” and butter [b]would[/b] melt in their mouths, and the parents that use the system the most are also trash except for the ones that are also villains, and only a few exceptions are even trying to pull their own weight, those few that do make an honest effort deserve proper credit for what they achieve, not to be viewed the same as the garbage that steals from us.

Why a keystroke logger?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Why not just setup a proxy with a black list or a host.deny list?

Why keystroke log? Makes me think you are looking for far more than you are letting on. Further, it sounds as if you weren’t clear or up front about what you where doing.

My suggestion: Implement a proxy or host.deny list and work from there. There are tons of black lists on the web, you just need to find the on that fits your needs.

Why not a keystroke logger?

In reply to Why a keystroke logger?

ESPECIALLY if your proxy server or firewall has a default allow policy with a block list instead of a default block policy with an allow list, it’s logical to prepare for the delinquents that will find prohibited topics on sites that haven’t been specifically blocked (yet).

web monitoring is SO much more efficient

In reply to Why not a keystroke logger?

than a keystroke logger. Looks lets go back to the start – the aim is to (a) protect kids from net predators and to (b) stop the improper use of the computers. The most effective method for (b) also does (a) – a good gateway with web monitoring software.

Set up gateway with proxy, close all ports not needed for approved services, anti-virus scan all mail, use web monitoring software.

Every web monitoring software that I have seen does three things – (1) block access to sites on the black list, (2) allow easy access to sites on the white list, (3) monitor and report on sites visited that are not on either list; many also do a fourth task of listing people who attempt to access sites on the black list. Most sysadmins examine the list at (3) on a regular basis and then use that to make additions to the black and white lists. All the required monitoring is done at the gateway server with simple maintenance.

A keystroke logger is wrong in any environment as it breaches any security re IDs and passwords. Who cares what words the kids used in their assignments and other text documents they write.

The keystroke logger also only shows where they went when they typed the URL, but does NOT show any URL visited via a link on another site and few show information entered via ‘cut and paste’, vision of kid typing up document with URLs at home and bringing it in on floppy or thumb drive. While the web monitoring software will show all web sites visisted as it works at the perimeter where the actual request is made.

I, Absolutely, agree.

In reply to web monitoring is SO much more efficient

However,

(1) This question was posed in Miscellaneous, and not in Tech, therefore the logical conclusion is that technical advice is not the purpose of the question.

(2) As I have said above (or below? Well, previously, & in this thread, at any rate) I believe this whole scenario is entirely fictional based on the absence of any specific information about the school: name, city, state, district, etc. Based on that judgement, I’m ignoring all questions of technical efficiency in the pursuit of a purpose, as my judgement is that no such real purpose exists. I intend to deal only with the [b]primary[/b] question: Do owners of property have the right to absolutely control their property? I say yes, that [b]absolute[/b] control is part and parcel of the literal (and therefore only honest) meaning of the word “property”.

(I’ll now add “farcical” to my evaluation of this conversation, because it really is quite silly to have to explain why children are not entitled to indulge absolutely every impulse they experience. It is infinitely sillier to have to explain it to entities representing themselves as “adults” and “professionals”.)

(3) I am not the tech in charge of making the efficiency decisions. I may well be more competent than he/she/it, and I do not dispute, nor care about, your implicit claim of superior competence in this. I have not even applied for the job, and certainly never will, because most adults are far too childish for my liking, and actual children don’t even know any marketable skills, advanced mathematics or recent cutting edge discoveries in science or engineering to make them interesting to me.

(4) None of this is intended as personal insult to Deadly Ernest, whose moniker I admire and emulate. I only mean to explain that the premise that children’s activities in public facilities are protected by a right to privacy is absurdly wrong, and that this is the fact that interests me in this discussion, not the technical details.

I think the concern for most is the reasoning

In reply to I, Absolutely, agree.

behind the process mentioned. As I have previously stated I doubt that anyone disputes the right of the system owner to control what is viewed across the network; and I agree that schools should exercise reasonable controls. Also children do not have the right to EXACTLY the same privacy as adults but they do have a right to some privacy and those rights expand as they get older.

The main point I hope I am getting across is that a keystroke logger does NOT protect the children from porn or anything else, all it does is tell the post incident investigator who they think may have done it. The way to protect is at the perimeter with web monitoring software blocking unapproved sites, allowing approved sites and listing access to any sites not on the first two lists. This will protect by not allowing the access to the ‘bad’ (provide own defintion here) sites.

If a student, any age, wishes to express a little individualism by using an abusive (again use own defintion) password that no one else really sees then who cares if they do, I don’t. Yet a keystroke logger would note this and report the person for use of an abusive word, despite it only being known by the computer and the user. If the student uses a word on the alert list whilst typing a report or some other legitimate use of the system, who cares – if it is in the final document the teacher will deal with it, if it is removed by then, no harm is done. Think about some of the material 12 to 15 year old students may write up when asked to do book reports or write short stories of their own. Truthfully if you did a book report on the Bible you would have to mention the large amounts of sex and killing involved; it mentions incest, torture, rape, murder, and even has one of the most sexualy explicit poems ever written in it – try doing a book report covering that without sending the keystroke logger into hyperdrive.

The technology exists, and has over a decade of very good track record, to block inappropriate access without using keyloggers for witch hunts. This is an inappropriate technology for the purposes claimed.

Another point to consider is the statement about who owns the equipment being able to decide on its use. As a general rule this is so, however that does not always apply in the education system.

Things may be different in the US of A, but here in NSW the govt tells you which govt school you will be attending and you need papal dispensation to attend any other govt school (private schools, you can go to whatever you can pay for). Many of the govt schools also dictate that you MUST provide certain completed assignments (for non-computing subjects) electronically and or in a typed format and style only available via a computer. This is great for the poorer kids who do not have home computers or Internet access. Also some assignments require use of the Internet to get the info to complete the assignment. This all muddies the debate re computer use rights / privileges arguement.

There are many aspects to the way this whole thread has gone, and I think some have taken some very severe hard turns, but in essence we are, or schould be, looking at what technology is used to PROTECT not what technology is used to CHASE after the event.

BTW My name is Ernest and I got the nickname deadly in primary school and it has stuck like superglue since. I do try to live down, err up to it at times.

I don’t know most, or their concerns.

In reply to I think the concern for most is the reasoning

I speak for myself, and consider facts as I know them.

Deadly Ernest: “The main point I hope I am getting across is that a keystroke logger does NOT protect the children from porn or anything else, all it does is tell the post incident investigator who they think may have done it.”

True, and that evidence is valuable. The post-incident investigator is responsible for understanding the limits of the key logger in ascertaining the facts, as are any other individuals involved in determining the truth and administering justice. Even if shared or cracked passwords make the key stroke logger an imperfect means of gathering evidence, that imperfection should be taken into account when determining guilt or innocence, not used as cause for eliminating the key logger from the list of options. No technology or methodology is perfect in every single scenario, but very few are dismissed entirely because they are imperfect. As long as the value of evidence obtained via key logger is treated as one piece of evidence, not as a basis of absolute certainty of guilt, it is no more responsible for “witch hunts” than any other tool. Witch hunts are the results of the decision of masses to tilt windmills, not of the existence of windmills.

Deadly Ernest: “The way to protect is at the perimeter with web monitoring software blocking unapproved sites, allowing approved sites and listing access to any sites not on the first two lists. This will protect by not allowing the access to the ‘bad’ (provide own defintion here) sites”

Those are important goals, but not the only ones. If children were angels, they would not need adults to enforce rules at all, and we could just provide their food, clothing & shelter and send them on their merry ways, but we know that isn’t the case. Protecting the children from bad adults is important, but protecting the children from one another is also necessary.

Deadly Ernest: “The technology exists, and has over a decade of very good track record, to block inappropriate access without using keyloggers for witch hunts. This is an inappropriate technology for the purposes claimed.”

My claim is that children themselves are never above suspicion, and that the use of key loggers is perfectly appropriate on property that they do not own anyway, [b]nor have any right to use at all[/b] except for the purposes provided by the same government that requires me to pay for the little rascals’ “education”.

I’m not talking about a witch hunt, and I don’t know why you are. I’m advocating emphasizing to students that the computers they use are not their property, that their use is contingent on their respect of the tools that we taxpayers purchase for their educatioanl use, not for their ownership, and keeping key loggers as an option for investigating improper use of [b]government property[/b], not as a tool for determining guilt with 100% certainty, even in the absence of any other evidence. That might be a valid comparison to a witch hunt, but that is not something I ever advocated, and is not necessarily the inevitable result of using a key logger. Any single piece of evidence, treated as irrefutable evidence, can result in a witch hunt-type scenario. The problem is not with the evidence, but with the [b]brainless mob[/b] that chooses to treat a single piece of evidence as absolute, certain proof. The choice to use, or not to use, key loggers has nothing to do with the choice of individuals to either think, or to abdicate their process of thought to a mob mentality. The very premises, echoed in many “educational” settings, that students have “rights” to unmonitored use of the public’s properties, or the properties of individuals other than themselves, are the same premises responsible for witch hunts.

If it isn’t your property, you have no [b]right[/b] to use it, and any use granted to you is according to the wishes of the owner, and any conditions the owner decides to impose. Those are the terms of use of public property. Take it or leave it.

Keystroke logging provides nothing

In reply to I don’t know most, or their concerns.

when compared to web monitoring software and more while it reduces security. If you use web monitoring software, you need it ONLY at the gateway and you evaluate the reports. Every such program I have seen can be set to record who accessed what web site, or tried to access a web site – ie user and site URL with date and time, etc. If you are seeking to evidence for a conviction this will provide it and be more reliable as the user ID and password has not been compromised.

Keystroke loggers require software installed on every computer, this requires much more time and effort. If you miss one, or if someone attaches another to the system without your knowledge or if a nerd can turn it off somehow, thenyou have NOTHING. Whilst a gateway web monitor will monitor all web activity.

I agree that the school computers should only be used for their intended purpose. I have said that a few times. I just find the idea of using a keystroke logger as a ridiculous and resource wasteful way of going about the stated objective of ‘protecting the students and stopping access to porn’ as it does neither of these.

School computers are not the same as work computers regarding the rights situation as the students are often REQUIRED to use them, they have no right to abuse that usage but they should have expedctations to reasonable privacy in their usage whilst typing documents for storage on their thumb drive – eg assignments etc.

I know many educational institutions that resolve this issue easily, the bulk of the school network does not have any access to the Internet, if you want Internet access you go to the library and use one of the Internet Access machines and those computers go through a proxy server with web monitoring software and you need to log on with your user ID and password. Much easier and cheaper to maintain security and monitoring. 15 machines does the campus of 1,800 students with lots of time not in use.

Keystroke loggers do nothing of the sort

In reply to Why not a keystroke logger?

You are either misinformed or being obtuse on purpose.

A keystroke logger ONLY logs those websites that I type in. It is a simple matter to go to some kind of proxy of any site with links on it and GO TO THAT LINK.

This doesn’t stop students from going to myspace any more than it stops them from going to porn. It is a passive way to log what is happening and blocking NOTHING.

A proxy/firewall solution not only allows academic freedom (which is the point really), but also allows certain sites/domains/subnets/et al to be blocked.

Who said anything about default deny or default allow anyway?

You still haven’t stated why a keystroke logger is logical! It’s too passive and too reactive to be useful.

Obtuse: no. Intentional: yes.

In reply to Keystroke loggers do nothing of the sort

jmgarvin: “Who said anything about default deny or default allow anyway?”

I did.

The claim was made that a more efficient means of controlling the children’s use of the Internet is with controls on a proxy server. My answer is meant to convey the sense that I don’t care where you implement controls, but that strict controls, enforced as strictly as possible within the law, are perfectly appropriate, and fully [b]within long-established precedent[/b] for (1) children (2) [b]anybody[/b] using property that they do not own personally, whether that property is public or lent to the “end user”.

I do not care one bit whether there are more efficient technologies for the task of limiting the use of public computers to the educational use for which I as a taxpayer & voter consent to make them available to students at my expense. I have not and will not comment on any claims of keystroke loggers’ [b]efficiency[/b] or [b]suitability[/b] compared to other technologies, until we collectively & absolutely settle the question of the nature of property ownership and the right to absolutely control one’s property.

To explain my perspective, I present, but do not recommend, the following:

If you own a car that’s in safe, freeway-competent operating condition, use that. If not, request to borrow one from a friend who owns such a vehicle. Activate this car and drive it safely, at the speed limit, with no license, registration or insurance, then have a “friend” call your local police, sheriff, highway patrol, or other law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over traffic control laws, and sufficient resources and disposition to enforce those laws strictly, which is the case in some jurisdictions, but not all. Ask that “friend” to report that you are driving erratically, and have that “friend” accurately indicate your location and destination to the law enforcement agency it called, possibly including wild, invented tales of other activities you are performing while driving or performed shortly before driving. Then, come back and tell me whether you have the right to use your privately owned car however you like on publicly owned roads, or whether any use of public properties is a privilege which can be limited by any pile of regulations of any size, that the collective has deemed appropriate, whether according to rational informed concerns or frivolous ignorant ones that may or may not be relevant to any particular motorist.

The same right to make [b]your[/b] (or anybody’s) use of [b]my[/b] property or time contingent on [b]absolutely any[/b] conditions applies equally to my privately owned property, and does not require any vote before imposing those conditions, regardless of how restrictive I choose to make them. Any argument that a right exists to use publicly owned property is irrational and directly contradicts the basis of such rights that individuals do have, which include controlling our own property. The use of publicly owned property, like the use of another person’s private property, is a privilege, which is extended by the owner(s) according to their standards, not the standards of the person borrowing that property. Logic demands that the right to own property also protects others’ property just as absolutely as it protects our own. To presume a right to use publicly owned property is to ignore the real nature of one’s claim to own one’s own property, and oneself. I neither make nor consent to any such claim.

Wrong

In reply to Obtuse: no. Intentional: yes.

“I do not care one bit whether there are more efficient technologies for the task of limiting the use of public computers to the educational use for which I as a taxpayer & voter consent to make them available to students at my expense.”

However, as a tax payer you should expect efficient use of your tax dollars. Using a technology won’t work and paying a large sum for the software is pissing away tax dollars.

The point you are missing is this:
Due Diligence. As a tax payer I expect my tax dollars to be used properly. By misusing my tax dollars on a boondogle like a key logger, than I’ve lost confidence in the fact that they can secure anything at all.

You analogy also makes no sense. Let me give you a proper analogy.

I use a pancake to lock my doors and windows. I sometimes use a bookmark as an added security measure. The best part is that my car never gets stolen because the scissors on my desk are a great security measure.

I like cake.

EOF

Eat it.

In reply to Wrong

You like cake, eh? Eat all of it, then tell me if you still have that cake.

jmgarvin: “However, as a tax payer you should expect efficient use of your tax dollars. Using a technology won’t work and paying a large sum for the software is pissing away tax dollars.”

Try to dictate to me what I should expect as much as you like. It won’t work.

What I expect is accountability for consumption of my tax dollars. More than the employees of the public school system, I expect accountability of the consumers of this government gift.

jmgarvin: “The point you are missing is this:
Due Diligence. As a tax payer I expect my tax dollars to be used properly. By misusing my tax dollars on a boondogle like a key logger, than I’ve lost confidence in the fact that they can secure anything at all.”

As a measure of the confidence you have lost, please answer this: do you support abolishing all public education in favor of competitive, free markets for education, that allow each family absolute freedom to decide where and how their children are educated? Any parent that does not care enough about the nature of their childrens’ education to home school, cares too little to be entitled to any of my money.

I haven’t missed the point at all, I’ve applied it more thoroughly, to the entire system. The larger boondoggle is the premise that students’ failure is a failure of teachers, which is just not the case. The students’ collective tendency to failure in recent decades is entirely those students’ faults, not the result of a lack of a “No Child Left Behind” boondoggle. Put the blame for failure where it belongs: on those who fail.

As for my analogy, I have already made it perfectly clear that I was arguing about rights to use public property, not about the effectiveness of key loggers for a particular purpose. Nice try, lame brain.

You can’t have it both ways!

In reply to Eat it.

You said: “What I expect is accountability for consumption of my tax dollars. More than the employees of the public school system, I expect accountability of the consumers of this government gift.”

You want accountablility at the cost of fiscal accountability. Using a key logger reaks of witch hunt and boondoggle.

A) It could be as easy as unplugging the logger (if it is a hardware key logger) from the client. If it is a software key logger, links,

will subvert them. So how is ANYONE more accountable? The answer: It makes no one more accountable, but it wastes tax payer money on a technology that is easily subverted for the task at hand. Further, there are far more efficient technologies that are FAR less expensive and resource intesive then key logging. Parsing a few thousand key logs is time consuming and a waste of ITs time (and money).

B) Government gift? What are you going on about? The government (if run properly) would use technology that is FITTING FOR THE APPLICATION! Rather than do that, they have invested and implemented a technology for no purpose.

“Try to dictate to me what I should expect as much as you like. It won’t work.”

You go on about government responsibility, par of that is being fiscally responsible! Using a key logger is not fiscally responsible nor is it efficient or effective. How does is that any more responsible than nothing at all?

“As a measure of the confidence you have lost,”

Claiming to have won the argument does not mean you have won. You’ve made no points in support of your orginal statement. Further, you dance around the idea of responsiblity on the part of IT AND he user, not just the user.

“please answer this: do you support abolishing all public education in favor of competitive, free markets for education, that allow each family absolute freedom to decide where and how their children are educated? Any parent that does not care enough about the nature of their childrens’ education to home school, cares too little to be entitled to any of my money.”

This is a straw man and provides no insight into our discussion. If you would like to start a new thread, I’d be happy to give you my views.

You go on about student failure yadda yadda yadda. The point is we are talking about implementing a technology that in no way truely does what the OP states.

The rights to use public property in an academic setting are far different from your narrow corporate views. You seem to think that by NOT allowing research or usage of the computer systems at all, that all will be well.

In education you have to take the good with the the bad. You MUST have an open view and rely on good black listing, a strong computer usage policy, and stronger security in other areas (and a little thing called trust), rather than reducing the access to nothing at all. By refusing access (willy nilly as you would suggest) you’ve crippled the education process. I know the next statement from you will be something along the lines of the slippery slope or some such nonsense, but the bottom line is that the students need access. Block myspace.com in the host.deny if it is such a problem. However, don’t cripple the educational process and go on witch hunts just because *YOU* want some form of pointless (and inaccurate) accountablility.

Seems like straw people are breeding here…

In reply to Eat it.

jmgarvin: “Parsing a few thousand key logs is time consuming and a waste of ITs time”.

I totally agree, and I never stipulated that IT [b]must[/b] use this technology [b]stupidly[/b], and I don’t understand why you would leap to that assumption, except that you’re trying to argue against the stupidest case scenario and hope that I won’t notice. In fact, it would be a waste of time to review every key stroke of every brat, but once a particularly problematic brat is identified, why not [b]allow[/b] the use of a key logger? Or if a teacher is suspected of using cafeteria supplies to fund a familia catering service?

If carpenters were only allowed to use one tool, whatever tool you choose, we’d have some pretty stupid-looking furniture! But just because a router doesn’t generally make the straightest cut, doesn’t mean good carpenters shouldn’t have one available, when it is the best tool for their goal. Sometimes, even key loggers are useful, and one of those times is when an admin wants to control the use of a network on behalf of the owner of that network, not on behalf of the users of it.

What’s wrong with you?

In reply to Eat it.

Do you have no other way to conceed a point than to bring up FURTHER straw men?

“I totally agree, and I never stipulated that IT must use this technology stupidly, and I don’t understand why you would leap to that assumption, except that you’re trying to argue against the stupidest case scenario and hope that I won’t notice.”

IT COMES FROM THE OP! The OP is stating that the school is using some form of key logging to ensure that the faculty, staff, and students don’t visit blacklisted sites. That *IS* the worst case scenario right there.

“In fact, it would be a waste of time to review every key stroke of every brat, but once a particularly problematic brat is identified, why not allow the use of a key logger? Or if a teacher is suspected of using cafeteria supplies to fund a familia catering service?”

Fine…but:
A) How do we identify these people with a pointless security system in place?
B) How do we maintain that it was truely that person, considering that they are using key logging to try to block surfing habits. I’d laugh them out of court.

“Yadda Yadda Yadda”

How about we clear this up:
A) More straw men
B) Ok, great…choice in tools, but use the right friggin’ tool for the job. The OP is using a nail gun as a screw driver.

Fine, then.

In reply to Eat it.

The OP is suggesting that the screwdriver be used as a nail gun or whatever.

Should key loggers be available in the school scenario for the purpose of investigating inappropriate posts to sites on the allow list, then? That is what I consider a sensible use of a key logger, that is the use I intended, and I didn’t mean to defend using a key logger stupidly, only to defend the use of it in public schools, assuming a case where it is useful.

Re-reading

In reply to Why a keystroke logger?

the original post, I am not so sure a keylogger is even involved. I even wonder if it wasn’t just a veiled attempt by a student to find a way around whatever security the school employs.

What planet do some people live on?

In reply to “Big Brother”

I assume the people who think that “freedom of speech” overrides common sense, employer rights, duty of care etc etc are neither parents nor teachers (at least I hope not).
One issue about monitoring: when it seems appropriate (as here or when, for example, it helps control theft or dangerous practices in the workplace) it should only be done in an open fashion. In other words, it is clear that it WILL be done, the reasons for doing it are clear, the methods are clear, and the limitations of the curtailment of personal freedom are clear.
When I managed a small secondary school in New Zealand (13+ age group), I decided against filters (which might, for example, interfere with an A+ student’s research project on condoms) but instead had a clear Acceptable Use Policy that students signed up to. It was made clear that I, and no other (as I also managed the network) would from time to time scan the logs to find possible abuse of the agreement. Abusers would lose their free access to the network until appropriate conversations between myself and them led to a new agreement.
The students had no problems with the agreement or the policy and there was no abuse.

good points

In reply to What planet do some people live on?

As an alternative to shaming a college student, and perhaps losing forever this student with so much promise, this is how I handle abusers.

Everybody here knows that “I know.” I don’t need key-stroke logging to know who-is-doing-what. I don’t mind letting them know it. It’s my rep and I plan to keep it. I don’t need public shamings to support my lab.

Example: Student finds computer still logged on. Pulls up some male porn and leaves the room. Another student reports the disgusting display. I validate the activity occurred, determine the culprit by access codes and session activity, and call the little jerk into my office – privately! When this 54-year old woman scolds you – you feel it. The student left my office grateful and in my debt – just the way I want him – because I DID NOT report it to his faculty.

Jiminy Christmas you guys. Where is the love? This student I mantioned is basically a good kid who has never given me one moment’s worry since, and has done wonders for my rep !!! Nobody messes with Sue. 😎

And here lies the problem

In reply to good points

What one person considers as inappropriate someone else may find totally acceptable and no I’m not referring to any Hard Core Stuff just some of the things that do occasionally from time to time pop up. Or in a case here some time ago a Newsagent was prosecuted for selling pornography and the offending piece of paper had a picture of David on it. The Adult Police person found this poster offensive even though it is a highly and widely respected piece of art.

More importantly what would be the result if it was to become known that you as a 54 year old woman in charge of the IT Department where trawling through Kiddy Porn Sites?

While I and most tolerant people would understand there is an element out there who would just blow a gasket and go right over the top calling you Pervert or similar and demand your removal.

Of course when they didn’t get what they wanted they would involve the media who are not known for fair unbiased reporting. You would just see some 30 second sound bite with your picture taken secretly or lifted from a year book shown in the background and words like Child Abuser used. [b]Yes I know it’s totally groundless but many will not[/b] they will believe what they have seen on the TV or read in the newspaper. I’ve seen far too many teachers hung out to dry because of false allegations which have ruined their lives by some disgruntled school child and it’s plain and simple wrong. But to date I’ve never seen any form of apology given to the affected person and even though they are not listed on the [b]Sex Offenders Register[/b] they may as well be for all the good that it has done them to be unfairly accused of something that they haven’t done.

With schools getting bigger and more of them employing Professional IT Departments to maintain their systems now the IT people are also in the firing line as well and that is [b]Plain & simple WRONG![/b] But it’s the world that we live in and currently I’m not expecting a change in the short term or for that matter in my Lifetime.

Col

calling you Pervert or similar

In reply to And here lies the problem

I aim for tolerant and compassioniate, but I wouldn’t understand. Anyone responsible for the market in products of child abuse is a child abuser, and this person is a victim of a disease for which there is no known cure. I’ll tolerate the kiddy-porn-perusers after they are removed from any association with children, compassionately imprisoned, if necessary.

And if it’s your job to stop access to these sites

In reply to calling you Pervert or similar

Are you still suffering from a Incurable Disease?

This is the problem here the Internet is a very big place and constantly growing so as a responsible IT Support staff member you have to keep on top of things and block as much as possible.

In this case unless you went looking for Child Abuse Sites to block you wouldn’t be doing your job to the best of your ability and even worse you would have the potential to leave the children that you are responsible for [b]At Risk[/b] which is a far more undesirable position to be in than doing what you are paid to do and block this junk from young easily manipulated minds.

Col

not from IT

In reply to And if it’s your job to stop access to these sites

If you think I need to surf porn to block porn, you don’t know the first thing about IT.

You are clearly an interloper who is trying to defame the liberal community, and I find your ilk akin to a double agent. Get off the ‘net.

Grow Up

In reply to not from IT

Not all Porn is so easily detected and more to the point are Chat Rooms easy to monitor?

If you’ve been in IT for as long as I have been you would understand that there is a constant attempt to make this rubbish far more freely available to those who may want a look see.

MS products are poorly designed and badly implemented and I’m guessing that from your Post you are a [b]True Believer[/b] in the MS solution. Well I was using computers long before Billy Boy punched his first line of code at 13 years of age and Hacking wasn’t Illegal as there where no laws in place to make it criminal [b]Imagine That[/b] 😀

The only thing that has happened since then is that the average user has been dumbed down so far as to be next to useless and these sites are far more easily accessible. Get a Life and Smell the Garbage outside your door it’s not perfume it [b]Stinks![/b]

Col

disease?

In reply to calling you Pervert or similar

how do you catch this “disease”, and what are the signs that you have become infected?

Calling peoples actions a “disease” is just another way of making excuses for people so they don’t have to feel badly about the choices they have made.

They SHOULD feel badly.

Same goes for other alledged “diseases” such as drinking and drug use.

yes, a disease

In reply to disease?

The disease is spread when the abuser inflicts himself on a child. Without intensive therapy, the child is at risk of “catching” the disease. I hope this helps you understand. It’s very simple. The hated abuser was invariably, once upon a time, the poor, dear, violated child who was left without any loving care or even someone to talk to.

Why do we have to hate? I don’t understand you people. You insist on hating and criminalizing, as opposed to loving your enemies and protecting your chidren. You prohibit the mention of human love. But I don’t see anyone on this list complaining about the rank things that children seem to deserve, much less what perverts deserve. You guys are meanies.

It’s nothing to do with hate.

In reply to yes, a disease

at least not for me. Hate hurts the hater, thus is illogical.

Speaking logically, sometimes it is necessary to cut out cancerous cells to keep the disease from spreading. Perverts are cancerous cells, regardless of how they came into being. Unfortunately, someone in our ‘enlightened’ society decided that tumors have rights.

LOL, Yes I am! :D

In reply to yes, a disease

I AM a big meanie!

Hate, love, and what people “deserve”.

First your definition of contracting this “disease”. Where did the FIRST child molester catch this from? Or is that just a throw back to when it was legal and acceptable to take a 12 year old wife? Or even modern day if your a Muslim that you can take a 14 year old wife?

Is this really just a “social” stigma so there is really nothing wrong with having sex with what we in every CIVILIZED nation consider to be an “underage” child? I don’t think we need to DEVOLVE back to a day when sex with 12/14 year olds is acceptable.

How is expecting people to be responsible for their choices in life ME being mean though? Where is the HATE in that?

Are you just jerking my chain here?

Criminalize child abuse and punish the crimials. That is a good thing.

Criminalize ANY abuse and punish the crimials.

You seem big on being pro-drugs. Remember there is a big difference between someone sitting around burning a “fattie” and someone lighting up that crack pipe. The people react differently and the crack addict will do self destructive things and injure people around them in the process.

There are MANY drugs that have no place in a civilized society. Some just have a bad social image and are banned because of that.

It should NEVER be a crime for a cancer patient to smoke as much and as frequently as they choose.

The people that PRETEND to be sick JUST so they can “get away with it” should be shot and hung and then dragged throught the streets and fed to the dogs. I don’t think it should be illegal to smoke pot (I CHOOSE NOT to smoke it myself) but to see ANYONE abuse and HARM a system being put in place to help sick people HURTS that system and makes ALL pot smokers look like scum, when only SOME of them are scum. (I have lost several friends and family to cancer, including my dad when I was 17, so I have seen what they go through and NOTHING should stand in their way to feeling human again.)

Well Sue as you don’t want to make it easy

In reply to yes, a disease

And since I’m such a novice that I wouldn’t know, would you like to help out one of your Peers and answer this question?

http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11184-0.html?forumID=47&threadID=192445

Go on [b]Spread The Love Around[/b] and do something for someone without expecting anything in return.

If you had of enabled Peer Mail I wouldn’t have listed this publicly. :p

Col

No and Yes

In reply to “Big Brother”

When does the protector become the oppressor. This is always the question when government of civil liberties plays into our day to day lives. No one likes it when big brother watches. You are watching them, but who is watching you?

Obviously

In reply to No and Yes

WE are watching them. I think that the very presence of this forum, not to mention the fact that it can exist, is an answer to that question.
I never read anything in the original post about anyone being “humiliated”. (speaking to some of the posts that imply that someone is somehow going to be treated to some humiliating retribution) However we have VERY public forums where infractions as well as criminal behavior ARE addressed. Rightfully so I say, and so did the framers of the Constitution that allows us the freedom to engage in this interchange.

I wonder if folks in China have the same privilege? How about the Saddam era Iraq? Not to mention a good portion of the “not free world”?

So the powers that be are logging keystrokes in the institution in question. If it turns out that information garnered from such monitoring is used to hurt someone then I’m certain that some price will be paid. I’m not for someone being hurt over such circumstances BUT, and here’s something I think is SO OVERLOOKED in today’s “try to avoid any potential harmful – gosh someone’s self esteem (a phrase that is so overused) might be hurt” gooshy thought process – FREEDOM IS DANGEROUS.

If you are a proponent of freedom you place yourself in a vulnerable position. People have DIED to effect and protect it. People ARE dying to protect the concept. When one is prepared to maintain freedom, yours, mine – the community who decided to place monitors on keystrokes, then it seems to me that one also takes on the potential responsibility of reprecussions. How many are truly willing to place themselves on that firing line? Talk is cheap.

I think this conversation – and ones like it are far from over. I also think it’s excellent exercise. My 14 year old Daughter is learning a great deal from it. As am I.

That is the point though Isn’t it?

In reply to Obviously

By monitoring anyone has the possibility of being caught and suffer the consequences.

What of the Teacher or SYS Admin who manages this system and has to trawl through the various web sites for things like Kiddy Porn and the like? To the average person if their surfing habits where to become known then they would be treated as some sort of Criminal Weirdo who must be avoided at all costs and I’m sure that the Parent Community would insist that they be dismissed immediately without first finding out why it was happening by this person.

After all there is no smoke without fire is there?

I agree that some sites [b]Must Be Blocked[/b] and some of those are chat rooms that are inherently dangerous to young children who need to be protected from their own naivet?. But doing the same thing to the teachers is stupid as there are many Web Sites that you can mistakenly stumble upon without intending to go there and until you know the content it’s all a pig in a poke as they say.

While it’s true that I’ve only skimmed through this thread the very reason to monitor is to catch people or why bother with the added expense of administrating the system?

Col

Porn?

In reply to “Big Brother”

I think porn is harmful and shouldn’t be allowed on the internet, however we do live in a free society so if someone wants to view porn at home, okay. Porn should not be accessable in private businesses, schools or libraries. Most schools and libraries are supported in part on my tax dollars and I have no desire to support someone’s porn habit.

Well I would like your opinion

In reply to Porn?

On the following.

http://tinyurl.com/s2p3a

Remember young children are not overly interested in porn per say but in seeing pictures of the naked human body.

I have to disagree totally with you on this point but I do think that Chat Rooms should be denied in schools particularly the lower grades with impressionable youths involved.

Col

Do you expect thanks?

In reply to Porn?

Do you expect me to thank you for “allowing” me to choose what I do in my home? Or for allowing private businesses to set their own standards for use of their computers, which they own and you do not? I have no more desire to support your religion habit with my tax dollars than you have to support a porn habit, and when I’m as free to enjoy my right, under the Constitution, to respect absolutely no establishment of religion in any way with any of my tax dollars, then we’ll have a fair arrangement. I won’t owe you gratitude, though, that’s just what the law requires of you.

Slackers forever

In reply to “Big Brother”

I started my career before there were even PCs in the workplace. People would bring a newspaper, magazine, or even a book to work or school. Reading the former was fine on break or lunch. However reading for pleasure was frowned upon during work or class. There have always been slackers. Maybe we used to spend more time daydreaming than surfing the web so it was more discrete. At any rate, usually what you were reading was not scrutonized unless it was inappropriate. So attitudes haven’t changed, just the technology.

Just one question here

In reply to “Big Brother”

Does the System Administrator or Teacher in Charge get monitored on their Web Visits so that they can block/list suspect sites?

The really stupid thing here is that the Porn sites can be easily blocked but the Medical and Art sites will remain wide open and these more often than not have far more graphic pictures than the so called Porn Sites.

Many years ago when I was at High School the most used book in the library was the Art Book covering the Old Masters not because it had a great history of Art but because if had Nudes in it.

On a similar type of stupidity a newsagent here was arrested for selling pornographic materials and all he was doing was selling posters one of which was the Statue of David one of the worlds most recognized Statues and that was the pornographic item that the Police Officer got offended over. Funnily enough he didn’t see the poster of the Venus Di Milo [or however the correct spelling is] as offensive only the statue of David as it showed the male genitalia. Seems that an armless naked female is harmless. 😀

Col

Well, that would make it difficult to harm anybody.

In reply to Just one question here

“Seems that an armless naked female is harmless.”

She definitely couldn’t punch like that.

A raft of issues

In reply to Just one question here

Nudity is not the issue (being offended by the statue of David is bizarre)and children have always relied upon Art, geographic and medical sources to satisfy their curiosity about their own and others’ bodies – the Internet does not change that. The issue then is that they may have been found to be “off task” rather than indulging in “bad” behaviour.
Pornography is a much more destructive agency than this with its encouragement to reify and abuse other individuals.
In an earlier response, I talked about my choice not to filter Internet access but to log activity and, as a last resort deny logon rights to persistent offenders. However, this highlights a possible legal issue that you and others have brought up. What if a child were to access porn under such a regime – could a parent sue the school because we made it POSSIBLE for the child to be harmed (by not filtering) and in so doing failed in our duty of care regardless of any Acceptable Use Policy?
My personal preference is open monitoring of logs (of students and staff) for fully explained reasons and known consequences. This is ultimately the better preserver of individual freedom than filtering.

And herein lies the problem Bob

In reply to A raft of issues

You’re dammed if you do and Dammed if you don’t.

It’s a [b]No Win[/b] position to be in and while I haven’t attended schools for over 20 years back then I used to have to go to schools to do Repair Work and it was a nightmare with all the young girls approaching me and flirting at the very least. I constantly tried to avoid the children when I attended schools for any work as they where just way too much of a danger to my personal liberty and freedom.

If you are constantly in one place you don’t get to see it anywhere near as much but for people like me who had to go to different schools it was a nightmare and to make matters worse the teachers used to laugh about my attitude and insisted that I was scared of the children as I would never be in any room with just a group of children without at the very least a teacher present.

At one of the private schools things really came to a head when one of the students attacked a teacher by throwing something at her and leaving her lying unconscious on the floor. The Head Teacher insisted that she only had [b]Young Ladies[/b] there and none of them would do such a thing implying that I was telling a direct lie even though the teacher had to be hospitalized and if the girls wouldn’t have done it I must have!

Because I was working at the time I only got to see the teacher hit the floor I didn’t see who did the deed and I was the one who ran for help and then accused of attacking the teacher. Of course none of the students where questioned and I left immediately and put that place on a [b]Black List[/b][ so that none of my staff would ever be in that position ever again. They eventually learnt the lesson when they couldn’t get any service calls performed and they had to bring in faulty equipment.

But today it’s much worse as there are far more computers involved and in many cases there is one teacher monitoring an entire class all using their computers to do their school work.

To my way of thinking Key Logging would only be useful to find programing errors entered by the student in a programing course.

Maybe the answer is not to have any Internet connection at all and just a massive DBase in the schools Server for research. I don’t know the answer but at the same time I do recognize the problems involved.

Col

Mr. 9000 sure does ramble!

In reply to A raft of issues

You’re right, Bob, instead of picking nits over what’s pornography and what’s art, the public schools should be teaching the 3 R’s, and any non-scholastic activity should occur at non-scholastic locations. There’s no reason for HAL’s worry about the offense at the statue of David, if punishment is assigned for being “off task” instead of “off color” or some spit.

I AGREE TOTALLY

In reply to Mr. 9000 sure does ramble!

Go back to the 3 R’s and remove every computer from the student reach that would cure everything right?

After all I did without computers when I was at Uni so why should some snotty nosed child have access to one? Of course without the ability to research things the school would need to spend far more money on their Libraries but that’s chicken feed in comparison to learning all that can be taught OK?

Incidentally just remember that you can’t go anywhere where I don’t have my eye on you. :^0

Next I’ll be bringing in the Thought Police to take you to a reeducation center to adjust your views and comply with the rest of us all. :p

Col ]:)

responsibility

In reply to “Big Brother”

Is it not the task of education to prepare the students for life? One of the biggest and best things is to demand that they accept responsiblity for their actions.
The policy of the school has been publicized (I hope) and ALL persons(students/teachers/staff) understand the policy? Then when a person CHOOSES to act improperly, there must be a consequence.
Monitoring keystrokes is one way of enforcing the policy, just as photo-radar is one way of enforcing traffic regulations.

If a student is accused of sending profanity-filled e-mails, it is not(nor should it be)a presumption of guilt. Give her a new password and tell her to keep it secret. If she is back again for the same reason, give her another password and tell her if she lets this one out, she loses all access to the computers.

The students are using someone else’s equipment, and must treat it with respect. They must be responsible for their own actions.

The same applies to teachers and staff.

yes, responsibility for their OWN actions

In reply to responsibility

however the original post covered other aspects, so I will address them all.

1. Each student should be responsible for their own actions, adjusted suitably for their age. The level of responsibility expected from an 8 year old is different to that of a 16 year old.

The problem with a keystroke logger is that it breaches ID and password security and can be used to provide the information needed to spoof another person’s ID. Thus you have no surety of who the user was unless you use a BIO identification system with regular re identification, say every 10 minutes or so. A very expensive way to do things.

2. The original post claimed that they were seeking to protect the children. A keystroke logger offers no protection as it only records what the CHILD has done and aids in a witch hunt AFTER the fact.

3. In the original post the only mention of signs is that those protesting the use of the keystroke logger have posted signs and implies that the school management did not, thus leaving one to wonder about the level of management publicity involved.

4. If you study what the educationalists say, the aim of school is to educate AND prepare students for life. That is why they have lifestyle and living classes and the like.

5. Regarding the radar photo – a keystroke logger is akin to having a radar activated photo where the camera lens is out of adjustment and the image is so blurred that you have trouble making out the vehicle make and model or the driver’s gender or hair colour – no clarity of information.

6. The best, and proven method, is a web monitoring and blocking system at the gateway server. Offers protection and no security breach.

Straw man alert!

In reply to yes, responsibility for their OWN actions

Deadly Ernest: “Thus you have no surety of who the user was unless you use a BIO identification system with regular re identification, say every 10 minutes or so. A very expensive way to do things.”

Because they do not, by themselves, determine who did what with 100% “surety” does not mean that key loggers are worthless. The expecation that any measure, by itself, will [b]or should[/b] be capable of making such a determination means that one who makes that assertion is worthless.

Yes a keystroke logger is a straw man

In reply to Straw man alert!

that provides no information re web usage (the claimed purpose in the original post) than a web monitor software will – but does reduce security whilst a web monitor wont.

A bio ID system does not breach the ID and password security as a keystroke logger does as the password is not entered by the keyboard.

The problem with the logger is that it breaches the basic ID password security and thus eliminates any way of being used as evidence the best you can hope for is that it gives you an idea of who to watch for the next violation.

Nor does the logger perform the stated aim of protection as it allows the improper access in the first place.

bullspit

In reply to Yes a keystroke logger is a straw man

The argument that a key logger “does reduce security” is based on the false premise that a user borrowing a computer from the tax-paying public has any right to an expectation of privacy. When you use a computer owned by the public, every member of the public has the right to demand that you be 100% monitored at all times, if we as the public decide it is sufficiently in our interests to do so. *Secret* key loggers, installed with spyware, are security problems. Legitimate key loggers, used to monitor children, who are too young to be trusted to be wise and responsible for themselves according to the standard legal premises, do not reduce security, they allow children to be monitored as they may always be. That’s life, kiddies.

Deadly Ernest: “The problem with the logger is that it breaches the basic ID password security…”

Eh? If the keystrokes are recorded in an encrypted partition, to which the students have no access, how is security compromised?

“…and thus eliminates any way of being used as evidence the best you can hope for is that it gives you an idea of who to watch for the next violation.”

Having an idea who to watch for the next violation is not elimination of any way of being used as evidence! In fact, that’s normally how any investigation works, whether criminal or scientific.

Deadly Ernest: “Nor does the logger perform the stated aim of protection as it allows the improper access in the first place.”

No claim was made that this or any other technology is a complete solution by itself. That claim, which is the straw man to which I referred, is the claim that you wish I had made, but which I never did.

Abs you have obviously never been near

In reply to bullspit

A big mainframe where terminals are left open and used by anyone and everyone or been exposed to the Cracking abilities that are so freely available today.

The most basic tool in my tool kit after a screwdriver is a password recovery program I’ll give you 2 guesses why it’s so important. :^0

Col

Spit all you like – it is, basically, a free country

In reply to bullspit

isn’t it?

You assume that the logger file is encrypted, many are not. You also assume that the encryption can not be broken, many can. I admit not all encryptions can be easily broken, but they are the better and expensive ones and I sincerely doubt that anyone taking the cheap option of a keystroke logger is going to use an expensive encryption program.

The original post stated that they were using a keystroke logger to do things that are impossible with a keystroke logger, ie the protection. There is nothing in the way of Internet access and usage that a keystroke logger can do that can not be done much more effectively and cheaper with web monitoring software at the gateway. Such technology is more secure more effective and makes the logger unneeded.

There is one advantage of Key Loggers

In reply to Spit all you like – it is, basically, a free country

And that is that allow someone else access to private data like Internet Banking the user names & passwords would be clearly visible to the Sys Admin at the very least.

So this limited technology might help to cut down bulling slightly but for anything about limiting Web Access it’s useless.

Col

Privacy on a Public computer?

In reply to “Big Brother”

Who in their right mind could remotely expect to have any privacy on a publicly owned computer. Especially if I’m not paying to use it!

Ditto!

In reply to Privacy on a Public computer?

😀

And again

In reply to Privacy on a Public computer?

[i]Who in their right mind could remotely expect to have any privacy on a privately owned computer.[/i]

You are forgetting the Meta file data that Office stores on every document that you write aren’t you?

Or the fact that Word constantly wants to call home every few minutes if you allow it to and hand out the private information there as well. :p

Col

As a taxpayer,

In reply to Privacy on a Public computer?

I object using publicly funded computers or any other equipment for that matter. There are reasonable exceptions – use of phone to receive and maker personal calls, etc.

But these objections may become moot as wireless technology spreads and becomes more affordable.

Electronic Communications Privacy Act

In reply to “Big Brother”

What you’re doing is expressly forbidden in the ECPA and is very, very illegal. While yes, it’s your computer, and it’s your network, the user still has a reasonable expectation of privacy. While you certainly have good intentions, without a legal notice on every computer and signed permission from the parents/guardians, you are going to get yourself into a world of trouble.

Big Brother is a necessary aspect of honing young minds and hearts

In reply to “Big Brother”

I am encouraged at your aggressive action to protect our young people from less than enlightening websites. This has proved most challenging for us with what is reputed to be the most advanced content filtering available according to Federal government tests. Students are using secured Chinese proxy sites to bypass this high technology solution. I am ready for keystroke monitoring now to supplement our blocking all HTTPS through our firewall. What software did you choose for keystroke monitoring?
Jim Gerlach

Big Brother!

In reply to Big Brother is a necessary aspect of honing young minds and hearts

VEE know were you live!! Show us your papers!
If you are not registered you vill be punished! Show me your papers !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

my own experience

In reply to “Big Brother”

Before I retired a couple of years ago, I taught in a public high school that used a net filtering system for years. While I support screening of internet acccess in the public schools, I have seen some strage things. For example, a few years ago, I had a couple of girls trying to doing research essays on breast cancer; their efforts were blocked at the high school. Another student could not gain access on school computers in an effort to research “horror” fiction in American literature. Others told me that access to liberal political sites were blocked, although I do not know about this personally. My point is that sometimes, because it is artificial, artificial intelligence cannot make judgments but depends on the ideas and prejudices of the people who write and publish screening and filtering programs. Thank you.

Big Brother!

In reply to “Big Brother”

1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984,1984, 1984!!!

[Author]

Replies