Slashdot Mirror


Hotmail: Not Safe For Work?

silentknight writes "According to MSNBC, web-based e-mail providers such as Yahoo and Hotmail may not be a haven for your private e-mail anymore. At least not while you're at work. SpectorSoft is introducing eBlaster, which aims to "secretly forward all e-mail coming and going through such Web-based accounts to a spy's e-mail". Corporations will most likely argue that, because of sites like Internal Memos, companies need to keep a tighter grip on the information that flows in and out of their companies. But attempting to spying on private e-mail?? In the words of Homer J. Simpson: "Butt out, Buttinsky"."

564 comments

  1. Ooh, goody... by gleffler · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yet another example of how we owe our lives and our souls (and our personal e-mails) to The Man(tm) while working on his clock. I agree that you're at work to work, but I feel that this is intruding just a bit too much for my comfort.

    /gleffler

    1. Re:Ooh, goody... by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yet, when a doctor, or lawyer, or any other professional service performs "hours" (I put it in quote because everyone knows that they generally grossly overstate their hours), I don't have the right to monitor their PC during the hours that they are working for me. I find it an interesting paradox that so many people will proclaim the "Yeah, well if you're doing the hours for them!" when so many other examples show that to not be how it works.

      If an employee isn't pulling their weight, warn them and then fire them. It's as simple as that. I understand corporations getting a little annoyed by weenies forwarding internal emails (which is reprehensible and they should be punished), but most justifications are for pathetic, over the shoulder monitoring.

    2. Re:Ooh, goody... by Latent+IT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're leaving out one major point -

      When we (meaning the IT department at my company) monitors what users are doing, either on the internet, or anything else, they're not just doing it on company time...

      They're doing it with company computers.

    3. Re:Ooh, goody... by gleffler · · Score: 1

      If an employee isn't pulling their weight, warn them and then fire them. It's as simple as that.

      I agree - there are people who can do two things at once.

      /gleffler

    4. Re:Ooh, goody... by uncoveror · · Score: 2

      The Spyware VS. Privacyware battle continues. I wonder if Pest Patrol will be able to tip us off that this crap is running, or even better, take it off our systems. I guess thespyware VS privacyware battle will continue to rage until both seem pointless.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
    5. Re:Ooh, goody... by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Yes, bonded slavery has been replaced by wage slavery. Greedy businessmen think they own us. They would pay us nothing, and have taskmasters whipping us if they had their way. It is time organized labor got off its fat ass and protected the rights of all workers, not just dues paying members of their union. It seems that established unions have become just another business, and are no longer run by people who work in the industries they allegedly serve, or a lot more of us would join a union.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    6. Re:Ooh, goody... by andrew_0812 · · Score: 0

      In business, there are employers and employees. When you work for a company, you have to do what the company tells you to or the company will decide to do without you. However, if the company tells you to do something that you will not do, or puts you in a situation that you find unfair, or stressful, or whatever, then you will decide that you can to quit and find another company more suitable for you.

      The same is true of a patient/doctor relationship. In this case you are the employer and he is the employee. You are paying him for a service. You could specify that he must allow you to monitor everything that he does on his computer while you are paying him. He would laugh at you and say "No." He can do that because he makes enough money from other patients that he doesn't need you. If he needed your money enough, he would decide that he could live with that situation, and would allow you to do it.

      Now you couldn't do it without his knowledge or consent, simply because the computer belongs to him, not you. In a company environment, the equipment belongs to the company. So they can install whatever they want on their machines, and monitor you on the computer,telephone,or even by camera.

      A better analogy than a doctor might be a plumber or electrician that you hire to come to your house and fix your plumbing or equipment. You could specify that you are going to monitor everything that they do while in your house. This is your right because the equipment belongs to you, the employer.

    7. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem of employers snooping on your phone calls has already been solved by cell phones.

      The problem of employers snooping on your email and surfing will be solved by wireless Internet access.

      Sure, it's their network -- so get off their network and use your own wireless account. Now all we need is decent wireless Net access :)

    8. Re:Ooh, goody... by slothbait · · Score: 2

      meh, more resons not to use hotmail

      running own server = good

    9. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not manager and dont work for the company in question. But I dont understand why ppl make it a issue when it comes to corporate logging. Sure it irritates me but think about this, say you hire some contractor to do job at your home on hourly basis, wouldnt you like to monitor what the guys are doing ? Dont you get nervous if the guy is spending time on phone talking his girlfriend and billing you for that ? Same is true to corporates.

    10. Re:Ooh, goody... by SwissCheese · · Score: 1

      The difference between your statement and reality however is that you are free to either a) ask for more money so that you are content with your job or b) quit and go find another place of employment that does a better job of providing for your interests. Or i suppose if your just anti-capitalist in general you could do c) go buy a cabin in the mountains somewhere and live as a hermit for the rest of your life.

    11. Re:Ooh, goody... by escher · · Score: 1

      Or more reasons to use public key encryption...

    12. Re:Ooh, goody... by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In business, there are employers and employees

      That's a pretty antiquated idea of business relationships nowadays. 30 years ago bosses (who very often were also the owner, and hence had more of a theoretical basis for it) could tyrannize their employees, almost like a parent-child relationship. In the modern era that sort of behaviour is relegated to sweatshops, and instead most "employees" are adults who deal with their bosses in a adult-adult relationship. A better representation of an employee nowadays is that they are businesses offering services to their "employer" (indeed, many companies have simply gone the contractor route, a movement which empowers workers more than most understand). There no longer is such a thing as long term stability or company loyalty (on the flip side there is very little employee loyalty), so classic, outdated notions of the relationship no longer hold true.

      I should note that I am an employer, and indeed I've actually argued on BEHALF of employer rights in many discussions in the past: I have the right to block whatever websites that I want, or to bar people from installing whatever OS they want, or from having admin priviledges. These things I do when I feel that there is a credible, reasonable, quantifiable risk to my organization. I will say, though, that most monitoring tactics have nothing to do with that, but rather it has to do with "putting employees in line". It's the same out outdated in-your-face method of "ensuring" employee productivity that has failed for generations, but there remains a contingent of people who still believe that if they just capture weblogs and read people's email, somehow that'll make them more productive. I treat all of the people who do work for me as businesses, and the control that I have is that I can cease requiring their business when the net detriment to me outweighs the benefit.

    13. Re:Ooh, goody... by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      Now you couldn't do it without his knowledge or consent, simply because the computer belongs to him, not you. In a company environment, the equipment belongs to the company. So they can install whatever they want on their machines, and monitor you on the computer,telephone,or even by camera.

      The bathrooms belong to the company as well, but that wouldn't justify being secretly recorded while pissing with out your knowledge. The question here is "How much privacy do you have a right to in the workplace?" I wouldn't want people listening in on personal phone conversations for example.

    14. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If this bothers you, use one of many excellent web based email providers that support secure connections.

      I can totally recommend FastMail.

      Though of course, if you are using IE, you are shot anyway.

    15. Re:Ooh, goody... by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 2

      this, is why unions were formed.

      employees are STILL just "labor" - and we as americans fail to realize this. there is a division between owners and labor, and the owners only look out for their own interests.

      never forget that labor is considerred to be the same as the chair you are sitting on, or the building you are working in. it is an asset and nothing more.

      this is why unions are formed, because labor eventurally demands to be recognized as greater than any of the other means of production.

      --
      ... hi bingo ...
    16. Re:Ooh, goody... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1
      We had an example of someone forwarding out company memo's to his personal account and giving them to someone he should not.

      Its a sad fact but if youre working in development you have to keep you code locked down (especially for internal billing applications)

      Point is if this is used responsablly it will make sys admins jobs much easier.. When I accept payment from my company, I am confirming I submit to their policies, included in that (in my case) is that $employer has the right to every packet travelling over their network.

      --
    17. Re:Ooh, goody... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1
      Yes but the doctor is not using *YOUR* phone, *YOUR* computer and will not be very adverly affected if you happen to use *YOUR* phone to make a call which would bring down the RICO act.

      The doctor is not copying your medical files and emailing them to himself, which make you have to ask yourself: How would you feel if your doctor decided to start forwarding his patients medical history to his hotmail account.

      And in some states 'just getting rid' of someone is pretty damn hard.

      --
    18. Re:Ooh, goody... by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 1

      Not really a good reason to use public key encryption at all. In fact it would be the worst reason. If they are monitoring your email and you start sending out encrypted messages they might think something funny is going on and call the fuzz. Next thing you know they are monitoring your key strokes, your house has been searched, and your undergoing a cavity search on suspsion of being a terrorist.

      Best thing to do is get a wireless device of your own or a cell phone that sends SMS if you must send private messages from work. Hell, you can even use a pay phone if you have to.

      On the note of public key encryption if they monitor your computer they would get your passkey. It would be best to set up some one time pads between your cohort. Then memorize the pad and eat the evidence. Of course the could alway pump your stomach...

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

    19. Re:Ooh, goody... by Xaoswolf · · Score: 2
      I wouldn't want people listening in on personal phone conversations for example.

      Well, I over heard a technician arranging a date for lunch when he was supposed to be getting our server working. Wouldn't have minded if he had done it after the server was fixed, or if he had used his own phone. But the server is still down, and it was a company phone.

      Monitoring is a good thing, but it can be abused. Just like security cameras in a department store or bank. There is normally no trouble, so nobody looks at the tapes. But when something happens, those tapes can help solve the problem.

    20. Re:Ooh, goody... by monkeydo · · Score: 1

      This software is just a key logger and screen scraper that emails the log to someone at spcified intervals or when it sees keywords. It doesn't matter what encryption or email program you use.

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum
      The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
    21. Re:Ooh, goody... by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      Ideally people at work would do 100% work related things, but in reality it's not very democratic. People resent those type of environments, and it effects their work.

      This reminds me of the AOL guy who said you cant go to the bathroom during commercials or you'd be breaking the contract you agreed to when you turned on a TV. Both Sort of Stupid. Yes, I know. If I don't like it I can turn off my TV and quit my job. But why should I have to?

    22. Re:Ooh, goody... by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Interesting
      you are free to either a) ask for more money so that you are content with your job or b) quit and go find another place of employment that does a better job of providing for your interests.

      In theory, yes; in practice, rarely. When wealth and power are concentrated under the control of a few, the rest of us end up with little choice.

      Or i suppose if your just anti-capitalist in general you could do c) go buy a cabin in the mountains somewhere and live as a hermit for the rest of your life.

      Why in the world do you associate opposition to a fundamentaly broken system with a desire to be a hermit?

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    23. Re:Ooh, goody... by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      I have literally no idea what my doctor is doing with my medical files: I don't control them, he does (even though they're about me). He is constrained by law (such as the corporate secrecy laws which are already in place when people are forwarding internal memos) and professional rules: I can't go and check out his PC to ensure that it is up to my satisfaction.

      Yes but the doctor is not using *YOUR* phone, *YOUR* computer and will not be very adverly affected if you happen to use *YOUR* phone to make a call which would bring down the RICO act.

      There's a paradox here: Judgements have shown countless times that the more you monitor and control, the more responsible you are. If you, for instance, monitor employee emails, then you'd better act on any sexually harrassing letters or you are instantly, because of policy, entirely culpable for them. This is a rather funny paradox of those who claim that they monitor to protect themselves in case of employee malfeasance, when in reality what they're doing is making themselves personally responsible for every email, web visit, Slashdot posting, etc.

    24. Re:Ooh, goody... by RalphSlate · · Score: 2

      When we (meaning the IT department at my company) monitors what users are doing, either on the internet, or anything else, they're not just doing it on company time... They're doing it with company computers.

      You're right. By the way, when someone at the company is thinking about something that is non-work, they are doing it breathing company air, sitting at a company desk, being lit by company electricity and heated by company heat. I guess that means it's OK to develop a thought-monitoring device and use it against those ungrateful bastards...

    25. Re:Ooh, goody... by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      So if you hire a contractor, and let him use one of your computers - that gives you the right to monitor every private communication he makes while on the job? No.

      As the poster two up said - there are so many examples where company time/company computers/company whatever doesn't matter that it's ridiculous to make that argument. What next? Searching an employee on his way out to make sure he didn't write a private correspondances with company pens on a piece of company paper?

    26. Re:Ooh, goody... by SwissCheese · · Score: 1

      My last comment was more tongue in cheek than anything. I just notice that alot of people out there bitching about "greedy business" and how "the man is holding them down" have some very communist ideas in the back of their mind. They don't understand that the primary goal of a business is to make money. The only reason business is willing to pay an employee money is because that employee supposedly generates revenue greater than said employees pay + benefits. People need to realize why they are being paid, and it isn't out of kindness from the CEO.

    27. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you worked in my network environment, you would be fired for installing something like pest patrol. That is, if you even had rights to install anything on company systems, which you wouldn't.

    28. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What good would PKE do? Read the article. Follow the links. This device being discussed also acts as a keystroke logger.

    29. Re:Ooh, goody... by virtue1 · · Score: 1

      same here buddy. u must give trust to obtain it. i really believe people should realize that. who cares if it keeps your kid from e-mailing messages, its the parents job to watch their kids, not a computer programs! its still SPYING and its still WRONG. "Law enforcement agencies are also interested, he said -- Web-based e-mail like Hotmail was used extensively by the hijackers who planned the Sept. 11 attacks, sometimes in public libraries" Bullshit. and i'm tired of terrorism giving everyone the right to impose on my privacy. peace.

    30. Re:Ooh, goody... by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      I guess that means it's OK to develop a thought-monitoring device and use it against those ungrateful bastards...

      You can't just compare apples and apples, can you? You just sort of compare apples, and whatever-the-hell-you-want. That's a sure sign of someone who doesn't even know what point they're trying to make. That's your head, idiot. Even if I could read your thoughts, it's not appropriate. God knows why I'd want your thoughts, though, if they're all as good as the ones above.

      In response to one of the other posts, that arguement is also flawed. Is it really appropriate to use office supplies that are not yours for personal correspondance? No. Not at all. Is it appropriate for you to write a letter to a friend on a break? Yes. But you'd better not use the company letterhead, and drop it in the slot, so they pay postage.

      If you want to make an arguement that it's okay to use stuff that isn't yours for whatever means you want, go back to hippie land, okay? We're in the real world now. Grow up.

      You're using a computer that isn't yours, bandwidth that isn't yours, and everything else. If you want to use it for personal shit, ask. Not many companies will tell you that it's okay. Most will tell you that it may be monitored. And it should be. If you want to bring in your laptop, cell phone, and fire off a private e-mail on a break, do it. But realize the difference between your stuff and not your stuff.

    31. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if you hire a contractor, and let him use one of your computers - that gives you the right to monitor every private communication he makes while on the job?

      EVERY private communication? You just don't get it, do you?

      Everything he does on that computer? Yes. Read my post above for a more detailed explanation, and where I call you a hippie. ;p

    32. Re:Ooh, goody... by rscrawford · · Score: 1

      True... and we're unlikely to be able to monitor the e-mail communications of senators, representatives, governors, legislators, presidents, vice-presidents, attorneys general, etc., and anyone else who works in the "interest of the people.

      --
      -- The reason it's called the right wing? Irony.
    33. Re:Ooh, goody... by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2

      ...And it's the company bathroom, too, so cameras in there are just fine. And that's a company desk, so if an employee writes a note to themselves (especially if they use a company pen or company paper) then you have a right to sneak into their purse and make a copy. And it's the company cafeteria and the company health insurance plan, so monitoring and regulating what employees have for lunch is a perfectly reasonable activity...

      Some companies need to realize that their employees aren't company property. As the workplace makes increasingly irrational demands upon employee's personal time, employees have no choice but to squeeze in necessary personal tasks wherever they can. Alleged "security concerns" are another convenient sham to justify increasingly intrusive tactics on the part of power-hungry execs and admins who have no faith in their employees and who lack the management ability to create a productivive workplace without resorting to intimidation and coercion.

    34. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope people realize that not all IT professionals
      resort to ad hominem attacks when they feel they are
      losing an arguement.

    35. Re:Ooh, goody... by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      Yes, yes. I want to read their minds, and photograph them in the bathroom.

      Let's play a game. Let's play the "Test to see if that's what I said game." It goes like this - I take the statements you say I made, and find out if I made them.

      then you have a right to sneak into their purse

      Nope.

      And it's the company bathroom, too, so cameras in there are just fine.

      Again, No.

      And it's the company cafeteria and the company health insurance plan, so monitoring and regulating what employees have for lunch is a perfectly reasonable activity...

      Wow. Again, not even close.

      Are you having trouble staying on the same track? Maybe you have ADD? I recommend the advice of a health professional. In the meantime, let's talk about something even mildly related to what I said.

      *COMPUTERS*

      Of course, since you didn't actually argue against anything I said, I don't really have to elaborate my point! I guess you saved me some time, at least. ;p

    36. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's play another game; it's called "I am a corporate stormtrooper with blinders on". The person was trying to illustrate a point about privacy and the implications software such as this has on our right to privacy. (You know what they say; Give 'em an inch...).

      Anyway, I don't want to take any more time away from your installation of the biometric face-scanner for your company. ;-]

    37. Re:Ooh, goody... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to your email, it's 1:16pm and it's a weekday - presumably you are at work currently?

      Using company bandwidth and the company's computer to type this?

      Just a thought....

    38. Re:Ooh, goody... by arivanov · · Score: 2

      This is the old statement that the moment something goes into computerland all laws change. It is being continuously abused to revoke various rights we have as consumers, customers and simply humans.

      Sorry, but I find this argument completely fallacious. There is no frigging difference between a computer, a pen, a company watercooler (forgot those didn't you?), a company microwave in the company kitchen and the company toilet in the company bathroom.

      All of those are company property. As an employee you are entitled to use every single one of them as long as you follow a certain set of rules. The company has no justifiable right whatsoever to violate your rights when formulating any of the rules dealing with these.

      And more to it in most civilised countries these rights are unforfeightable. So even if the company has imagined that it has the right, the court will quickly teach them of the opposite. Even if you have signed a contract forfeighting them.

      A typical example is one unnamed big american corporation in Germany. For whatever reasons it found out that employee X during the lunch break did his weekly shopping and had the boot of the car fool of beer on the premises. Fired on the spot of course. Two months later the court awarded the employee half a million DM and reinstated him. Because according to German law the company had no right to search the car, had no right to manifest any interest in what is in the car and the employee had a right to privacy.

      Same stands for private email and private phone calls from work. Once again giving germany as an example. The employer is entitled to ask the employee to pay for private phone calls but cannot state in any document any details about them that disclose the exact destinations. Which usually means cannot question those destinations. Similar rules stand for snooping the network.

      Let's take another country to make the list full. Let's take the country with the second worst employment rights record after US - the UK. Every employee is entitled at any time to ask the company to hand him every bit of data being kept on them. Ask and make a reasonable scandal of the fact that IT or other people have read communication with your wife. After you have done it two or three times urge to snoop disappears very fast. Pity brits do not have the habit to behave this way.

      So this problem is localised completely to a certain world region. And it is quite time for this region to start learning the value of human rights instead of trying to teach the rest of the world about them.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    39. Re:Ooh, goody... by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      The person was trying to illustrate a point about privacy and the implications software such as this has on our right to privacy.

      The person, if they're really trying to do that, should realize something about the implication software such as this has on our right to privacy. (If it's installed on your computer at work.)

      *none*

      Remember when you have an expectation of privacy. In your purse, or bag. In your home. In the bathroom.

      *NOT* in public. If you're walking around on the street, everyone can see what you're doing! My, imagine what that does to your right to privacy! And you don't have it here, either. Especially since they warn you! It's monitored, doofus!

      Try to put it in perspective, instead of jumping on the 'cry wolf' bandwagon, okay? Fifty years ago, if an employer wanted to look at your files, it was perfectly normal. Now, if an employer wants to know what you're doing with his computer, it's an invasion?

      Bull. People like the guy you're defending draw all sorts of insane parallels with this. Mind reading. Spy cameras in the bathroom. People like the guy you're defending have uh... mental problems. ;p If you want to draw a parallel, how about this? You work for a company, and they give you a car, with the understanding that you're supposed to use it strictly for work purposes. In keeping with the slashdot story trend, this car has a GPS unit, that logs the cars position. Is this an invasion of privacy?

      If you said no, then I wonder why you disagree with me so strongly. If you said yes, how about this: what if he just asks you where you've been? I find it hard to believe that you'd think that was an "invasion of privacy". And then what are you really saying? That it's okay for him to know what you do, so long as you can lie about it a little bit?

      Har. Blinders indeed.

    40. Re:Ooh, goody... by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 1

      The possibility of a latex sphincter dance notwithstanding, I'd still rather run a private mail server with an https: based web frontend in that situation.

      Of course, I'm an administrator type. Most people who perch themselves in front of a box at work are just your standard data entry plebe with no clue about how email works aside from "I puts the name of the person I wants to mail here, and hits send after I babble for a while."

      Hm. Not unlike slashdot, if you think about it. :D

      --
      "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
    41. Re:Ooh, goody... by forkboy · · Score: 2

      And CEOs need to realize that the only reason they are making any money is because of the employees. It works both ways. Corporations ceaselessly take advantage of both employees and customers, and it seems to get worse every year.

      I can't speak for the rest of the sheep, but I won't be a slave to a company that routinely treats me like shit. I've walked away from a very high paying job without a second thought because management took both their customers and their employees for granted.

      Unfortunately, some people have families to feed and that's not an option for them, and all I can say is next presidential election, vote Green Party. They're on your side.

      --
      This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
    42. Re:Ooh, goody... by shatfield · · Score: 1

      And I bet you are writing this email on company time, using a company supplied computer, company supplied software, and company supplied bandwidth. If reading slashdot on company time isn't wasting company resources, I don't know what is.

      My point is, we're all guilty of doing personal "things" on company time, while using some company resources.

      As far as I'm concerned, they are lucky to have employees who are as talented and hard working as we are. Letting us get a little down time here and there, while providing us with a little extra bandwidth for reading news sites, should be considered a part of our jobs.

      --
      "To make a mistake is only human; to persist in a mistake is idiotic." Cicero
    43. Re:Ooh, goody... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1

      And if you do act on them instantly you are clear, two issues that are covered are legal and buisness too many employees abuse internet privlidges..

      --
    44. Re:Ooh, goody... by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      And I bet you are writing this email on company time, using a company supplied computer, company supplied software, and company supplied bandwidth.

      That just goes to show you that you shouldn't make bets unless you actually *know* something about the thing you're betting about.

      In other words, *Bzzzzt*! That's wrong, Chuck! Tell him about his lovely parting gifts!

      As far as I'm concerned, they are lucky to have employees who are as talented and hard working as we are.

      Their luck balances out with lazy, shiftless employees that rely on doing just enough to not get fired, believe me.

      Letting us get a little down time here and there, while providing us with a little extra bandwidth for reading news sites, should be considered a part of our jobs.

      I never argued with that. And if you've asked your employer if you can do that, and he said it was okay, then by all means! In my company, while we monitor, we warn that it's monitored. And as the IT department, we don't contact your supervisor if you're reading nytimes.com all day. We don't even say anything if you're using hotjobs.com for (like some people do) over an hour each day. We do if you're looking at pr0n, or if we get a complaint. *but* I'm willing to bet (though I probably shouldn't... what did we learn about betting! ;p) that half the people that go ahead and read slashdot or whatever from their desk at work never even considered asking. Why? Probably because they're pretty sure they would be told 'no'. So they do it anyway. And what does that say?

    45. Re:Ooh, goody... by SwissCheese · · Score: 1

      Absolutely its a two way street. But I view this as more of a chicken-egg situation as to who is more dependant on the other. In today's society employees are becoming a disposable resource. A company can fire you for any reason and you can quit for any reason. Maybe its just me, but I still have a hard time understanding the argument that some people can't just quit their jobs because of family, etc. In my town I can quit my job right now and start flipping burgers for $8/hour. So I may have to work 2 shifts and give up some luxuries to pay the bills, but I always have that option as a worst case scenario.

    46. Re:Ooh, goody... by zolon · · Score: 1

      I used to work in IT, still do some what. Right now I not only work the IT, but I am the company manager. I could care less if my employee's are looking at pr0n or slashdot. As long as its on break, and they are not swamping the pipe. Now on the company computers, thats different. Company computers get audited now and then. Not just by us, but by the software manufactures, sometimes. Last thing I want as the company manager is to have a MS Piracy person come up to me and say.. "Nope, your systems are all legal. Except for this one picture we found." .. I really don't need that. So as I told my employees. Bring your own machine. Use it on break. And since the IP's are static. I can tell what machine is wich. But alas, that is my company. Every company is different. If my company was Data Housing, it would be different. That pipe means a hell of a lot more, then in a furnace company. sin

      --
      Merf
    47. Re:Ooh, goody... by andrew_0812 · · Score: 0

      Well, this creates another problem, because it infringes on the rights of the person in the bathroom. The employer has the right to do any of these things as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of the employee. I don't believe you have the right to use the company telephone to make personal phone calls, so the company could monitor it.

      In reality, most companies would never stoops to such tactics.

    48. Re:Ooh, goody... by andrew_0812 · · Score: 0

      Well, I was intentionally simplifying the issue. You are right, and there is alot of complexities that I didn't address in the workplace. What I am saying is that it ultimately boils down to this. I am the employee, I am selling you a service. You are the employer, you are buying the service. If the deal is not suitable to either one of us, then we can terminate the employment. We each have stipulations for the deal to be acceptible. I may charge you 50,000 a year. You may say, "ok, but I can monitor your computer use." If you don't feel I am worth that, or I don't want you looking over my shoulder, then You don't offer, or I don't accept.

  2. eBlaster by tuxedo-steve · · Score: 4, Funny

    That eBlaster software seems like a totally excellent way to increase the amount of spam you receive in your inbox per day.

    Thanks, SpectorSoft.com! You've made my week!

    --
    - SMJ - (It's not just a name: it's a bad aftertaste.)
    1. Re:eBlaster by lightcycler · · Score: 1

      Great idea. Take every single bit of crap sent across port 25 of a library computer, or anything posted to mail.yahoo.com/send.pl (oops, did i just reveal their super-secret algorithm?) and forward it to a policeman. Yeah, I can just imagine being that policeman.

      G'morning Steve: 31,242 new emails, listing page 1 of 822

    2. Re:eBlaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the guy in IT upstairs wants to read my web based e-mail from home, let him. He's in for some rather boring reading... and one wonders why companies are bleeding red ink *cough*

  3. To be honest by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The time you spend at work, you ought to be working, not sending personal email, making personal calls, or anything besides work-related stuff.

    Now this becomes a little tough because we aren't automatons and have lives outside of work that need tending to. However, to expect that what you do within the walls of your company is private is laughable.

    Just assume that everything you do there is under surveillance. Heck, all your thoughts are already belong to them.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:To be honest by nagarjun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      However, to expect that what you do within the walls of your company is private is laughable.

      That's highly culture specific. For example, most Asian companies usually do not insist that *whatever* you do on company time is teh company's. Heck, I did not even sign a contract to that effect.

    2. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
      >>> The time you spend at work, you ought to be working...

      ... and you shouldn't be thinking about what you will be doing for the weekend, and you shouldn't read a newspaper during your lunch hour, and you shouldn't have personal thoughts while sitting in the chair that the company provided for you. Yup, nothing personal is allowed while you are "on the clock".

      These types of solutions are needed by companies who make work so much like work for their employees. Instead those companies should foster an environment where the employees want to contribute, and not have to be forced to contribute.

    3. Re:To be honest by yatest5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just assume that everything you do there is under surveillance

      I really feel sorry for whoever has the videos of me cracking one off in the toilets then...;-)

      --
      • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
    4. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you shouldnt spend that time talking to friends - instead you should stand outside smoking for 15 mins every hour or two.
      you should ignore your statutory 15 mins break every hour or so (depending on what country you`re in) too.

    5. Re:To be honest by ObviousGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      companies should foster an environment where the employees want to contribute, and not have to be forced to contribute.

      Is it worth it?

      After all, you've already got them by the balls. You don't have to put up with low productivity.

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    6. Re:To be honest by Mr_Silver · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The time you spend at work, you ought to be working, not sending personal email, making personal calls, or anything besides work-related stuff.

      Which is fine until you point out that the flip side of this is that you'll only work your contracted hours and never think about work outside of work hours.

      If a company is going to totally restrict what you do during work hours then they shouldn't expect any favours back - especially when a better job comes along as you'll be the first out of the door.

      It works both ways, they make your working conditions pleasant and you reward them with loyalty.

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    7. Re:To be honest by Schik · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, you shouldn't be "cracking one off", you should be working. To compensate for your slacking off, your company will take ownership of any an all "output" you create while on the toilet.

    8. Re:To be honest by pubjames · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The time you spend at work, you ought to be working, not sending personal email, making personal calls, or anything besides work-related stuff.

      Stuff that nonsense. This is exactly the kind of crappy mentality that made me become self-employed.

      If my employer feels the need to treat me like a child, then I'll go work for someone else (which is what I have done, now I work for me). Stand up for yourselves people -- don't let your employers treat you like children! It's your
      life!

    9. Re:To be honest by Library+Spoff · · Score: 0

      yes it is your life - but it's *their* company. If you don't like their rules you can be sure they can find someone else to fill your sandals.

      what about smoking crack on company time ? would u agree with that ? what's that?, it would slow down productivity ? you dont say...

      every lunchtime our corporate network slows right down due to people checking email and you can't get a thing done. (like trying to read /.)

      I agree it is an infringement on your liberties - but at the end of the day people take the piss.

      I know I do and i'm not that bad...

      --
      Acid House saves Souls
    10. Re:To be honest by pubjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you don't like their rules you can be sure they can find someone else to fill your sandals.

      Backwards thinking again. If you don't like their rules, you should go work for someone else. If then can find another idiot that doesn't mind being treated like a kid then that's fine by me.

      what about smoking crack on company time ? would u agree with that?

      Erm. No. I wouldn't agree with that. I expect to be treated like an adult because I can act like an adult. If a company employs idiots and potheads then they deserve everything they get.

    11. Re:To be honest by zurren · · Score: 1

      Being overly restricted at work can lower worker moral. If they are stuck doing the same mundane job with no form of a 'break' other then lunch, then it can harm efficeny and producitvity. I know when I was doing a programming job awhile ago, there would be days I'd sit at a screen just being brain-dead, but not being 'allowed' to do anything beyond that.. didnt make much progress. But, now and then I'd "break" the rule (was never monited, so no real repercuions), chat on IRC for a bit or surf a web page/etc, get my mind off it. Then get back at it and be far more productive then I was previously. Also, if you are stuck doing mundane/repetative tasks (depending on the job), I almost find I go faster if I have something to keep my mind off of what I am actually doing. Either it talking to a co-worker, or sending a quick msg off on MSN if I am at a computer. It is when workers 'abuse' it, and dont get their work done that it becomes an issue.

    12. Re:To be honest by clickety6 · · Score: 2

      The time you spend at work, you ought to be working, not sending personal email, making personal calls, or anything besides work-related stuff.

      Yep, Jim Beam agrees that you should not be doing anything at work that is not 100% work-related:

      http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Business/ap20020827_1 11 7.html

      --
      ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
    13. Re:To be honest by BlewScreen · · Score: 1
      The company I worked for recently distributed a policy pertaining to the use of company "assets" such as the email system and the phone system. Essentially, it boils down to: "You will not use company assets for personal reasons without case by case permission from your direct manager."

      We've got caller ID here, so I immediately asked the woman responsible for the policy what to do if I saw that my mother was trying to reach me. Should I raise my hand and yell across cube world: "Jack [my manager], can I answer the phone? It's my mother..."

      Her response was that there was "obviously" a "mommy exception" to the rule. I asked why that wasn't in the policy and she responded "well, that's just common sense..."

      Why isn't that mentioned in the document?

      Because she believes the same thing you do... That while on the clock, everything I do HAS TO be work related. Can't you see the absurdity in this? Do you really want to work for someone who determines when you can talk to your own mother?

      To be honest... I'm going to do and think things that are NOT work related, regardless of what insane policy is in place. If this is a problem, I'll just have to go work for someone who will allow me to exist as something other than a robot...


      -bs
      (now self-employed)

      --
      That that is is not that that is not. That that is not is not that that is.
    14. Re:To be honest by Lysander+Luddite · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I spend about 1.5 hours a day actually doing work. If I were home on a real computer with real software I could do everything I need to do in half that time.

      Yet, somehow I need to spend 9 hours a day at work simply because the phone might ring. I'd be happy to work if I had some. In fact, I actually request more work constantly. By all accounts I would be a model employee. Yet, when I have nothing to do I surf the web. I'm using company resources to do things other than my job.

      So I guess that makes me a bad person.

      *rolls eyes*

      If I do my job appropriately and efficiently then the company should cut me some slack. I'm not wasting company time or resources if I have fulfilled my job duties. If I read a book at work would it be any different?

    15. Re:To be honest by SwissCheese · · Score: 1

      I agree. Most companies seem to have the policy that you can do limited personal tasks on company time. Just don't be surprised when they come up to you some day and tell you to knock it off and get back to work. Use common sense and realize what the boundries are at your particular place of employement.

    16. Re:To be honest by photon317 · · Score: 4, Interesting


      Search perlmonks.org for Tilly's article on the subject a while back. It appears that by most states' labor laws, if you are an exempt, salaried, full-time professional - the company does in fact own all of your output, even when you're not at work, and they don't need a special contract to get these rights. If you work as unix sysadmin, and you develop and patent a new lawn sprinkler on your own time on the weekends, they can take your patent away from you. They certainly in this light own your output during work hours, which means they very well can try to enforce that you don't do things like use hotmail.

      --
      11*43+456^2
    17. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what about smoking crack on company time ? would u agree with that ? what's that?, it would slow down productivity ? you dont say...

      Whats that, if you're unproductive you'll get the sack, crack smoking or not? You don't fucking say!

    18. Re:To be honest by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2

      I noticed that they didn't consider the effect on turnover, nor did they quantify the actual costs, so they really didn't say much. Anecdotally, I would expect a reduction in turnover and an increase in product quality in places that are conducive to work.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    19. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      To quote the article.

      The study didn't look at the effect of the programs on costly turnover and absenteeism. And although it's a reasonable assumption that happier employees are less likely to skip work or quit than their less-happy colleagues, this doesn't necessarily mean employee-involvement programs save money for companies. That's because the cost of setting up and running the programs could offset savings in turnover and absenteeism

      So you're saying that over the findings of a study that took into effect 373 companies, that you'll accept anecdotes as the basis of your beliefs?

      Do you think the Earth was created in 6 days by God?

    20. Re:To be honest by kryptkpr · · Score: 1

      I do some of my best coding after smoking a little pot.. it doesn't turn everyone into a lazy piece of shit, regardless of what you've been told.

      It enhances creativity, and (at least for me) makes it easier to think and make connections between things in your head.

      Admitedly, it does make you hungry, and there's no denying that...

      --
      DJ kRYPT's Free MP3s!
    21. Re:To be honest by RailGunner · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If a company is going to totally restrict what you do during work hours then they shouldn't expect any favours back - especially when a better job comes along as you'll be the first out of the door.

      Quite honestly, you should do that anyways. Company loyalty is a complete farce. Most companies treat people as "human resources" anyways, and in most companies your employment is "at will".

      Quit giving your lives and your hearts and your souls to a company like that. You'll be much happier if you think of yourselves as mercenaries - do honest work for honest pay. If you think a management decision is stupid, as long as it's legal / ethical, then kick back and remember that they're paying you to work, they're not paying you to care. Example: Say some pointy haried boss wants you to implement a horrible User Interface. You know it's a bad idea, that it'll be clunky. GO AHEAD AND GIVE THE PHB WHAT HE/SHE WANTS! Let them deal with any consequences. If a company starts reading your private email, then quit. Find something else.

      And this isn't a bad attitude. When you're at work, you should perform your duties to the best of your ability. However, when you're not at work, forget about work. And if someone offers you a better job, then TAKE IT. Start putting yourselves and your families over your jobs. Ultimately, your own self and your family is far more important then a company that's here today, gone tomorrow.

      Look what company loyalty got employees at Enron and WorldCom.

    22. Re:To be honest by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that over the findings of a study that took into effect 373 companies, that you'll accept anecdotes as the basis of your beliefs?

      No, I'm saying that:

      Anecdotally, I would expect a reduction in turnover and an increase in product quality in places that are conducive to work.
      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    23. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, then don't expect any unpaid overtime then... Unpaid overtime is very common for salary workers. Think of it this way, I need to leave on the hour not one minute later so I can go home and check my personal E-Mail.

    24. Re:To be honest by ichimunki · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That's not what happened to tilly. The only law that applied in his case was contract law. He signed a contract that was overly generous to his employer in this regard. He says: I am a professional employee. I signed a routine employment contract while I was still pretty much of a novice as both a programmer and an employee.

      The question is, how many of us have agreed to some similar contract without realizing it? My own "employment handbook" is quite large and I am regularly forced to "agree" to the terms laid out in that book by signing some form. Thankfully I've never found a section on "intelekshul prahpitty", because if they ever do sneak one in there, it'll have to respect my ownership of non-work-related ideas, or I'll have to strike it, or I'll have to quit.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    25. Re:To be honest by rpg25 · · Score: 1

      Actually, this is oversimplified and doesn't agree with US law. You have some very specific privacy rights, even when you're at work. For example, without some preparation and warning, your employer can't rifle your desk or listen to your phone calls. They can read your emails and look at anything on the computer they supply you.

    26. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is also depends on which Asian company you are working for. Depends on the country. Depends on the management. Depends on many things.

      One company that I worked for believed that they owned everything. Another felt that differently.

    27. Re:To be honest by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

      According to the article, though, worker happiness has no bearing on how "conducive to work" the environment is.

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    28. Re:To be honest by Yet+Another+Smith · · Score: 1, Troll

      This is patently untrue. For example, in the article, they point out that personal mail coming to you through the company's mail room is not subject to search or opening. This would be a direct violation of federal law in the US. Similarly, in many states it is illegal to monitor or record phone calls without the express permission of both parties in the call, regardless of who owns the telephone. So when you say 'However, to expect that what you do within the walls of your company is private is laughable,' not only is it not laughable, it is in many cases a matter of law. If they want to set up a camera to monitor wether you're working, that's their business, but they can't screen your mail. So it is hardly unreasonable to think that a certain modicum of privacy could be protected in web use.

      My company also has as part of their acceptable IT use policy that the internet can be used for certain amounts of personal business that cannot be conducted outside of business hours. This includes personal banking, bill paying, and other such activities. If we assume that they then have the right to spy on anything we do, then they can spy on our personal finances, medical history, or whatever. By allowing us expressly in their IT policy to use the web for personal business, they've put themselves in a position where we have a demonstable expectation of privacy. Of course, this is not true in the case of every company, and even the US Mail is not private in cases of companies that deal with national security or other sensitive activities.

      --
      if ($it != $onething) {$it = $another;}
    29. Re:To be honest by Pfhreakaz0id · · Score: 2

      Exactly. I cant believe the hours people work. I have been a programmer for 7 years and in professional, post-college employment for 12 years, and I've NEVER worked non-compensated overtime. Not once. Granted, as a programmer, that compensation has always been in comp time, but, what the hey.

      My advice? I usually take in the following day, a week at most. And I don't ask. I just leave an email or say something on the way out "hey, I'm heading out... I'm taking those 3 hours I worked for the deployment last Thursday. Have a good one."

    30. Re:To be honest by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      what about smoking crack on company time ? would u agree with that?

      You've brought up a excellent slippery slope, and that's why companies should be run like concentration camps with cameras and armed guards in the bathrooms.

    31. Re:To be honest by dswan69 · · Score: 1

      It is most definitely private and I dare any company exec to try messing with me. I have more dirt on them than they have on me and I have no problem with destroying them permanently.

      Tired of corporate bullshit.

    32. Re:To be honest by dogfart · · Score: 1
      Just assume that everything you do there is under surveillance.

      No joke. Employers always believe you belong to them. What you say and think is very important to them, and something they believe thay should be able to control. Consider this behavior from Ford Motors' personnel department in the 1930's:

      ...Intimidation and attacks by his "Servicemen" were commonplace, and a spy network within the factories kept Bennett well-informed. Inside and outside the plants, his men observed union meetings, followed suspected unionists and lurked outside their homes. They also eavesdropped on conservations on the shop floor and in taverns, groceries, restaurants and other public places.
      This is from The Walter Reuther Library at Wayne State University

      Lessons here:

      1. This is nothing new. Employers have acted as petty tyrants for as long as they have existed.

      2. The automobile workers were eventually able to do something about this, through concerted group action. Being treated like this at work is not inevitable.

      --

      "dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"

    33. Re:To be honest by raptwithal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Heck, all your thoughts are already belong to them.

      All your thought are belong to us! :)

      Sorry, couldn't resist...

    34. Re:To be honest by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      You know, one thing that really annoys me about all of this is the difference between people who live to work, and those who work to live. Personally I work to live, yes my job can be interesting- but it can be a pain in the ass- some of the hours I am expected to do and given big greif about if I dont do. My boss is a live to work guy.. And I really do not appretiate it. Beleive me- when a better job comes- I will be out of the door very quickly. Its not just about money-but a better job in terms of something I would be happier with. Unhappy workforces make poor workers. As A programmer- I know that I end up adding more bugs than fixing them when I am tired and angry. As for ideas I have in my own time- I keep them under my hat and let them out when I am ready.

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
    35. Re:To be honest by LunchingFriar · · Score: 1
      My God, that was the smartest, most profound comment I've ever read on this site. And it even got modded up! ;)

      In all seriousness, work is much easier when you don't give a damn. That's my problem. I still care about my employer, even though I know I shouldn't and I know they don't care about me (or anyone else that works here). I try to be like Wally, but instead I'm usually more like Alice.

    36. Re:To be honest by danbeck · · Score: 1

      That's just fine. But, that is something you need to work out with the company before hand. Don't like what they are doing? LEAVE! This is America, not Russia.. there are other jobs available.

      Well... I guess that doesn't apply to the idiot html designer who was making 80K out in San Fran and can't get a job now. Hint: html designers are lowest of low on the totem pole. You deserve to make 20K... you are doing a job that a 14 year old could do. Here is a $0.25, go get a real skill for a career.

    37. Re:To be honest by Loligo · · Score: 2

      >The time you spend at work, you ought to be
      >working, not sending personal email, making
      >personal calls, or anything besides work-related
      >stuff.

      Does reading Slashdot count as "work-related stuff"?

      -l

    38. Re:To be honest by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 2

      Yes, I agree. It's always bothered me that in this society you have to be a different person when you're "at work".

      Part of the problem of course is that our culture is so varied, you can't have everybody dress and act the way they "usually" do, or you'll offend someone (i.e., keep your politics and religion to yourself if they aren't mainstream).

      But, whatever the reason, self-employed is the best way to go, especially with computer-related jobs. The goal is to minimize the time you're a "work" person and maximize the time you're just yourself.

    39. Re:To be honest by voncheesebiscuit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I only wish I could mod this higher, very well said.

      The unforunate thing is, a mutually loyal company/employee relationship is better for all parties, but its so often an "all take and no give" relationship by my employer that I get fed up and end up with the completely mercenary attitude.

      I'd probably get more done if I thought my company cared about me, but once they make the choice to treat me as nothing more than a resource, my morale declines and so does my efficiency.

    40. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it even got modded up! ;)


      That alone is enough to make me question its wisdom...

    41. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look what company loyalty got employees at Enron and WorldCom.

      Damn straight!

      But it looks like those Enron employees are now going to get more severance than we did at a startup (Archway, what a joke) that laid off 30% with $25M still in the bank..

    42. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1- What are all belong to them is the work product to which you agreed in you contract. Not all your thoughts. Heck, they probably want to suck the upto the last snippet of java you ll write at work, but if you happen to think about a novel and write a good and successful one, they would even miss the opportunity to strip it from you.
      2- Again, what you agreed to leave to the company is your work, not your privacy. Privacy is necessary for human dignity. It s a human right, probably a stronger one than property, since property is just a way to get there.
      3- Now for a more "unofficial" agreement: when you have some level of responsibility, the company expects you to return call at home outside office hours and be available then, mostly in case of ermergencies. The counterpart is that you can expect from your company to perfectly agree that you manage important and urgent personal matters during office hours. There is some slack there in what you define as urgent, important, etc ... on both sides, but it is sure that deciding that nothing is important enough to break those stupid worktime rules will not make you a good employee.

    43. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to re-read the article. It said there was no increase in productivity measured as sales per worker, but said it did not measure turnover rate or quality in the study...

      So the poster is correct in his anecdotal beliefs as the article DID NOT ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES!

    44. Re:To be honest by jschrod · · Score: 1

      The level of allowed or tolerated private activities depends on the kind of business you're in.

      Look, I own a consulting company. And I wouldn't even employ somebody with your opinion. I simply expect my staff to keep their private activities to a reasonable level, and that level is judged according to how they get their work done and how good they get it done.

      Anything else is counter-productive, it diminishes work efficiency. That's not even a matter of "friendlyness" from my side, that's pure business.

      But then, we're not located in the US with it's hire-and-fire mentality either.

      --

      Joachim

      People don't write Manifestos any more -- what's going on in this world? [Frank Zappa]

    45. Re:To be honest by isaaccasaubon · · Score: 1

      Which is fine until you point out that the flip side of this is that you'll only work your contracted hours and never think about work outside of work hours.

      If a company is going to totally restrict what you do during work hours then they shouldn't expect any favours back - especially when a better job comes along as you'll be the first out of the door.

      Are you a terrorist?

    46. Re:To be honest by zemkai · · Score: 1
      Not in California, which has law on the books that specifically states that anything produced entirely without company resources (time, materials, etc) is the sole property of the employee. It should be part of any Proprietary Rights and Invention Agreement you signed.

      -ZK-

    47. Re:To be honest by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

      (* I cant believe the hours people work. I have been a programmer for 7 years and in professional, post-college employment for 12 years, and I've NEVER worked non-compensated overtime. Not once. *)

      But that's how most of us make up for the time we spend trolling around on slashdot :-)

    48. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I resent the automatic implication that if you smoke pot at home, you must do so at work, too. I know a lot of pot smokers who wait until after work to unwind with their favorite illegal substance- using at work would just be a waste of a good buzz. Does everyone who drinks alchohol with dinner drink before or during the work day? NO. Why the automatic assumption that pot smokers do smoke during work hours? This is my biggest complaint about drug testing, they can't tell when you have been using it, just that you did at some time in the past month or two.

    49. Re:To be honest by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2

      Let me guess, you are one of the the coders working on Windows...

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    50. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Quit giving your lives and your hearts and your souls to a company like that. You'll be much happier if you think of yourselves as mercenaries - do honest work for honest pay. If you think a management decision is stupid, as long as it's legal / ethical, then kick back and remember that they're paying you to work, they're not paying you to care. Example: Say some pointy haried boss wants you to implement a horrible User Interface. You know it's a bad idea, that it'll be clunky. GO AHEAD AND GIVE THE PHB WHAT HE/SHE WANTS!

      That is counter to "nerdiness" though. True geeks have a passion for their work and the results of it. We want to be rewarded for our merit and enjoy fixing broken things, whether those "things" are machines or people processes.

      IOW: We really want Open Source bosses deep down.

    51. Re:To be honest by jazman_777 · · Score: 1
      Heck, all your thoughts are already belong to them.

      Since I do a lot of thinking "off hours", can I count that as work? I even think about work sometimes. So I can balance that time with /. surfing while I'm "at work"? Please say "yes!"

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    52. Re:To be honest by pubjames · · Score: 2

      I resent the automatic implication that if you smoke pot at home, you must do so at work, too.

      That wasn't really implied. I have nothing against pot, in fact I smoke the stuff myself. But I draw the line at smoking it at work!

    53. Re:To be honest by jazman_777 · · Score: 1
      I'd probably get more done if I thought my company cared about me, but once they make the choice to treat me as nothing more than a resource, my morale declines and so does my efficiency.

      For large companies, people are viewed as machines in an assembly line. It's all about "efficiency" and "cost/benefit" and "shareholder value". There are no real human values that work--such as pride of work, loyalty, gratitude--except maybe among individuals who know each other. That's the manager/industrial engineer way in the USA.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    54. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      absolutely, how would you otherwise learn that your right are being infringed upon. not to mention all the other great references on security, microsoft, "law" etc.

    55. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Part of the problem of course is that our culture is so varied, you can't have everybody dress and act the way they "usually" do, or you'll offend someone (i.e., keep your politics and religion to yourself if they aren't mainstream).

      the only thing that really irks me about that fact is the way some people seem to feel that just because their politics or other religion is "mainstream", that it's A-OK for them to be all in my face about it. somehow i just think my freakishness would suck a whole lot less if normalcy would just give me some space, goddessdammit.

    56. Re:To be honest by lightcycler · · Score: 1

      "If a company employs potheads, then they deserve everything they get."

      They deserve City of London bankers?

    57. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess companies need a better strategy
      of infomation management.
      They fear so much loose their info that:
      1) Don't trust people. But work is done by people,
      not machines.
      2) Keep it safe very away from employers' brain.

      I didn't forget about that guy who wants to f*ck with his company, but I prefer look at workers. They are honest in a major degree, so should be
      treated like that and models of Knowledge Management should appear. I guess Open Source is a way, but talking on society scale, what would be like that?

    58. Re:To be honest by CarrionBird · · Score: 1

      Who really has a choice? If you don't sign, you normally don't get the job. Ther may be a few oddball excpetions, but I've never heard of someone refusing to sign and still getting the job.

      --
      Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
    59. Re:To be honest by yog · · Score: 2

      if it's for hourly contracting work, the contract is entirely negotiable; I regularly strike clauses that I don't like, and they expect me to do so. They put'em in knowing the savvy, experienced contractor is going to object. It's a sort of game. (sigh)
      what happened to doing business on a handshake?

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    60. Re:To be honest by ichimunki · · Score: 1
      I have. There is an "Ask Slashdot" about this same topic every month or two.

      You do have to decide if you would rather have that particular job or if you like owning your thoughts when you are not at work. Personally I'd rather be a janitor than sign a contract that put my family snapshots, doodles, private email, and non-work-related programming efforts in jeopardy. The way some of these contracts are written that's not a far stretch. For 99% of all people, there is no reason at all for the company to have rights to any of your creative efforts that are explicitly created for work.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    61. Re:To be honest by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      er, that should be not explicitly.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    62. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone is not on drugs while at work, why should they be punished for what they do outside of work?

    63. Re:To be honest by seanellis · · Score: 1

      Company loyalty is a complete farce.

      Not always. Company loyalty has to be earned, just as individual trust has to be earned. The company I work for has consistently treated me well, and has earned my loyalty.

      Also, the net usage policy treats people like adults, and as a result people tend to work like adults. Where people have to spend a little time doing personal stuff, they make up the time voluntarily by staying a little later or taking a shorter lunch break.

      It's a balance. Think of it like the freedom to decorate your own cube. Of course, nude calendars won't be tolerated, but there's no need to go for a draconian clear desk policy either. And 99% of people are quite sensible about it anyway, so you just have to deal with the 1% who aren't rather than fending off the 95% of people who would be pissed off otherwise.

    64. Re:To be honest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Want a job? I'd love to hire you RIGHT NOW! Please come work for me! I can't wait any more. Tell all your buddies to come work for me too!

      Christ!

    65. Re:To be honest by kryptkpr · · Score: 1

      What does working on Windows have to do with anything? You sound like one of the thousands of mindless Slashdot anti-microsoft spokesmen.. Sure, lets make fun of windows and the people who wrote it, but my question to you is, can YOU DO BETTER?

      Can YOU make an OS that will run on hardware created by thousands of companies? Support most common devices, right out of the box? Point-and-click driver installation?

      Don't get me wrong, I love linux, and it's running on my gateway/firewall/samba/apache server sitting in my basement, but it doesn't mean that I'd like to use it for my desktop.. I tried once, and it just isn't ready. Not until it has the backing of many more hardware manufacturers, and more standards (the X clipboard springs to mind).

      If whoever wrote windows was high at the time, power to them, they created the operating system that turned computers into household items.

      --
      DJ kRYPT's Free MP3s!
  4. blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 5, Informative
    In the large company where I work, all access to Hotmail, Yahoo, etc is blocked at the firewall. This is because too many lusers kept downloading klez, hybris, (random vbs trojan), etc and executing them.

    After this was done, all virus problems on the network dropped from one incident per 2 weeks to maybe 1 incident per 4 months.

    As to the privacy issue, the easy solution is to NOT SEND PRIVATE E-MAIL FROM WORK (or at least use GnuPG or PGP!)

    1. Re:blocked at work by Zathrus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Sigh... freaking morons.

      The previous company I worked at did this as well. Pissed the hell out of me, since I could no longer get to my email and I prefer to not give out my work email out over the net to avoid the spam.

      The really idiotic think is that they blocked sites like Sneakemail too, which is just a redirector service.

      I can understand the need to block webmail sites, since there are too many idiots out there, but at least be intelligent about what gets blocked.

    2. Re:blocked at work by Fapestniegd · · Score: 1

      It's a Ketstroke logger that then forwards them on.

      How is any form of encryption going to work? You're not the only one to suggest this countermeasure, You were just the first.

      It seems the best solution for this would be to see if it running on your machine, and if it is, hook up an alternate input device. From the looks of the product It probably doesn't log voice input (i.e Dragon or ViaVoice) Not that these are robust enough for real work, but they might be for personal email.

    3. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah, forget it. I'm not feeding a box I don't trust a disk with my private key on it, much less even type out my passphrase on that machine. (Keystroke logging, remember?)

    4. Re:blocked at work by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      What about keystroke loggers? I doubt PGP or any other software encryption will get around that.

    5. Re:blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "The previous company I worked at did this [block webmail] as well. Pissed the hell out of me, since I could no longer get to my email and I prefer to not give out my work email out over the net to avoid the spam. The really idiotic think is that they blocked sites like Sneakemail [sneakemail.com] too, which is just a redirector service."

      Yes, blocking sneakemail is just anal. The setup here doen't bother me too much because I use an obscure free webmail provider (20MB, IMAP4!!) that I will not name when posting from the office. Fortunately they only block the big webmail providers that most lusers use plus the instant messengers.

    6. Re:blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "It's a Ketstroke logger that then forwards them on. How is any form of encryption going to work?"

      The keylogger probably detects that hotmail is open and then monitors keystrokes to the web browser. Now this suggestion is security by obscurity, but it's better than nothing. You could just type your e-mail in word and then encrpyt and then paste into hotmail. They keylogger probably won't log Word-created documents as e-mail.

    7. Re:blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2, Informative
      "Bah, forget it. I'm not feeding a box I don't trust a disk with my private key on it, much less even type out my passphrase on that machine."

      You are encrypting to send to someone else. No private key is required. If you really need one, generate a new key for work purposes.

    8. Re:blocked at work by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      One day I'll drag the name of that webmail provider out of you!

    9. Re:blocked at work by Nomad7674 · · Score: 5, Informative
      Another alternative, when e-mail from work is essential, is to get a wireless device capable of sending e-mail without using the work e-mail system. The Kyocera 6035 Smartphone (and the coming-soon 7135), Palm's i705 Palm.Net service and Earthlink's various wireless services seem like good possibilities.

      Of course, a truly persistent person or corporation can find a way to tap into any technology, given time and money.

    10. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, where I work our e-mail system is so f***king s****y that IT advised us long ago to keep hotmail, yahoo etc.accounts as a fallback for whenever we were having problems.

      Our formal company policy is no personal email but in fact nobody cares if you send your grandma a brief hello. And even the guys that are supposed to monitor webuse don't bother. They don't usually have time and, in any case, spying on your coworkers is really not that interesting. Who cares if Bob in accounting is obsessed with naked midgets? As long as it doesn't have an effect on his work

      Cheers,

      JHVH1

      `The shapes of things are dumb.'
      -L. Wittgenstein

    11. Re:blocked at work by oval_pants · · Score: 1

      I agree and have seen a similiar solution. If you use the company's computer to access the internet, you are using their resources (both time and money) to do so. If you do not want your private email monitored, simply wait till you get home and do it then.

      I think that most companies should implement a junk email address as well, for signing up for information on the net (similiar to a throw-away Hotmail account). That way you will not need to use your own personal accounts.

    12. Re:blocked at work by bgfay · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Okay, sure, but what about at a school that won't provide accounts for students to use? I teach at just such a school and would like to communicate with students using yahoo, netscape, hotmail or some other such thing. I could send out assignments, handouts, etc on email and not have to print the damn things on dead trees. Having free email at work would be a huge bonus to us, be much cheaper than getting each kid a hosted account, and be safe considering the machines are all set up with pretty good antivirus software that is updated all the time.

      As for lusers (sic) downloading virus files, well, that's going to happen regardless and we ought to be proactive (plan for these things) than reactive (ooo, no more email for you!).

      --
      Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    13. Re:blocked at work by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2
      You could just type your e-mail in word and then encrpyt and then paste into hotmail. They keylogger probably won't log Word-created documents as e-mail.

      I would expect that, for sites like hotmail, the program is going to record your 'post' requests.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    14. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of my teachers hosted all the handouts and assignment lists online. Hosting the one site online is going to be a lot more efficient than sending a couple hundred email messages.

    15. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We locked all non-company email down via web and otherwise at corporate and virus incidents went to 1 in 6 months (Code Red :P virus via one of the branches).

      Disabling the floppy drives helped as well. Users cannot be trusted.

      At the branches, which we did not control, they were losing servers monthly to viruses and files daily.

    16. Re:blocked at work by bgfay · · Score: 2

      I do the same (though I have to get my own site because the school system won't buy one and, even if they did, I'm sure I wouldn't have access). However, I would like to be able to send emails to students, have them file writing with me electronically and the rest. For now, because of this blocking, I can't.

      Can you think of a reason beyond virus problems that would warrant this blocking? I've been told because free email systems open the system to attacks on the network (not viruses, but malicious attacks by people on the network).

      --
      Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    17. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, except that at small companies it's not too hard to view the logs or figure out who is doing what and block it.

      It may be anal, but it beats having to fix the servers on the weekend or in the middle of the night.

    18. Re:blocked at work by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > The keylogger probably detects that hotmail is open and then monitors keystrokes to the web browser.

      Umm... to what web browser? Netscape? Mozilla? Opera? Lynx? I didn't know anyone wrote plugins for all of those products :)

      If you get to Hotmail from work by using your home machine as a web proxy and encrypt that connection, it's not even gonna see the DNS lookups to Hotmail's site.

      Yeah, Joe Sixpack who only uses IE with Javashit and ActiveX turned on is fux0r3d, but anyone sending stuff to internalmemos.com without covering their ass deserves what they get.

      (And if Joe Sixpack can't install another browser because his work box prevents it, whatever happened to "Cut, paste, save to floppy, and send it through hotmail from home?")

    19. Re:blocked at work by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

      Keystroke loggers ? I'm more afraid of Dickstroke loggers. Now The Man will really know how unproductive I am!

      graspee

      P.S. This is of course a joke. I am not really employed.

    20. Re:blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1

      send me an e-mail ;-)

    21. Re:blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "P.S. This is of course a joke. I am not really employed."

      Yeah I saw your name and immediately knew it would be a joke. (I'm that guy who wrote 'h3ll' way back when.)

    22. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Still another possibility is to not use web-based email. Instead, ssh into your own offiste systems (e.g. at home), and handle all email transactions there. The company certainly has the choice of blocking this sort of access entirely, but due to the DMCA (:-P) doesn't seem to have the legal option of intercepting it (IANAL, etc.).

    23. Re:blocked at work by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      Kay as much as I agree with the dead tree issue- I would have been somewhat unhappy about teacher communicating with me on my private mail though. Maybe the better solution is to have secure accessible accounts from outside the school.

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
    24. Re:blocked at work by Izang · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we have a guy that takes a 30-minute shit everyday so that he can check email and voice mail on his phone.

    25. Re:blocked at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, this is fucking Slashdot. You can swear your motherfucking ass off here, no one gives a shit. And if they do, they can fucking suck my cock.

    26. Re:blocked at work by Emont319 · · Score: 1
      Assuming you have shell access, why not just ssh ( ssh for windows ) to the machine and use pine or someother form of command line program? Or, do what I do, setup an ssh tunnel and use your preferred mail client to pop your mail.

      I would assume you would be in the clear with either method -- unless of course you're sending mail and they have a keylogger or screen capture.

    27. Re:blocked at work by digitalsushi · · Score: 2
      "As for lusers (sic)[sic]"


      http://www.pootug.demon.co.uk/lusers.html

      --
      slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
    28. Re:blocked at work by LazyBoy · · Score: 1
      In the large company where I work, all access to Hotmail, Yahoo, etc is blocked at the firewall.
      This was done where I work too, in the name of security. This by the same CIO that has forced Outlook and Exchange on most of the corporation.

      But I read mail on a Sun and have never had a virus problem in my life. It's quite an inconvenience.

      --

      If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.

    29. Re:blocked at work by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "This was done where I work too, in the name of security. This by the same CIO that has forced Outlook and Exchange on most of the corporation."

      Yes it is the same situation at my place of employment and I feel your pain. But I have to do it all on NT4.

    30. Re:blocked at work by Kris_J · · Score: 2

      The previous place I worked at had a rule that said you weren't allowed to connect to the Internet from inside the building except through authorised channels. I don't think the directors realised that this technically meant they couldn't use their WAP phones' data services, but that problem went away by itself anyway.

  5. One word : by M1000 · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.hushmail.com

    1. Re:One word : by walt-sjc · · Score: 2

      Won't help you if you are using IE due to this flaw since you can spoof hotmail or any other SSL based site and noone will be the wiser. It allows for a trivial "Man in the middle" attack. Some nice security guys on BugTraq providede a nice tool for spying on all SSL sessions. Note that Microsoft doesn't seem to even care to fix this flaw that basically makes SSL useless as a privacy tool.

    2. Re:One word : by lamp77 · · Score: 1

      well, maybe we should all use dasher now, to get around keylogging.

      dasher+hushmail == very good.

    3. Re:One word : by psychosis · · Score: 1

      Just a dumb observation, but that's a really long sequence of characters for being one word!
      achteeteepeecolonslashslashwwwdothushmaildo tcom?
      maybe "one URL: http://www.hushmail.com" would work?

    4. Re:One word : by acceleriter · · Score: 2
      Hotmail only uses SSL during the logon process (AFTER your username and password have been transmitted in the clear). I suspect this is an underhanded attempt to get the real IP address for those using anonymizing proxies, which often don't proxy SSL: you think you're anonymous, your browser silently connects on port 443, your real IP address is captured, and you're none the wiser until you're found out.

      To observe this, turn on the warnings for transitioning between SSL and non-SSL pages and log on to hotmail.

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

    5. Re:One word : by jareds · · Score: 1

      Hotmail only uses SSL during the logon process (AFTER your username and password have been transmitted in the clear). I suspect this is an underhanded attempt to get the real IP address for those using anonymizing proxies, which often don't proxy SSL: you think you're anonymous, your browser silently connects on port 443, your real IP address is captured, and you're none the wiser until you're found out.

      To observe this, turn on the warnings for transitioning between SSL and non-SSL pages and log on to hotmail.

      You don't know what you're talking about.

      The page with the login form is indeed sent to you unencrypted via ordinary HTTP. However, the form action is of the form https://foo/bar, which means that your browser will use SSL to submit the information you put into the form. This is why you don't get a security warning until you submit the form.

      Now, this is inferior to using SSL for the login form, because the user has to examine the page source to protect against an attacker replacing the login page, via a DNS spoof or something, with one that submits the form to the attacker rather than Hotmail. However, the username and password are not transmitted in the clear if the actually Hotmail page is used.

    6. Re:One word : by acceleriter · · Score: 2
      You don't know what you're talking about.

      It's not necessary to be combative.

      The page with the login form is indeed sent to you unencrypted via ordinary HTTP. However, the form action is of the form https://foo/bar, which means that your browser will use SSL to submit the information you put into the form. This is why you don't get a security warning until you submit the form.

      I stand corrected.

      Now, this is inferior to using SSL for the login form . . .

      I agree.

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

    7. Re:One word : by Harik · · Score: 1
      I suspect this is an underhanded attempt to get the real IP address for those using anonymizing proxies, which often don't proxy SSL: you think you're anonymous, your browser silently connects on port 443, your real IP address is captured, and you're none the wiser until you're found out.

      I suspect you have no clue what you're talking about.

      Proxys don't cache SSL (they can't read it), but they do proxy it (by just passing it through). CONNECT hostname:port HTTP/1.0 Even if they don't, many (most?) corperate networks are on internal IP space with a NAT firewall. AT BEST you're going to see the http from the proxy box and the https from the NAT gateway.

      --Dan

    8. Re:One word : by acceleriter · · Score: 2

      Early publically available anonymizing proxies, such as lpwa.com, did not cache SSL. And WTF is with the "you don't know what you're talking about" posts. It's possible to disagree without being a prick. Why not try it?

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

    9. Re:One word : by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/cache/proxy/ in the above post.

    10. Re:One word : by Harik · · Score: 1
      Wow, not only are you stupid, you like to demonstrate it.

      NO PROXY ANYWHERE EVER CAN CACHE SSL. PERIOD.

      For more information, please apply your head to a solid object.

      HTH. HAND.

    11. Re:One word : by acceleriter · · Score: 2
      You know, I simply used the wrong word. And minutes after clicking submit, typed the following as an AC reply:
      s/cache/proxy/ in the above post.
      which you obviously didn't bother to read. So obviously, you're not just a dick, but a dick that can't bother to read everything. While I really don't care what you think of me, here's a big FUCK YOU for calling me stupid.
      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

  6. WEB SECURITY LINKS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:WEB SECURITY LINKS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      frist psot

  7. it's their world... by Ransak · · Score: 1

    If you use a company PC and bandwidth, you play by their rules. Sad, but true.

    --
    "Powers. I have them."
    1. Re:it's their world... by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Hrm. Well the company doesn't go anywhere without my body and my mind. Does that mean I get to dictate the terms of use of these two things?

      No. Remember you're the one who says because its their PC and their bandwidth (which they can only afford by virtue of the work I do for them, so really, they are mine) that it goes by they're rules. And who's they? Oh yeah, us.

      I think you'll have to support your point a little more. There isn't any reason why your point is intrinsically true, especially given that the PC and bandwidth can only be purchased because of the work I do. I'm not going to roll over just because some people mistakeningly equates the ownership of property with absolute power of their use, and doubly so in a corperate envioronment where the equippment has only been purchased because of the employees.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    2. Re:it's their world... by andrew_0812 · · Score: 0

      What you say is basically true. The company can only afford their assets because of the work of the employees.

      But it is still the company's assets, not yours. I know that some companies are employee owned, and that you may have stock options or whatever, but the assets still belong to the company, which is controlled by whatever leading body your company may have, President, Board, Dictator, whatever. Yes, the work that you do gives them a product/service to sell so that they can afford to buy computers and internet services, but if you don't abide by company policy regarding these issues, or other ones, then they will let you go, and find someone else that will. Then you are no longer putting money in their pocket. Now if you are so indespensible that they can't get rid of you, then more power to you. Email all you want. But for the rest of us, it comes down to one simple point, The company is paying you for your work. This does not include lunch, going to the bathroom, or sending email. Luckily, most companies understand that people aren't machines, and they have to have time to go to the bathroom, take mental breaks, and interact with each other on non-work topics. It all depends on your company. I work for a company that doesn't mind personal email, telephone calls, or internet surfing, as long as you don't do it too much. If you have to send personal email from work, I suggest you make sure that you work for a company that allows that.

    3. Re:it's their world... by Latent+IT · · Score: 2

      Wow, you're a confused reactionary. Congrats.

      If you want to use the company PC, and the company bandwith, even forgetting company time to forward your friggin' chain e-mails around, I think the company has a right to know about it.

      If you want to slack off so bad, open a frigging book. Or bring a Gameboy, if that's too intellectual for you.

      I'm not going to roll over just because some people mistakeningly equates the ownership of property with absolute power of their use.

      That's funny. Especially in this situation, how is that a mistake?

    4. Re:it's their world... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you use a company PC and bandwidth, you play by their rules. Sad, but true.
      I don't know if that's necessarily accurate. There's a long standing law that employers cannot legally listen to private phone calls you make from the office (though they can disallow you to make them). In that case, I would be using the company paid for phone and the company paid for phone time but I do not have to "play by their rules" if they want to listen to my phone calls.

      However, the phone law is probably written specifically for phone use. Like a lot of laws dealing with computers, lawmakers seem to be trying to define the new laws to be inconsistent with the spirit of previous ones. It seems more consistent to me for companies not to be able to monitor your private correspondence, but to be able to prevent you from having any.
    5. Re:it's their world... by duck_prime · · Score: 1
      Remember you're the one who says because its their PC and their bandwidth (which they can only afford by virtue of the work I do for them, so really, they are mine) that it goes by they're rules.
      The difference here is that they've already compensated you for your work. Your contract probably says (more or less) "You get X dollars per year for working here". It *doesn't* say, "You get X dollars per year for working here, plus you own the machinery". The company didn't buy that machine for *you* as an individual, they bought it for whoever puts their fanny in that seat that day. If you don't believe me, quit your job, then come in and use the bandwidth and PC on the weekends. See how mad they get! ;)

      Imagine you work as a technician at a cyclotron lab. Your job is "vital" in that the machine won't work without you pushing levers, but does that mean you have some claim of ownership to the mighty cyclotron? Does this buy you the right to run your own experiments on it? Nope. All you get is your salary, and pride in being involved in a great work.
  8. Ok -- by Hayzeus · · Score: 1

    That kind of sucks. I've been putting this off, I guess, but does anybody know of a good web-based email client that runs with apache on linux (that doesn't require php)and that I install with minimum effort?

    1. Re:Ok -- by thegodshatetexas · · Score: 1

      Instant Web Mail... Easiest webmail client I have ever installed

      --
      Overgrown military establisments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as par
    2. Re:Ok -- by flonker · · Score: 2

      This isn't a direct answer to your question, but if you want to be secure in your email, you should be using HTTPS, (or some other secure protocol).

      BOFHs everywhere have been doing this for ages using proxy servers and/or ethernet sniffers. POP3, SMTP, IMAP and all those aren't safe either.

    3. Re:Ok -- by guacamolefoo · · Score: 1

      http://nullwebmail.sourceforge.net/

      Very, very fast. No goofy features, just send, receive, compose.

      More pimpified:
      http://horde.org/imp/

      Guac-foo

    4. Re:Ok -- by Phroggy · · Score: 2

      This isn't a direct answer to your question, but if you want to be secure in your email, you should be using HTTPS, (or some other secure protocol).

      If you're using Apache, just set up mod_ssl, and your webmail package shouldn't care if the connection is encrypted or not. The Web server handles that.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    5. Re:Ok -- by Lafe · · Score: 1

      I recommend SquirrelMail. I use it myself, and am quite happy with it.

    6. Re:Ok -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Symantec Mailgear. They have a linux client.

    7. Re:Ok -- by plover · · Score: 2
      The whole point of the spyware stuff is that it's installed on the victim's computer. It reads the contents of the screens after they've been decrypted while they're being presented to the user.

      I assume their product works by installing a global hook via SetWindowsHookEx(). They probably register to be notified of window messages pertaining to keyboard and drawing.

      Sure enough, a google search of 'eblaster dll' turns up URLMKPL.DLL in the first hit. I'd like to dumpbin this DLL to see exactly what they call.

      The point is that https: protects the links. It cannot protect the endpoints.

      --
      John
    8. Re:Ok -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been using squirrlmail too, it's been great.

    9. Re:Ok -- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said "doesn't require php" LTIL, SquirrelMail uses PHP>

  9. Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The best way to make people rise up against this is simply to encourage employers to try to apply the goals and reasoning of software like this against traditional communication services.

    How many people you think would be cool with their employer listening in on their personal phone calls, and opening all their personal mail that gets sent to the office?

    Apply it to everything, and people will understand that this is an encroachment on what we currently have, not a reasonable measure for dealing with a newish technology.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
    1. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most already do.

      Why are you getting personal mail sent to the company?

    2. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we get to hear the executive-level employees of the company..?
      How about if I'm a shareholder? Can I hear it then?

      Oohh...

    3. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by SirSlud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because my company prefers me being at work rather than taking a morning off just to sign for a package at home? So I get it sent to work; I can sign for it, and I dont miss any time.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    4. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by gmhowell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ditto some of the other replies. NO mail gets delivered in my office until it is opened. Even stuff that says "personal and confidential" is opened. It's a safety issue. There have been a couple of death threats throughout the years. It's also my facility. I paid for the person opening the mail, I paid for the post box. Trust me, I have no interest in reading a subpoena from your divorce attorney. I really don't. But if that's a death threat, I owe it to you AND THE OTHER EMPLOYEES to tell the cops.

      In our employee handbooks, we reserve the right to monitor calls. We never have, but we can. We allow a few calls (lots of mothers in my office. Lots of calls to/from the office to make sure the kiddies got off the bus okay) which is no big deal. Same thing with... A million little things. People are more productive, like you say, if they don't have to stay at home to wait for a package, to order a repair of their appliance, etc. But some people abuse the privelage.

      It's a balance that has to be struck. What seems to work is when we suspect someone of abusing the phone, we just remind them that we allow limited personal calls, and that we can monitor their calls to see if they are abusing the privelege. The offending behavior stops within hours:)

      And to the naysayers who say 'ignore company loyalty'. I've got news for you: it's a chicken and egg problem. I'll extend loyalty. We've got employees working for us who were around in the Ford administration. Until they retired, there were a couple of employees who changed my diapers. They gave their loyalty. We reciprocated. Need 2 months off for back surgery and recovery? No problem. Hope you get better. We'll keep your chair warm for you. OTOH, you think we're only good for a paycheck? Well, screw you. When times get tight, you'll be first on the chopping block. We'll find a way to save the person who stayed late to finish up some work.

      Loyalty works both ways. I think some of the children on slashdot forget that.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    5. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by ttys00 · · Score: 1
      Loyalty works both ways. I think some of the children on slashdot forget that.

      Yes, loyalty must work both ways if its going to be effective. But there are far more employees loyal to their company than companies loyal to their employees. Being loyal to a small business, where individual efforts are noticed, is very different to a large corporation where you are just another number in the HR database. The big corps threw out their loyalty policies long ago.
    6. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      Having never worked for a large company, I wouldn't know. But from talking to friends (on both the management and employee side) who do work for big corps, I would tend to agree with you. I really don't mind when folks slag large companies. But slagging small companies is a little too close to home (plus, the day I wrote the original thing, someone just decided not to show up to work one day. Never asked for a raise, never asked for different position, nothing. She just didn't feel like working). OTOH, I know of more than a few small companies that excel at treating their employees like shit.

      What it boils down to is that I work for/run the exception to the rule, and it really chaps my ass when others screw it up for me.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    7. Re:Make all changes retroactive, technology-wise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I gave loyalty. I did the extra hours. I made lots of money for my boss.

      Guess what? He still dropped me...

  10. this can be monitored already by prisen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not really anything new here; "The Man" can see what I'm doing right now, where I'm going, whether or not I'm logged in to a site (including my username and password), how long I've been on a certain page, etc etc etc - And he doesn't need a kiddie script to do it. That's just part of working for the DoD or any other institution that has full monitoring instilled in their computer use policy, I guess.

  11. Hotmail Not Safe For Work? by haukex · · Score: 1, Funny

    What, really? Oh no! Someone should've told me earlier!

  12. Our only hope is by Dirk+Pitt · · Score: 4, Interesting
    that the market will take care of these privacy invasions, and people just won't work for companies that get a rep for doing BS like this.

    I mean, legally, I have to side with the companies. Their machines, their time, their liability. The can do what they want.

    BUT...it does suck, and I'd hate to work for anyone that would think they needed to read my private mail. My only hope is that more and more people will leave companies that do that to work for smaller companies, or start their own, and that these smaller companies will begin to resist the temptation of corporate assimilation. I see it beginning to happen now, there are some fairly large, privately held consulting companies that foster a great atmosphere for their people. The more I see big companies doing things like this, the more hope I have that this renaissance of the small business will grow.

    1. Re:Our only hope is by jonatha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      that the market will take care of these freedom issues, and slaves just won't work for plantations that get a rep for...

      Well, you get the idea. There are good reasons for the existince of fair practice standards in labor laws...

      --
      The SCO lawsuit makes me wish my company were in Utah. We need a new building.
    2. Re:Our only hope is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the spirit of the USA Patriot Act...
      If your not doing anything wrong.. You've got nothing to worry about.

    3. Re:Our only hope is by dcollins · · Score: 1

      Ah, the market will take care of it.

      Why did we ever waste time with civil rights legislation or constitutional protections, I wonder?

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    4. Re:Our only hope is by Dirk+Pitt · · Score: 2
      good reasons for the existince of fair practice standards

      No doubt, but I think the slave comparison is a false analogy; to compare our work situations to people who were physically and emotionally supressed for hundreds of years, people who had *no* choice, is pretty cheap.

      My point was, constitutionally I don't think regualating data falls outside the limits of what an owner *can* do, but it is something they *shouldn't* do. And you know what? If we don't like it, we should go work somewhere else.

    5. Re:Our only hope is by jred · · Score: 2

      The only problem is small companies do these things, too. I know the company that I work for, less than 20 employees, monitors all network traffic. We don't pore over every email, but we do keep eyes on things.

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
    6. Re:Our only hope is by zangdesign · · Score: 2

      Why did we ever waste time with civil rights legislation or constitutional protections, I wonder?

      Because this is not a civil rights issue, dude. Look, it's pretty simple. If the company owns the equipment you use during work hours and pays for the bandwidth you use to access the internet, they get to say how you use it.

      If the company is in a position that any sort of unapproved disclosure of corporate information could cause harm, then they certainly have the right to restrict access and monitor their employees. One good example - a bank. There's so much confidential information floating around a bank that it's a wonder they even allow a single internet connection.

      Second, if a company is worried that an employee is going off the reservation, then they certainly have a right to monitor the activities of that employee vis-a-vis their computer use to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of corporate information.

      Now, a reasonable company is not going to gripe about the occasional personal email, or the occasional surfing frenzy as long as you take care of business. A reasonable company is also going to state up front what the rules are so that these questions don't come up. But nothing requires a company to be reasonable to employees except a legally unenforceable social contract, a legally enforceable written contract, and state and federal labor laws.

      Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    7. Re:Our only hope is by Dirk+Pitt · · Score: 2
      Ah, logical fallacies.

      So the market has never corrected problems by itself, and we should always legislate when we're not happy with something?

      Rubbish. If it's sweatshops and 12 year olds, write laws. Professionals? Take care of yourselves.

      If you want to explore the legalities, imagine you visit a neighbor for dinner. You ask if you can borrow the phone, and he lets you know that you can, but the conversation will be recorded. Perfectly legal, _but you have the choice not to come back for dinner_.

      You're cashing the paycheck and the benefits, no one's holding a gun to your head. If you want to control your communications, bring a laptop and cell phone to work, or go work for someone that's enlightened on how to treat their most valuable resource.

    8. Re:Our only hope is by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      How about this. I continue to work there and I sabotage the system. If you don't like it, you can go out of business.

      Imagine that every time the boss checked up on you, you were notified. Would the boss be as willing to spy on you? I don't think anyone would stand the boss physically looking over your shoulder every 5 seconds. That's because it's rude, voyeuristic and obnoxious.

    9. Re:Our only hope is by John+Whitley · · Score: 2
      Fallacy alert! Fallacy alert!:
      I mean, legally, I have to side with the companies. Their machines, their time, their liability. [They] can do what they want.

      I don't buy this. My reasons are:

      1. Legal-oriented thought tends towards viewing the sets of ethical, moral, and legal as being identical. Or rather, that all behavior is collapsed to "if it's legal, then it's O.K." Anyone who remembers the drivel spewed by the First Great Spammers, Cantor and Siegel, the infamous "Green Card Lawyers" could see a prime example of this type of thought.
      2. A more mature mindset recognizes that legal vs. ethical vs. (e.g.) balanced compassion are progresively "smaller" behavioral sets. Point: just because a practice is legal doesn't mean that it's even remotely acceptable! Examnple: Say that someone spams half the Internet, then a law is passed that makes spamming illegal for that individual, then they spam again. The law doesn't change the fact that this individual was a thoughtless jerk even before the law was passed!
      3. Despite the above ideas, some people and organizations will continue to suck. This is one reason for laws to exist: to create boundaries of extreme behavior beyond which society will no longer tolerate those actions. Companies must not continue to confuse the real need for employee performance, responsibility, and accountability with a control-freakish need to survey every aspect of a worker's life. If this trend goes too far, and it probably already has, then it's a definite call for improved privacy laws.
    10. Re:Our only hope is by Dirk+Pitt · · Score: 2
      Well, I don't really understand what the fallacy in that statement is--I mean, it is legally defensible, so the company can in fact do what they want. But I think I went to some great lengths to explain why, in fact, it does suck and they shouldn't do it. I never tried to say it was ethically correct because no law exists to deny it.

      This is one reason for laws to exist: to create boundaries of extreme behavior
      Absolutely. But how do you write this law to protect all circumstances? What if I work for DoD subcontractor, or a company that's extremely prone to industrial espionage? These things aren't just fiction. Doesn't the employer have the right to some paranoia?

      I just think we have too many laws. I can turn your statement around: just because an action is unacceptabe, does NOT mean it should be made illegal. An additional law to regulate employee privacy is just not necessary at this point, especially if the employees of the world just grow some balls and decide not to take this along with the other increasingly silly corporate antics.

      If this trend [control-freakishness]goes too far, and it probably already has, then it's a definite call for improved privacy laws

      Umm...Yeah, I guess, except, where above did you try to establish that employers don't have the right to do this? You're assuming your premise to be true, when in fact, it is highly debatable. Are you saying that anything you believe to be wrong should be turned into a law? Isn't it possible we should defend the employer's right to do this, despite the fact that the action is deplorable?

    11. Re:Our only hope is by gmhowell · · Score: 2

      Let me suggest you never take a job in the medical field.

      Lots of folks clamor about how their medical privacy needs to be protected. Guess what? Monitoring email and phone calls is a price paid.

      Unlike in the real world, privacy breaches in medicine carry big time penalties: $10000 per incident.

      Someone replied to you something along the lines of "legality does not mean morality". That's right. In your freshman philosophy class, that is true. I work in the real world. What that means is defining our highest moral draw. That is providing healthcare. Since 1973 (the day the practice started) we have accepted Medicare and Medicaid patients. No other primary care practice can say the same thing.

      But back to the point: the most ethical thing we can do is provide quality medical care. The risk of egregious fines would seriously impact our ability to serve the public. Therefore, there is a large system of checks on our systems. Including the blocking of all internet access. (BTW, this is changing, but there is still a default DENY policy. Opening up access to various and sundry sites is trivial)

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  13. VPN by Admiral+Lazzurs · · Score: 1

    This is why VPN was created so we can all VPN into home and use that connecting to get to hotmail.

    1. Re:VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen to that!

      But I still think that employers sniffing personal email accounts is an evil, big brother policy. Blocking them is only slightly less so.

  14. Heh by zapfie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Their computers.

    Their network.

    Their time.

    Their money.

    'nuff said.

    --
    slashdot!=valid HTML
    1. Re:Heh by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Insightful

      OK, then the following changes will take place:

      1. Pay for all my work clothes.

      2. Pay for my fuel expenses going to work.

      3. Pay me for all the unpaid overtime spent in the office *and at home*.

      4. Pay me rent for using my home as temporary office space (see item 3).

      5. Pay my cable modem/DSL bill for VPN'ing over the weekends.

    2. Re:Heh by Dan+Crash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their toilets.

      Still think you don't deserve any privacy?

      --
      He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
    3. Re:Heh by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Funny, I'd like to see how they (and what you really mean is us) can afford computers without my work? Its ironic, because I thought one of the tenants of capitalism was that by investing my work and effort into something (the company in this case) I can claim instrinsic ownership of the fruits of that labour, which would seem to include a partial ownership of the tools we use to achieve our goals (doubly and doublessly more legally so if you own stock in your company, right?)

      This isn't a war, with a whiteline in the middle with an us and a they. We are us, and its sheep thinking such as yours, devoid of any true analysis of the reality of the situation that does us a disservice and simply ensures apathy reigns supreme.

      For that matter, can I bring in my own computer to work? Should they get to spy on that? Consider what you say carefully, because you sound like you're simply regurgitating a way of thinking that doesn't have to be a part of our lives if we dont want it to be.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    4. Re:Heh by Stuart+Gibson · · Score: 1

      As long as you don't expect to have the right to use it when you want:

      Think Jim Beam

      Goblin

      --
      It's all fun and games until a 200' robot dinosaur shows up and trashes Neo-Tokyo... Again
    5. Re:Heh by laserjet · · Score: 2

      If corporations use this software, I will show them what I think of them when I use their toilets. Unfortunately, the only one to get mad would be the custodial engineer.

      --
      Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
    6. Re:Heh by Andy+Smith · · Score: 1

      I don't think I've ever seen such a good point so efficiently countered!

    7. Re:Heh by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 2

      I don't really buy the "the company can do whatever the hell they want" argument. There are certain recognized freedoms, such as freedom from sexual harassment, to which an employee is entitled. Certain of these freedoms extend into the arena of privacy. A company can't for example, monitor your personal telephone calls (Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Co., 704 F.2d 577, 583 (11th Cir. 1983). The basic point here is that if a company operates in such a way as to require your presence at a staffed facility, certain human provisions must be made for your occupation. Everything from exit marking to bathrooms and building codes revolve around this fundamental understanding. As evidenced in the above citation, this understanding extends, at least in part, to your privacy rights.

      Therefore, a company's insistence upon intruding into your private communications can and should be resisted.

      IANAL YMMV

    8. Re:Heh by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm not worried that they're keeping logs.

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    9. Re:Heh by CodeMonky · · Score: 1

      1) If you have a uniform a lot of places will give you a stipend, otherwise clothes are a requirement of the job. If you don't like it, don't take the job.

      2) It's not their job to make sure you can get to work. That is your responsability.

      3) If you are on salary then you are out of luck and need to accept that 'overtime' doesn't exist. If you aren't and are payed hourly than you need to be payed for your overtime. If you aren't, then quit.

      4) That depends on whose choice it is for you to work at home. If it is your choice (meaning you could come in and work in an office/cube) then no they don't need to pay you, if it is their decision then they should most definately aid in the expenses. If they don't, then quit.

      5) Most resonable companies will do this if you are expected to work from home alot. Again if they won't pay for it then quit.

      --
      --"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
    10. Re:Heh by psychosis · · Score: 2

      I understand your sentiment, but I think there are a few holes...
      1) You'd need clothes anyway. OK, maybe not if you live in a nudist colony, but what colony would take your average geek? If you need specific clothing for the job (i.e. uniform, safety gear, etc), the company SHOULD defer the cost somewhat, if not provide it for you.
      2) You'd be free to walk, ride a bike, etc. at your discretion. Cost savings there. Maybe if you're lucky, the company would buy you a new pair of running shoes each year. Commuting is generally accepted as the cost of having a job.
      3) I agree 100% on this one, but if a set-in-stone salary is a part of the negotiated contract, you're pretty much screwed. On the other hand, when labor rates dive into the toilet, a firm contract can be your benefit as well.
      4) You'd have to live there anyway. If you needed special facilities to work from home (see response to #5 below), it would not be unreasonable to ask for cost deferrment, but having a house isn't required to have a job. (An address or residence, yes, but not a house/apartment. Hell, it's usually OK to have a PO Box as your primary address and live on the streets.)
      5) Yes. If you are required to have DSL or cable to do work from home, the company should cover at least a portion of the bill.

      However, the company's computers/network connection/etc exist solely for their corporate benefit. Just because there's a picnic table in the courtyard doesn't mean employees are permitted to spend all day sitting there BS'ing. Just because there's a water faucet on the building doesn't give me the right to fill up a large truck with water to fill my pool. The company has a right to control the usage of its resources. In the examples above, worker productivity and straight-out theft (respectively) are the situations at hand.

      If your company doesn't compensate you for the things you mention (namely gas and clothes), those are expenses you need to consider when calculating your NET salary. "If I take a lower paying job that's 15 miles closer to home, is there a benefit?" is a good question to ask. Hell, maybe it's a tie for money, but the time regained from not being in traffic makes it worth the change to you.

      Oh well... Again, I agree with the underlying sentiment, but some of the points are a bit unreasonable.

    11. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      tenets

      Tenants are the people who pay rent to a landlord.

    12. Re:Heh by ericman31 · · Score: 2

      For that matter, can I bring in my own computer to work? Should they get to spy on that?

      Given that the vast majority of all attacks and break ins of corporate networks are internal in nature rather than external, a company policy that you cannot use your own PC within the company network is valid. A company policy that you can bring your own PC in, but it has to be checked out by the desktop support and security admins before you can use it, and after that it has to conform to corporate PC standards, is all right. I see nothing at all wrong with that.

      Run a keylogger or a sniffer against your personal PC that they allowed you to bring in? Only if they do it with all PC's in the network. If yours is being singled out, no.

      I have done a bit of security consulting, mostly firewalls and intrusion detection, and in my mind sniffing hotmail or logging keystrokes is something you only do when you have a reasonable suspicion that they employee is breaking the rules. If the government were to do this to all hotmail and yahoo users on the assumption that terrorists use those services and that justifies their action the whole country would howl. I think monitoring employees across the board falls in the same category, not to mention it's a horrible waste of resources that could be focused on something else that is more productive and less controversial.

      --
      In my universe I'm perfectly normal, it's not my fault you don't live in my universe.
    13. Re:Heh by CS_Snapple · · Score: 1

      At a major company that I've done work for, the bathrooms ARE monitored.

      There's even a sign on that door that says, "This restroom is monitored for your safety."

      I never knew restrooms could be dangerous places.

    14. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahha i had soda squirt out my nose, i hope the burning of my nasal passages brings you satisfaction hah!

    15. Re:Heh by derch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Their computers wasting cycles without an employee using it.

      Their network sitting idle without employees working.

      Their time wasting without employees.

      Their money not growing without employee talent.

      You forgot that a business without an employee goes nowhere, and an employee is a person who deserves more respect than a little bit of bandwidth.

      I'm a human being and deserve some respect - respect for life outside of work, respect for privacy, respect for talents. When they prefer to use iron fisted policies that treat me as a simple machine in the system, I no longer feel the need to respect their corporate secrets or work hard.

      It's a pretty easy equation. Respect me and acknowlege I have a life, and I'll respect the company and want to help it grow.

      I mean goddamn, I've worked shit jobs for rednecks who understood that treating employees like shit gets you nowhere.

    16. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course not. You might be snorting coke or sniffing glue in there.

      Thus, access to toilets will be blocked with a brick firewall.

    17. Re:Heh by radja · · Score: 2

      if they start taping what I do in the toilet, I'll stop going to the toilet, and this office is gonna be one shitty mess.. //rdj

      --

      No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
      --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
    18. Re:Heh by CS_Snapple · · Score: 1

      That's true, but you're forgetting the part where the company can simply tell you that you aren't allowed to make personal calls on the phone. If they do that and you still make a personal call, they are allowed to monitor it.

    19. Re:Heh by ajlb · · Score: 1
      because I thought one of the tenants of capitalism was that by investing my work and effort into something (the company in this case) I can claim instrinsic ownership of the fruits of that labour, which would seem to include a partial ownership of the tools we use to achieve our goals (doubly and doublessly more legally so if you own stock in your company, right?)

      Actually, owning part of the company because of your labour is one of the tenets of socialism - in fact, capitalism is the opposite: you exchange the ownership of your work for cash. The only people who own your work are the owners - including the shareholders if it's public (which means that if you own stock yes you have some ownership, but it's probably a very tiny amount).

      When they weren't going on about silly stuff like overthrowing civilization, Marx and the gang (not the Soviets who used Communism as an excuse for their own brand of dictatorship) were generally concerned with the fact that workers generally *don't* get to share in the profits of their work. Employee stock ownership is a step in that direction - although ideally companies would only have internal stock owners.

      Maybe if the employees truly owned their own work and shared in the real profits - from reception up to CEO - Enron wouldn't have been quite such a mess.

      Oh no but wait that's bolshie talk you little pinko!

      (-1 offtopic)

      --
      I say the future is a serious matter
      And so for god's sake - hock and soda water!
    20. Re:Heh by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Really, it was the classical capitalist thinkers of Smith's time that offered the the example that if you took a piece of land, and put some work into it, that land became yours (unless it was previously owned, of course). By adding value to something, you raised the worth of it, and thus it was your wealth to do with as you saw fit. You can read about The Hedge Wars to find more information on this.

      I certainly have to agree that if all companies were indeed private, there would certainless be alot more happy employees in this world, although we'd probably have to give up the kind of massive economy of scale oeprations new-age CEOs have been jizzing about over the last 5 years. 'Course, thats fine by me.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    21. Re:Heh by mwjlewis · · Score: 1
      You clearly are working to hard or... not doing enough in the office. I would say of all the people that I have asked (considering doing a thesis on changing the hours of the workday), How much time are you *actually* working when at work for 8 hours. The common response. 2 hours.

      If you are working at home, you should get paid. Unless you are the dummy that signed the contract for exempt status. Should they pay a portion of your rent? No. Should they pay for your clothes? No, Your transportation, maybe.

      My situation:
      I am an independent contractor/small business, and I include in my price, my clothing (for work), my travel time, and business expenses.
      Maybe as a employee, you should discuss this with your employer, and explain that you ARE working the 8 hours that you are there, and even working at home. Better yet, Have someone write a letter of appreciation about your performance. Also... you might want to start sending emails from home at late hours of the night, or early hours in the morning. Time stamps DO get noticed. If it is a decent place to work, and you are doing as much work as you indicated that you are, then you should not have any trouble getting what your giving to the company. If you worked for me, I would have NO problem paying you for your time, but when you are on my time, I will monitor your actions and have no qualms about it, I don't think that I would actually care that much browsing the web, checking the bank account etc. (slashdot), but it is when it is excessive, that I would start to be "concerned" and I might bring it up in a meeting, or casually. (although, if you are working as hard as you indicated that you are, I would not care in the least, well that is if I don't see Goatse.cx in the log. )

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    22. Re:Heh by Col.+Panic · · Score: 1

      Thanks for saying these things so I did not have to. I have just a couple of things to add ...

      3) If you are on salary then you are out of luck and need to accept that 'overtime' doesn't exist. If you aren't and are payed hourly than you need to be payed for your overtime. If you aren't, then quit.

      And if your work requires overtime, shouldn't you be bringing that to the attention of whomever authorizes it? If it ain't authorized, don't work it.

      5) Most resonable companies will do this if you are expected to work from home alot. Again if they won't pay for it then quit.

      Using VPN from home should not only mean that you are using a company-paid connection, but a company-owned asset. Of course, this also means you can't install your own software on it ...

    23. Re:Heh by Stonehand · · Score: 1

      Fewer witnesses plus stalls in which to hide the bodies... more seriously, sexual assault of those already at a disadvantage 'coz their pants are down.

      They might also be looking to catch drug use on the job, but that's not really a safety issue unless it's coupled with industrial equipment or hazardous toys, is it?

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    24. Re:Heh by BlowCat · · Score: 2
      I never knew restrooms could be dangerous places.
      Then look at this.
    25. Re:Heh by abischof · · Score: 2

      If you work at Jim Beam, they do:

      Workers on the bottling line are fuming about being limited to four breaks per 8½ hour shift, only one of which can be unscheduled. Extra trips to the bathroom can result in reprimands. Workers with six violations can be fired. [...]

      --

      Alex Bischoff
      HTML/CSS coder for hire

    26. Re:Heh by spoonyfork · · Score: 1

      That's one of the funniest things I've read in a while. Good show ol' chap! Pip pip, cheerio!

      --
      Speak truth to power.
    27. Re:Heh by brokenspoke · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hey your sig? Carnival of Monsters is it? Definitly a John Pertwee line!

      --
      -- I am Jack's sig line.
    28. Re:Heh by zapfie · · Score: 2

      Agreed, but irrelevant. A company can make a choice to not monitor employees, and I personally feel that a company that trusts their employees and lets them have a life will be rewarded with employees who work harder and are more loyal to the company. But the fact still remains that it is their computers, their network, their time and their money. Whether it's a good idea or not is debatable, but they certainly have a right to monitor employees.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
    29. Re:Heh by spoonyfork · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Best post in this discussion. You nailed it.

      --
      Speak truth to power.
    30. Re:Heh by zapfie · · Score: 2

      The need to relieve yourself is not the same as making an active choice to use company resources for things you can do on your own time.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
    31. Re:Heh by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      There are plenty of areas where your naieve assessment does not fit. I have worked in several of them.

      The most serious one was a situation where the users of the computer system were attorneys who communicated with all sorts of people on regulatory compliance, and health/safety matters.

      It turns out that the privilege of confidentiality between an attorney and a client trumps pretty much any other consideration *even* if the correspondence is internal. Even an *accidental* exposure of certain types of data can cause serious problems.

      There are lots of other similar circumstances for other professions as well. Financial professionals often need privacy of documents and data, even to the point where it is very important to hide that data from other employees in the same firm. Some service-oriented businesses have clients who are competitors of one another. It is extremely important to keep insulation between their affairs, because even accidents or honest mistakes can lead to litigation or embarrassment.

      This has little to do with "Hotmail" but everything to do with the need for privacy for individuals.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    32. Re:Heh by mriker · · Score: 1

      You should probably ask them to pay for your student loans and education too, because God knows your employement depended on it. If you're unhappy having to purchase clothing or gas for your job, by all means find a job without a strict dress code within walking distance of your home... it's entirely your choice.

    33. Re:Heh by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 2

      Require by law that EVERYTHING by open 24/7 and I'll agree with you.

      Ever try to get any banking done when you're working 50+ hours a week?

    34. Re:Heh by derch · · Score: 1

      We're talking about software to monitor employees so the employee's rights and expectations are not irrelevant at all. Companies have a right to monitor employees, and employees have a right to privacy. Neither of the rights are absolute, so there must be a balance. The software greatly shifts the balance to favor the employer, though, and that's what most people are getting upset over.

    35. Re:Heh by isaaccasaubon · · Score: 1


      I'm not worried that they're keeping logs.


      If I ran a company I would send in stool and urine samples for every employee. I would want to know who's having too much fun outside the office (why wasn't I invited?) and who might be likely to make large health insurance claims in the near future (colon cancer more common among programmers, sitting all day, maybe diabetes, heck even bad anal hygeine, I want to know.)

    36. Re:Heh by zapfie · · Score: 2

      It's not the company's problem that your bank does not have hours conductive to your work schedule. That is between you and your bank. And yes, I have, and yes, it's a pain. But it's still not my company's problem.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
    37. Re:Heh by zapfie · · Score: 1

      I can see where you are coming from. If employers are using monitoring equipment to capture personal information about employees, I'd be against that. If they are using it to make sure their workers aren't just sitting around viewing porn, that's another, though. Making it a compromise, although not required, would be a good idea for both employer and employee.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
    38. Re:Heh by (H)olyGeekboy · · Score: 1

      5. Pay my cable modem/DSL bill for VPN'ing over the weekends.

      I work in Server Ops for a bank, and they already do this. I don't like how they are kind of draconian about in-office network policy, but the fact that they cover my DSL at home is a nice compensation perk. (I typically spend a few hours a week during non-business hours doing support from home.)

    39. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think that companies need AT THE VERY LEAST to be restricted in how they share private info collected from employee email. I also think they should have to notify you whenver they read your email within a reasonable time. I also think that companies who read private email might be at GREATER risk for certain types of litigation. For example if a person is fired after making an email admitting he/she is gay. The firing might REALLY be for some other reason, but to certain jurors, it might look like descrimination.

    40. Re:Heh by BayAreaRefugee · · Score: 1

      I'm not worried that they're keeping logs.

      Have a supply of Milk of Magnesia or the like on hand at work to make it harder to keep them then! :)

    41. Re:Heh by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2

      Sure. Its funny unless you work for Jim Beam.

    42. Re:Heh by Dan+Crash · · Score: 2

      The need to relieve yourself is not the same as making an active choice to use company resources for things you can do on your own time.

      You can't hold it? C'mon, you're a big boy. Maybe you need to schedule your time better. Eat less bran. Drink less water.

      And the cameras will be installed next week.

      --
      He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
    43. Re:Heh by zapfie · · Score: 1

      Not in that sense. ;) It's just something that if you don't take care of, tends to eat into your productivity a lot. ;) It would be funny to see a company institute a policy against that though.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
  15. They're welcome... by Zathrus · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... to read each and every one of the 300+ spam emails I get daily to my Hotmail account.

    1. Re:They're welcome... by -dhan-101 · · Score: 1

      of course, then you'll be tagged as a balding perv with huge debts... I wonder who's going to be fired first?

  16. yes, they can do whatever they want by blastedtokyo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The company owns the bandwidth, PCs, internet gateways, etc. etc. If the company doesn't trust or can't trust (because of legal liabilities) their own employees, then some IT fool will buy this thing.

    Of course this article is quite irrelevant for slashdotters. We should have our certificates, machines we can VNC to, encrypting proxy servers, etc.

    But, ironically, it'll probably be the arrival of widespread wireless (be it 3G, a mesh network of 802.11, etc.) that provides a little privacy. Imagine, if you want to send a private email, just change your Wireless connection to be your public ISP-type network, send your mail, and voila. You use your ISP's network instead of the corporate one. Both parties are happier.

  17. Private e-mail ? by stevenbee · · Score: 2
    The computer i use at work is the property of my employer, provided for work-related purposes only...
    Likewise, the bandwidth I use is restricted to those activities necessary for me to carry out my duties.
    I have specifically agreed to limit my use of thecomputer and network in this manner as a term of my
    continued employment. Why would I expect any kind of privacy in this case?

    Interested to know what people think about this.

    --
    Don't read this!
    1. Re:Private e-mail ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when those 1's and 0's are gone, they are gone forever...

      (copied without permission from Dilbert).

      How abuot a shareholder? They own the PC in part (including the CEO's PC..!), so do they get to see what it's used for? Who decides who gets to look at the email? If the CEO is found out, who blows the whistle..?

      And so on.

    2. Re:Private e-mail ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the other guy said....

      So is the toilet.

    3. Re:Private e-mail ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I totally understand your point, but I think that there needs to be some balance. So lets say I go to a meeting and talk with a coworker about my weekend while we are waiting for the meeting to start. Should that time be deducted from my pay check for holding a personal conversation? Or what if my wife calls me at work because of an emergency and my company blocks calls from employee's home numbers because its not work related.?

      There just needs to be some intelligent balance going on here.

      -Rick

    4. Re:Private e-mail ? by joshsnow · · Score: 1

      The computer i use at work is the property of my employer, provided for work-related purposes only...
      Then let's hope you're not at work and reading slashdot then....

    5. Re:Private e-mail ? by stevenbee · · Score: 2
      Then let's hope you're not at work and reading slashdot then....

      LOL, no.....

      --
      Don't read this!
  18. Solution? by f00Dave · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Use ssh or WinVNC (like I do) or somesuch to remotely access your home system, and run your personal stuff THERE. At work, the only non work-related software I run is WinAMP, WinVNC client and a web client. At home, I run an email client, IRC, ICQ, Kazaa, etcetera....

    So long as the employer doesn't mind you connecting to your home machine (and you can encrypt that connection, somehow), then what you do with it is your own business.

    Of course, you can still paste memos over VNC/ssh, so this just defers the problem somewhat. ;-)

    --
    .f00Dave
    1. Re:Solution? by dazdaz · · Score: 1

      It's worth pointing out that if you do use ssh then don't use passwords in case a company uses keyboard monitoring tools.

      Passwordless ssh (RSA/DSA)keys means anyone with access to the box can access the remote server.

      You'd have to use a one time pad, like a SecurID card, this would provide security so you knew you "safer".

      Of course then ssh MITM attacks could come into play, so you must watch those warnings of changed system keys.

      Joy of joys.

    2. Re:Solution? by mcg1969 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's worth pointing out that if you do use ssh then don't use passwords in case a company uses keyboard monitoring tools.

      If they are using a keyboard logger, then yes it doesn't matter whether you're typing on your local computer or on your "remote" computer, they'll pick it up.

      However, I would say your remote computer encrypted via SSH is still a pretty safe haven from corporate keyboard logs. Even if they intercept your password, they would still have to set up a decryption system to listen in on the return traffic in real time. Then they'd need to know you were running winVNC, and rig up a special winVNC client to listen in on the display updates that are coming in.

      That's a pretty big hurdle for an IT department to overcome.

      As for other hacks---frankly if someone inside the corporate firewall were hacking around, I don't think their motives would be directed at someone's SSH connection to their home computer.

      So I'm not saying you're totally secure but I would say that the apathy factor probably protects you pretty well.

  19. For parents? by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1
    Fowler said the software would be useful for parents who want to watch their children's e-mail activity in the early afternoon hours, when children are home from school but parents are still at work.

    Yeah just what kids need, their parents reading their e-mail. As if they didn't have enough to deal with.

    Sure, in some cases this could actually be an asset (as in if you're afraid your kid is going to run off with some 40 year old child molester) but otherwise parents should let it be.

    Besides, if they really knew their kids they'd be able to guess their password ;D

    --
    -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
    1. Re:For parents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about doing the right thing, and not being absent whenyour kids get home from school?

    2. Re:For parents? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "Besides, if they really knew their kids they'd be able to guess their password ;D"

      These days, it's more likely that if the kids know the parents well enough, they will be able to guess the parent's password.

      Chances are it's the name of the family's dog/cat, the word 'password' , the first letters of the kids' names concatenated together, the parents' initals + birthdate, the home address + last 4 digits of phone number and so on. Most PARENTS don't know how to use proper passwords and can never remember them so they use 1 password for everything from their bank account PIN to ISP logon.

      (Now my dad on the other hand ... he has been a UNIX admin (real unix mind you, not linux) since the 70s ... he uses STRONG passwords.)

    3. Re:For parents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Yeah just what kids need, their parents reading their e-mail. As if they didn't have enough to deal with.

      Sure, in some cases this could actually be an asset (as in if you're afraid your kid is going to run off with some 40 year old child molester) but otherwise parents should let it be.

      You're obviously a kid yourself. If you had a child, even one that was 1 month old, you'd not be saying this. I guess you've got some growing up to do.

  20. Not Neccesary. by Penguinoflight · · Score: 1

    This really isn't neccesary when you can get programs such as keygrabber for windows, and if somebody's sneaking around on linux, they're either easy to track, or they're too good.

    --
    "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
    1 John 4:14
  21. Just don't abuse it by rczyzewski · · Score: 0

    We really don't have the time or energy to look at every users web usage. However, we do make sure we have the tools to prove abuse if we need to get into a legal issue. Supervisors and coworkers can pretty much tell if you are abusing your company's Internet resources. I think many users don't realize what the IS dept. is able to track on them. Just like with every moral, ethical, and legal issue: if you feel guilty doing it, you probably shouldn't be doing it.

    1. Re:Just don't abuse it by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      Just like with every moral, ethical, and legal issue: if you feel guilty doing it, you probably shouldn't be doing it.

      With all this spying at work, I feel guilty doing everything.

    2. Re:Just don't abuse it by rczyzewski · · Score: 0

      Like I said, we don't track. We just know how to in case we need to.

  22. Bad management... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If employees are spending that much undo time at personal email at work, I think this speaks far more about the poor quality of the managers and the low morale of the company itself, than of problems of the employees. As such, it might even be useful to have a tool to determine if managers should go based on the rise or fall of such email traffic :).

    Far more often than having your boss actually read your personal email every day, companies snoop to archive this sort of information so that if they need to they can review and use it later. This possibility for abuse in this regard is endless.

    1. Re:Bad management... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! That is an excellent point, I manage a number of people and from past experience the employee's that had to much personal stuff going on were also the employee's that I spent the least amount of time working with.

      Mod this man up, this is an insightful comment.

      -Rick

  23. Re:Just Use Linux by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

    Doesn't have a functional web browser? What do you call Mozilla? Galleon? Konquest? Netscape?
    Opera? The only browser it doesn't run is IE (you call that functional?) and there are some reports of IE running on Linux under wine!

    BTW I did set up a Linux box running Debian at one place I worked. The machine was made out of parts salvaged from several junked computers so it cost the company nothing. My excuse was I wanted to evaluate Linux as a platform for a future internal project.

    It took a little while to figure out how to set up proxies so I could reach the internet over the company network (MS friendly firewall) but it worked fine. I doubt that any spy ware intended for windows machines would work on Linux (and I could have just set up an internal firewall to try and lock any out).

  24. Great. by infinite9 · · Score: 2

    My present client simply blocks all web based mail sites at the firewall. So I just send whatever I want through their corporate email system. Even mail relating to my other clients or negotiations for other contracts. If I really need security, I'll use encryption or simply give them a call. If they don't like what they'r reading or how I'm using their email system, they can either provide me with access to my yahoo email account or bite me.



    It's just like my house. Anyone can look through my windows. But I can't be responsible if they're horrified by what they see. :-)

    --
    Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    1. Re:Great. by nochops · · Score: 1

      No, you can't be responsible.

      The point is they can be responsible if they look through your windows and see you murder someone and they fail to call the police.

      --
      "A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn't have an air force." -William Blum
  25. Competition by alsta · · Score: 1

    All this does is add competition to already available solutions for spying on employees. Such as hardware filters for keyboards or perhaps firewalls that log this kind of activity.

    What I would like to know is what kinds of companies perform this kind of spying on their employees. I'd like to quote from Office Space;

    "When I make a mistake, I have 8 different people comin' by to tell me about it. That's my only real motivation is not to be hassled, that and the fear of loosing my job. But you know Bob that will only make someone work just hard enough not to get fired."

    --
    Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
  26. Make sure you don't use the phone either... by beamz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I understand that a computer is company resources, I believe that responsible use should be acceptable and big big brother should not be there listening.

    Blocking or intercepting email is more or less the same as listening in on a phone conversation. Yes, I know this horse has been beaten to death here but it's still ridiculous.

    If you're not allowed to make personal phone calls then I can understand them not allowing or even monitoring personal computing use but for communications, email should be a protected medium.

    1. Re:Make sure you don't use the phone either... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh, I dunno where you are, but here, we monitor the phone calls too. Employees sign an agreement stating their use of the company phone can and will be monitored at any time for any purpose.

      It's already saved the company money - we found an employee setting up his own competing business using our resources and customer list.

    2. Re:Make sure you don't use the phone either... by beamz · · Score: 2

      Sounds like a great spirit of trust and loyalty between both parties. True there are slimey people out there but then again, so are a lot of the employers.

      Where I work you don't have to sign an agreement stating that the company can monitor phone calls and in addition to that, I believe it is unlawful to do so without such agreement. There's a good reason it's against the law too.

  27. What gives you the right to privacy? by toupsie · · Score: 2, Redundant
    And what's the big deal here? You are at work. You are being paid to do what your employer wants (within the law). You do not have the right to use your employer's equipment for personal business unless you get permission. If you don't like your employers policy, quit.

    There is no such thing as a "right to privacy" in the United States. Check out the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You won't find find it along with other "rights" people say they have like, 'right to free health care', 'right to Social Security' and the often touted, 'right to party!!!'.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    1. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by cnoocy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is entirely true that the constitutional right to privacy is not explicitly stated, and may stand on some dubious jurisdiction by the Supreme Court. But the fact that a right is not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution does not mean that people don't have it. That's pretty much exactly what the 9th amendment states.

      --
      This sig is not the Zahir. Lucky for you.
    2. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct that the right to privacy is not expressly included in the Constitution. The Supreme Court, however, considers that the right to privacy in the Constitution is an implied right.

      For more information, visit http://www.publaw.com/privacy.html.

    3. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by jhines0042 · · Score: 2

      How about the the protection against illegal search and seizure.

      Yes, that keeps the police from walking into your house/searching your car, etc... without probable cause.

      How does that apply in this instance? The hotmail account is mine, I signed up for it, I use it for personal reasons.

      The fact that I access it electronically is besides the point. Would you want your employer to know what the contents of your bank account are just because you did a little online banking from work? How about the contents of your safe deposit box because you went there during lunch hours? Are they allowed to fire you for the contents of your car while its parked in their parking lot? (Ok, bad example, they probably could if you had explosives or naked pictures of the boss as a windshield sun shade) But how about the trunk?

      What if you and some co-workers decide to play some network games after hours?

      Companies usually reserve the right to terminate you for inappropriate behavior. Fine, thats their right. But I believe that I do have a right to privacy in this country and any company that intends to read my email had better tell me that they reserve the right to do it. That way at least I can make the choice of wether or not to work there.

      --
      42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
    4. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by Phronesis · · Score: 2
      There is no such thing as a "right to privacy" in the United States. Check out the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

      From Justice Douglas's opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), spelling out the reasons why there is a constitutional right to privacy (Not the best argued opinion I have ever read, but until the Supreme Court reverses itself, this is the law of the land):

      The association of people is not mentioned in the Constitution nor in the Bill of Rights. The right to educate a child in a school of the parents' choice -- whether public or private or parochial -- is also not mentioned. Nor is the right to study any particular subject or any foreign language. Yet the First Amendment has been construed to include certain of those rights.

      ...

      The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. See Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497, 516-522 (dissenting opinion). Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbra of the First Amendment is one, as we have seen. The Third Amendment, in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers "in any house" in time of peace without the consent of the owner, is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The Fifth Amendment, in its Self-Incrimination Clause, enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender to his detriment. The Ninth Amendment provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

      ...

      We have had many controversies over these penumbral rights of "privacy and repose." See, e.g., Breard v. Alexandria, 341 U.S. 622, 626, 644; Public Utilities Comm'n v. Pollak, 343 U.S. 451; Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167; Lanza v. New York, 370 U.S. 139; Frank v. Maryland, 359 U.S. 360; Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 , 541 . These cases bear witness that the right of privacy which presses for recognition here is a legitimate one.

      That said, the constitutional right to privacy only prohibits the state from violating this right by coercion. There is nothing to prohibit people from voluntarily waiving some or all of this right as part of a contract of employment.
    5. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by derch · · Score: 1

      Aside from the above mentioned 9th Amendment, don't forget that the government is supposed to work for you. Ideally, you tell them what to do instead of them telling you. The fact that the 2nd Amendment still exists should be proof that 'we' tell them what to do.

      You should also look into the history of labor relations. We, the workers, have had to fight to be treated like humans and the eight hour work day. We shouldn't let management chip away at what we have.

    6. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by slykens · · Score: 2
      Yet again people are confused about the protections afforded by the Constitution.

      Say it with me people, The Constitution only restricts the actions of the government and has no effect whatsoever on your company's treatment of you!

      Now, there may be other laws that may be in place which protect you but that protection is certainly not Constitutional in nature. Also, let's not forget that most companies consider anything you do on company time and resources to be their property, and the law typically backs up this idea. You don't have much privacy if the company owns your communications anyway!

    7. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

      "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

    8. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by Chris+Parrinello · · Score: 2

      The fourth amendment which states the rights of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects.

      If you wanted to sum it all up in a few words, "right to privacy" is what that amendment is all about. But don't let the fact get in the way of a good rant. :)

    9. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by toupsie · · Score: 2
      The fourth amendment which states the rights of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects. If you wanted to sum it all up in a few words, "right to privacy" is what that amendment is all about. But don't let the fact get in the way of a good rant. :)

      So that gives you a "Right to Privacy" at your work site? I don't think so. Good try though. There is no blanket right that covers your privacy like speech.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    10. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

      I know the laws are not based on this
      (someone enlighten me why) - but doesn't
      the protection against unreasonable
      searches/seizures implies exactly a kind
      of right to privacy?

      --

      Considered harmful.
    11. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by toupsie · · Score: 2
      I know the laws are not based on this (someone enlighten me why) - but doesn't the protection against unreasonable searches/seizures implies exactly a kind of right to privacy?

      No. That only relates to your relationship with the Government not business. There is nothing in the Constitution that protects your privacy at work. If you don't believe me, utilize your 1st Amendment right to free speech at work by running around screaming the dreaded "N Word". See how long you keep your job and how loud the Judge will laugh at you when you file suit against your employer for "violating your civil rights".

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    12. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by toupsie · · Score: 2
      Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

      Excuse me, but I do not live under the United Nations, I live under the United States. I respect its Constitution not the UN.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    13. Re:What gives you the right to privacy? by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

      1st amendment specifically say "Congress shall
      make no law..." so it applies to gov't. Now
      4th says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" - notice that it does not
      say "by the government".

      --

      Considered harmful.
  28. This is the start of a GOOD thing! (kinda) by mustangdavis · · Score: 1

    I have heard (and seen) small companies use email as a means of transmitting credit card numbers for purchases they get over the web because they are either too lazy or to cheap to set up a PGP based email system.

    Although it may take a very unfortunate incident to really make people listen to me on this issue, forcing companies that need to keep their information private is a GOOD THING!

    Customers trust companies to keep their information confidential, so they should do just that ... and sending coorporate information to hotmail is NOT the way to do it!

    Although I do not agree with spying into people's email, I do like the idea of scaring companies into investing into a more secure method of transmitting their customer's PRIVATE information ... this is the first step into forcing cheap companies into doing so.

    To all cheap bastards trying to run an e-shop: If you can't afford to buy a linux box, a small ISDN line, and PGP software to keep private customer information secure, GET OFF THE WEB!

  29. As and admin by Kushy · · Score: 1

    I block most web based email systems... I have to... not because I want to be a a$$hole to my users, Its because no matter how many memos, emails, yelling at them...

    They are downloading virus' to the network and causing me grief. Because then everyone get involved, and it becomes a huge mess just because someone wants to send something that should be done from home anyway?

    Adult users, corp users should know better.. but i've been doing this for many years now, they act and treat the systems just like children... There are a few good ones don't get me wrong, for the most part they got from 35 years old back to being a giddy teen with a crush on someone...

    So yes as a matter of fact I do think companies and admins should know what is going on at a users desk, it will save a lot of time and money for the company... and folks that's what's its about...

    If a user bitchs (Like the one last week did) well I dont' have a computer at home, point there cheap ass to ebay.... and keep your personal crap where is belongs at home.

    --
    "The word "genius" isn't applicable in football. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein," - Joe Theisman
  30. Well done, but not needed. by mwjlewis · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Why shouldn't a company monitor your personal email? I really don't see any problem at all with it. Ask yourself this: WHY ARE YOU THERE, WHY ARE THEY PAYING YOU? *To Do your Job*.

    Why are you doing your personal matters on their network, computers, bandwidth?

    At one of the offices I Admin, I have two terminals set up in the breakroom with access to the public email sites (yahoo, hotmail, various popular ISP's), and only from those IP's (on their own subnet /30) can they get to those sites. Those workstations are also locked down, but have games and other break related software on them. All the users know that they are monitored on the "business" network for the sites they browse and the communications they make. Everyone is content with this. There is the option to use the break room computers, and if they want to do it on their machine (yahoo, hotmail, etc) they just plain can't. (unless you ssh/telnet(sniffed)/rdp/ica/pc-any to another computer off the network.)

    --
    www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    1. Re:Well done, but not needed. by bgfay · · Score: 2

      I just wonder if all phone conversations are monitored as well, if there are video cameras in the bathrooms (to keep people from doing illicit things), if cars parked in the lot are searched, and if employees are regularly checked for clean and sexy underwear. I most certainly hope so. It is the company's right to do these things. After all, they pay those employees and that gives them all the rights anyone could ever ask for.

      --
      Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    2. Re:Well done, but not needed. by mwjlewis · · Score: 1
      If any thing is Monitored, The company/person monitoring is required by law to tell you. If they are listening in on your phone calls, you are required by law to be notified. Bathroom monitoring is Illegal. (period).

      What you do on company property, and company time is "their business" no matter how you look at it. For example. you shoot someone at work, does it not affect their business. (bad publicity, people getting hurt, liabilities, etc.) They have every right to search your (company owned) desk, your electronic transmissions, and files, sometimes even your person, (where is the pen supply disappearing to? EBay?)

      Besides, why are you so concerned? Are you doing illicit things in the bathroom? Are you stealing the pens? Planning on going postal?

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
    3. Re:Well done, but not needed. by bgfay · · Score: 2

      I disagree that everything done while at a company is "their business". That someone has the right to search my desk, locker, hard drive, etc seems to me something that should be printed in large letters and mentioned to everyone from employees to customers to media outlets. It is invasive and unnecessary.

      AS for what I'm doing in the bathroom, that's my business and that's my point here. Why should you know what I am or am not doing? How does that affect your life or the life of the company? As for the pens, yes, I am stealing them and you can't stop me. Someday, all pens will be mine. Mine, all mine, I say.

      --
      Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    4. Re:Well done, but not needed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, goody for you. Aren't those lovely computers you so kindly set up for the employees still company computers? Didn't you pretty much contradict yourself? You are at work to do work, so why bother setting up "company" computers to allow employees to get to their personal email?

    5. Re:Well done, but not needed. by mwjlewis · · Score: 1
      You are at work to do work, but on your lunch break, in the break room. As many people have mentioned before, people DO have personal lives, AND if you allow them to do what they need to do, they are going to be happier working there, and be willing to perform.

      The reason that the sites are blocked it more of a virus prevention, security issue. I don't log anything on that computer, I don't track the sites, etc. I might through the cookies everyonce in while, but only to see that people are not abusing it. If someone needs to check their mail in the middle of the workday, they can go and use it, no one is going to say anything, but it keeps it from becomming habitual.

      --
      www.oobersworld.com - For those that ride.
  31. Hotmail safe? What a joke. by October_30th · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Hotmail is phenomenal if you get there within the right time frame," said Kevin Mandia, a former Air Force investigator now working as a consultant with Foundstone Inc. "You can actually see people as they travel, checking messages from different computers. You can really track people effectively."

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:Hotmail safe? What a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You communist fucking asshole. You must pay! You think you are better than a fascist? You scum are cut from the smae cloth. You dont have a family, you have no responsibility. You sit in school on your high horse and you legislate mediocrity while you circle jerk with your peers pretending to know it all. I will knaw you thigh off you bone you fucking bitch, and defecate you out in the form you belong in.

  32. Stop that! by zulux · · Score: 2

    You!

    Slashdot isn't safe for work.

    Stop. You! In the cubacle - stop reading. You're being logged and will be delt with. Soon.

    -Your Loving Managment

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    1. Re:Stop that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Stop. You! In the cubacle - stop reading. You're being logged and will be delt with. Soon."

      Has anyone dealt you a lesson about spelling, lately? :P

    2. Re:Stop that! by Koyaanisqatsi · · Score: 1


      You! Yes, you! Stand still lady!

    3. Re:Stop that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll be logged and delft with.

      Yeah, thats right, you'll be painted blue.

  33. Blast this! by joncarwash · · Score: 1

    Interesting how they do not go into details how this product works.. I wonder if it will work through a secure connection (SSL-encrypted)? It doesn't even seem to mention if the product is a trojan horse-like program on the client computer or a firewall-like intercepting device.

    Anyway, if the boss wants to read all of your SPAM, maybe you should just sign him/her up for all the SPAM lists your hotmail account is on. This way you don't even have to purchase the software to view all correspondence.

    --
    A computer is a valuable tool, so use it and stop whining.
  34. You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by DnemoniX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am an IT manager for a local government agency. We monitor all internet usage on a regular basis. for the most part it is rather boring. This also means that if sombody uses Hotmail or some such at work it gets logged. By state statute here all documents that are created on our equipment, i.e. you type an e-mail. It becomes public record. that means any Joe Blow off the street can send in a request for copies of any and all e-mails that we have on our system. This causes a few interesting problems. So I do a couple things. 1. I do not backup the e-mail system. All users are aware of this. 2. Zero retention on deleted e-mail. 3. A signed Acceptable Usage poilicy for each user. They are all aware of the possibility of being monitored. Does this stop people, no! We have had to take action on abuses several times. Like the guy that wouldn't stop surfing porn at work, he worked in the cube and there are several women that work in that office. Bad judgement. Last week things got worse. I noticed a user surfing a little porn so I checked the logs, I was a little surprised, he was accessing a Sex Offender Database. He was looking himself up! Turns out this guy is a registered sex offender in the neighboring state. I looked up what he was convicted of and it was RAPE. Also 90% of the workers in my building are female. We would have never known any of this without monitoring our system. Our lawyers are working on what to do with him now. People can bitch all they want about Big Brother, but ever consider sometimes this is bigger than one person feeling bad? Think about how you would feel if your sister or mother worked in that office and something happened. Wouldn't you have wanted us to do something about it? Take off the blinders and step off the soap box, because until you are the one responsible you don't know shit.

    1. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by nochops · · Score: 1

      Good for you, and your employer. More people need to read and understand this. Someone mod this up, please.

      --
      "A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn't have an air force." -William Blum
    2. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I am not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I am not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I am not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me. -- Pastor Niemoller (1946)

      So you're saying someone who is convicted of a crime should never be allowed to be employed again.

      The courts have already dealt with this guy, punished him, released him, and have him on file. If he reoffended, he'd do hard time, and he knows it.

      You send him out on the streets and give him a grudge against society, be prepared for the consequences. Or as long as it's not in your back yard, it's fine?

      America truly is well on the way to becoming a police state. I'm glad I live in China.

    3. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will someone please think of the children! Appeal to sympathy?

    4. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This - in no way - forms an argument for such things.

      First off, as a government agency, you think you'd do a background check on someone convicted of a felony, and then not hire them. That's just ridiculous that he got away with it.

      Secondly, the man had committed rape, yes. Now he is free. That means that he has paid his debt to society. If he was going to commit another crime, statistics show that most people do it within the first three months of getting out of jail/prison.

      Your kind of mentality is that which says that we should tap peoples' phone lines because they *could* be planning terrorism, or we should follow people around, because they *could* be going to commit crimes, or they should be able to search your house because you *could* have illegal material. I hope you get the idea.

      This is not the way the US works, and is not the way it ever was intended to work. There's reasons the police can't just search your home, or tap your phone, or have a camera on you all the time. They're all good reasons, too. They protect my freedom and your freedom.

      At what cost do we give up the ability to be free for our security? Checking e-mail? Tapping phones? Hidden cameras in your house?

      Even at work, you have the right to a certain amount of privacy. They (usually) don't tap your phone or spy on you, so they shouldn't be reading your e-mail either.

      A lazy employee looking at porn and a lazy employee drawing a picture are both lazy employees.

    5. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by op00to · · Score: 1

      We would have never known any of this without monitoring our system.

      Uhhh, right. Your employer doesn't have the little "I have never been convicted of a felony" check box, eh? C'mon. Monitoring is the least of your worries if you can't even follow standard hiring practices.

    6. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by rweir · · Score: 1

      Also 90% of the workers in my building are female.

      Uh, which building is that...I may need to 'investigate' it myself;)

    7. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by metlin · · Score: 2

      Exceptions don't make rules.

      It swings both ways - by monitoring the contents of everyone to see if there is one potential threat, you are compromising the privacy of the mass to nab the few.

      I'm not saying that what you're saying is wrong, or that complete freedom should be the way. But the truth is, it's debatable both ways.

      Agreed it's worked out for you this time, but what about if some other guy who'd watched pr0n, for the heck of it? Not everybody who does that is a sex-offender or a serial rapist. What about his appraisal, what would you do if the guy evaluating the person felt that pr0n /is forbidden by religious law and is hence incorrect/ and had a grudge on him? And you go on as far as to post this information on a public forum like Slashdot.

      If I were to spite you, I could make you visit my site and secretly store images, cookies and what not. Duh, I could right now put up 100s of pics of size 1x1 from bianca's smut shack in my site and could report you watching pr0n.

      Aren't you compromising the privacy and freedom of people by doing this? Any sufficiently motivated person could and would misuse such information.

    8. Re:You Bet Your Ass We Monitor! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is not the way the US works"
      It is now.

  35. Blocking hotmail by slutdot · · Score: 2

    We have a very strict standard for e-mail. All e-mail that comes into our network belongs to the company, not the employee. If it's using our servers, it's ours. Granted, we don't allow managers to indiscriminately view an employee's mailbox without HR approval but we will do our best to protect our assets.

    I block all web-based e-mail from our proxy - like another poster said, it prevents users from downloading viruses. I work in the medical field and we have to protect patient data so there's also the added risk of someone sending confidential material out of the company through a webmail account without our ability to take corrective action because of the lack of proof. Originally, I had to block hotmail because MS Proxy Server used to crash whenever someone accessed Hotmail so our company policy was actually born out of protecting our proxy server.

  36. Won't work. by FreeLinux · · Score: 2

    eBlocker, like so many other key logger programs, intercepts the email, web sites, etc before it reaches the network. So hushmail won't help.

  37. the system by mattdm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So it's feudalism at work; democracy on your own time.

    Your words could apply just as well to someone justifying plutocracy as the logical system of government for a nation -- the wealthy landowners get to make the decisions, because they literally own the country. Somehow, in these modern times, we've decided that that's just not acceptable anymore. Why do we still put up with it at work?

    1. Re:the system by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

      Because you are perfectly free to leave. If your company trats employees like shit, go find a job somewhere else. If enough employees do that, they'll either change their ways or go out of bussiness.

      While there are certina things they can't do, I really fail to see why this would be a problem (legally speaking). They own the computers, the network, and so on, they may monitor it if they wish. It is perfectly legal for you to install logging software on your home system to monitor your children/spouse/guests, why would it be any different for your company?

      It is, of course, a crappy thing to do but like I said, if thye impliment something like that make it clear you will seek employeement elsewhere unless they get rid of it.

    2. Re:the system by mattdm · · Score: 1

      Sure, but realistically, it's not that easy, especially in areas and times when jobs are scarce -- and when practices like this become the norm because all of the employees have this "it's their right to do that if they want" attitude.

      Usually, things are better for educated folks, but there was a court decision a while ago banning someone from finding a new job in his field because he knew too much from his old employeer -- they owned his skills and knowledge, just as a feudal lord owns the labor of his vassals. That seems ridiculous, but that was the ruling, and we're going to see more of it in the future. (William Gibson might not be so far off.)

    3. Re:the system by LunchingFriar · · Score: 1
      Your words could apply just as well to someone justifying plutocracy as the logical system of government for a nation -- the wealthy landowners get to make the decisions, because they literally own the country. Somehow, in these modern times, we've decided that that's just not acceptable anymore.

      LOL...plutocracy is exactly the system that the United States runs under. Don't believe me? How many poor people (hell, even lower middle-class) get elected to public office...ANY public office, even if it's just the town council? How many of your congressmen and senators vote by what they believe to be correct, instead of how their lobbyi$t$ told them to vote? How many concerned citizen groups ever get listened to by elected officials?

      In America, the people with money make the decisions...and those decisions are almost always to the benefit of the people with money.

    4. Re:the system by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      That's just outrageous! Bah!

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    5. Re:the system by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      (* [So it's feudalism at work; democracy on your own time]........Somehow, in these modern times, we've decided that that's just not acceptable anymore. Why do we still put up with it at work? *)

      Because the alternative has not been shown to be economically viable for whatever reason.

      Although one is "free" to quit and go elsewhere or start your own company, in practice this does not end up working out for most people.

      Just one of those things that you have to get used to, like death and taxes.

    6. Re:the system by Fascist+Christ · · Score: 1

      ...the wealthy landowners get to make the decisions, because they literally own the country....Why do we still put up with it at work?

      Because they literally own the company.

      Besides, do you see any prospering companies where the employees make the decisions? Can we say overpayed and underworked?

      It's just business. It's nothing personal.

      --
      TodayTM BillyJoelTM GoogleTMd for StitchTMes due to WindowsTM while RollerbladeTMing with an AppleTM and a PopsicleTM
    7. Re:the system by Rainier+Wolfecastle · · Score: 1

      Wait, so you're saying that we live in an age where it's not the wealthy that make all the decisions? Someone needs a reality check.

    8. Re:the system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That same argument could be used to justify things like sexual and racial harassment. Hey, if you don't like it, leave!

    9. Re:the system by mattdm · · Score: 1

      Ok, touché. But it's strange to me that most people easily recognize this as a problem in government but not as a problem in the rest of life.

  38. Is hotmail selling my Email address? by brejc8 · · Score: 2

    I have been getting a lot of spam lately on an address I only give out to my friends.
    They all seem to keep it in their hotmail and yahoo address books.
    Is that the spam leak?

    1. Re:Is hotmail selling my Email address? by Utopia · · Score: 1

      My advice it to choose your e-mail address with numbers in between the letters.
      Like br55ejc or bre007jc. I guess adding some characters like ~ or $ might help too.

      I have two hotmail account one with numbers in between the characters and one with numbers at the end of my username. The one with numbers in between has never been spammed in 3 years. I bet my addresses are in tons of address books.

      Some E-Mail address gathering software try to find valid e-mail addresses by sending e-mail to random adresses and once a e-mail doesn't bounce you are added to a list. Hotmail due to size (and therfore the greatest chance of success) is the most popular target for email gathering software.

    2. Re:Is hotmail selling my Email address? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "I have been getting a lot of spam lately on an address I only give out to my friends. They all seem to keep it in their hotmail and yahoo address books. Is that the spam leak?"

      Many spammers just try random user names and hope they reach an inbox. And even if you open just one random spam with HTML 'phone come' code embedded in it, you are exposed and the spam starts rolling in.

  39. Privacy is far from a right in the workplace by Zeddicus_Z · · Score: 2

    Err, excuse me, but since when have we had the expectation of privacy when using company resources?

    You send email via Outlook and your company's Exchange server. It's logged (or at least monitored), for legal reasons.

    You Web-browse on your company Workstation during lunch. It's logged (or at least monitored), for legal (and HR) reasons.

    You send IM traffic across the company network to an external friend via ICQ. It's logged (or at least monitored), for legal reasons.

    You send email via Hotmail using a company Workstation, out a company NIC, across the company Cat5, through the company switches and routers, out the company gateway and upstream to you company's service provider. It's logged (or at least monitored) for legal reasons.

    Personal use of company assets on company time. Unless you have an absoultely rockin' Acceptable Usage Policy (from the employee's point of view), you're "up shit creek without a paddle".

    You can bitch and moan about this kind of thing all you want, but it comes down to one thing. Is use of Web-based mail against the AUP policy you signed when you commenced work? If it is, and you do it anyway, you're screwed.

    Sheesh, you'd think it was rocket science or something...

    --
    Janie took my gun...
  40. Two Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    CIA Operated.

  41. It's easy to eavesdrop on LAN (work, school, ..) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tcpdump

    Need I say more?

  42. And the moral is: Use SSL! by jnievele · · Score: 1

    Why do all these webmail-users use plain HTTP, anyway? Use HTTPS and nobody can spy on you - it's that simple.

    And if $Webmailer doesn't support HTTPS, switch to one that does, because Webmailers that don't use HTTPS don't give a damn about security anyway.

  43. I hate to say this but.... by HowlinMad · · Score: 1
    But attempting to spying on private e-mail??

    Why are you using private email at work? This is more than liekly against company policy. Simple solution, do not use private email at work.

  44. I normally agree by ACNeal · · Score: 1, Insightful

    But the whole idea of salaried employees blur this. If I am a salaried employee, my private time and work time start to become blurred. I am expected to work at home at times, and so I should be able to do private things while at the office.

    An hourly employee is being paid for everything they do at the company, and that time does explicitly belong to the employer.

    A salaried employee gets paid for the work they do, more than their specific time at the office.

    1. Re:I normally agree by zenray · · Score: 1

      A vaguely remenbered cartoon. 'Sally Forth', I think. It shows her folder clothes at work and her boss is asking what she's doing? Her reply - "Remenber last week when we were backed us here at the office and I took work home with me? Well now I'm backed up at home." As some say 'turnabout is fair play.

      --
      zenray
  45. Internal Memos Website by irix · · Score: 4, Funny

    Man, that site is hilarious! You can't make stuff like this up :-)

    --

    Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    1. Re:Internal Memos Website by el_nino · · Score: 2

      This memo is pretty amusing, too.

    2. Re:Internal Memos Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This memo is pretty amusing, too.

      The memo is about "This afternoons events in the restroom." It's claimed to be from the Oxbridge Group which is "AN EXECUTIVE SEARCH FIRM SPECIALIZING IN THE FINANCIAL SERVICES INDUSTRY"

      Perhaps this sort of thing can help explain Enron, Worldcom et al.

      The last paragraph of the memo is kind of interesting "I understand from some of you that my recent indecency related arrest in Thailand seems to have clouded your judgement to illegal acts"

    3. Re:Internal Memos Website by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oxbridge Group
      This afternoons events in the restroom.
      Re: This afternoons events in the restroom.
      cc: Overseas, Mai Lang Me, Edward Chin, H. Hunter

      By now, many of you will have heard of the incident in the mens restroom this afternoon. I cannot condone what went on and I have suspended those responsible. This company does not allow and will not stand for drugtaking anywhere on the premises. In addition, the language and behavior of all concerned went totally unacceptable for any humans anywhere.

      I have called in contractors to repair the damage, the police have been informed and cameras will be installed by the end of the week outside the restroom doors.

      Once again we find ourselves in this situation. Last year was bad enough but I will not sit back and watch our hard work go down the drain whilst stoneheads and sluts defile the office.

      Random testing will be introduced later this month and I expect anyone who fails will be invited to leave the company in line with company policy.

      I understand from some of you that my recent indecency related arrest in Thailand seems to have clouded your judgement to illegal acts. Let me warn you that I am innocent and will prove so soon. This does not mean the office is a free for all.

      Regards, Charles Hunter Managing Director - UK

      Oxbridge Group Limited Registered in England No. 44122514 Registered Office: Ellensgate Court, 4 Court Lane, London W1W 3RT This message is subject to and does not create or vary any contractual relationship between Oxbridge Group Limited, its subsidiaries or affiliates ("OBG") and you. Internet communications are not secure and therefore OBG does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Any view or opinions expressed are those of the author. The message is intended for the addressee only and its contents and any attached files are strictly confidential. If you have received it in error, please contact our offices. Thank you.
    4. Re:Internal Memos Website by DEBEDb · · Score: 2

      Can they do random testing if
      it wasn't in the contract
      to begin with? I'd run to my
      lawyer as soon as I could...

      --

      Considered harmful.
    5. Re:Internal Memos Website by joshsnow · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and in the UK, we call "restrooms" "toilets", so this sounds like a fake.

  46. For those looking for a ssh client in windows by (H)elix1 · · Score: 2

    Putty is an amazing little win32 ssh client (does telnet and a few other things as well). For me, if I am working on windows and need to check my mail, I ssh out to my linux box and fire up pine. No muss, no fuss. It is worth checking out the license link... Simon, you ROCK!

  47. I just use ssh by AssFace · · Score: 2

    I have a shell where I host my web pages and such... or at least theoretically where I would host them were I to have any.
    I ssh into that and use pine while at work, and then when I am home I use pop3 to yank it down.

    this has worked well for me and I'm gonna stick to it. it isn't free like hotmail, doesn't have a slick web interface... or at least a web interface - but I like it well enough.
    (it is like free to me because I would have this account whether I were using the e-mail or not)

    --

    There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
    1. Re:I just use ssh by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2

      What I do is fetchmail from my "regular" POP account on a Linux box at homme (connected 24/7), which I access either via IMAP from other PCs at home, or through SSH+PINE from work.

  48. Re:EVEN THOUGHTS OF HOT BUTT SEX IN THE CO. BATHRO by ObviousGuy · · Score: 0

    Especially those thoughts. Are you thinking them now, you bad monkey?

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
  49. Plus you assign dual copyright to Microsoft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of anything you send through Hotmail - it's in the T&C.

  50. Oh please, save us from the Bad People! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for we's too dim to handle such a sichuashun in the real world! please, mista eye-tee man, keep a sharp eye!

  51. In the famous words of thousands upon thousands by Pac · · Score: 3

    Who, is his right mind, ever thought Hotmail was a haven for commercial or otherwise private information, when not a month goes by without a new flaw in their security or a new loophole in their privacy policy comes to light?

  52. I know that Slashdot tends to be anti-MS... by frleong · · Score: 2
    But the headline pretends that only Hotmail has this problem. This is not new as *ANY* http transmission that is not encrypted via SSL is prone to this problem, since all the boss needs to do is to setup the proxy server/firewall to dump everything passing through, even without this particular software.

    Additionally, that e-Blaster software even traps and logs the keystrokes of the workstation: not even SSH or any other software that requires typing your password will help you here. If you're using your company's computer, and you are subject to their rules. ***END OF THE STORY***

    --
    ¦ ©® ±
    1. Re:I know that Slashdot tends to be anti-MS... by FunkyChild · · Score: 1

      Additionally, that e-Blaster software even traps and logs the keystrokes of the workstation

      Perhaps the solution is to practise typing in rot13? :)

    2. Re:I know that Slashdot tends to be anti-MS... by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      I'm one better than that. I can type in double-rot13.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:I know that Slashdot tends to be anti-MS... by PigleT · · Score: 2

      Simply put, why do people work for companies where the administrators would do such a thing?

      I don't work for anywhere where they expect me to use a "corporate standard desktop" of any description - first thing I did here was wipe NT and install debian/unstable, so unless they've zapped the BIOS specially I'm pretty darn' safe :) . Did the same at the last place as well, except I went from stormix to potato to unstable instead ;)

      Certainly amongst the clueful this won't be a problem. For those folks not in the Development department, well... can we hope to educate them? All that's needed is a list from the sysadmin of what monitoring and intercepting she's doing - it should be a Data Protection requirement in the UK, and easily justifiable on moral / privacy grounds elsewhere.

      --
      ~Tim
      --
      .|` Clouds cross the black moonlight,
      Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
    4. Re:I know that Slashdot tends to be anti-MS... by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "Perhaps the solution is to practise typing in rot13? :)"

      Why learn something that can easily be decoded?

      Try taking classes and learning another real language, perhaps Russian or Nederlands (sp?) or Korean. Most admins except in those regions will not be able to read it AND you will have learned a valuable skill which increases your personal job marketability.

  53. you missed something by mattdm · · Score: 4, Informative
    The 9th amendment -- for some reason, people who want to restrict the rights of US citizens seem to conveniently forget that one. Here it is:
    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
    There's my right -- and yours --to an adequate standard of health, to be looked after after a life of contributing to society, and yes, to pursue happiness. Oh, and of course, to live like a free human being, not a corporate slave, even when I'm at work.
    1. Re:you missed something by ZoneGray · · Score: 2

      >> my right -- and yours --to an adequate standard of health, to be looked after after a life of contributing to society

      How the hell do you read that into the 9th Ammendment? What you've mentioned are not rights, they're services that would be provided by others. Nowhere in the Constitution or any other founding documents are you obliged to provide for others. Rights enumerate what the government can not do, or restrict you from doing. They do not specify what others must do for you.

    2. Re:you missed something by toupsie · · Score: 2
      The 9th amendment -- for some reason, people who want to restrict the rights of US citizens seem to conveniently forget that one. Here it is:

      With your reading of the 9th, I could decide to do anything I want, at anytime as long as I don't tread on the Civil Rights of others such as keep animals in inhumane conditions on purpose. Not true. Justice Goldberg says it for me:

      "Moreover, a judicial construction that this fundamental right is not protected by the Constitution because it is not mentioned in explicit terms by one of the first eight amendments or elsewhere in the Constitution would violate the Ninth Amendment. . . . Nor do I mean to state that the Ninth Amendment constitutes an independent source of right protected from infringement by either the States or the Federal Government. Rather, the Ninth Amendment shows a belief of the Constitution's authors that fundamental rights exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed exhaustive.''

      There's my right -- and yours --to an adequate standard of health, to be looked after after a life of contributing to society, and yes, to pursue happiness. Oh, and of course, to live like a free human being, not a corporate slave, even when I'm at work.

      Working is a choice. If you do not wish to be forced an employer to do certain things, don't work for them. Its their equipment, bandwidth and electricity. They determine how it will be used.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    3. Re:you missed something by mattdm · · Score: 2

      With your reading of the 9th, I could decide to do anything I want, at anytime as long as I don't tread on the Civil Rights of others such as keep animals in inhumane conditions on purpose.

      I didn't say that at all. I didn't say that you have whatever rights you claim -- just that you do have rights beyond those listed. Exactly as the quote you give says.

      Working is a choice. If you do not wish to be forced an employer to do certain things, don't work for them. Its their equipment, bandwidth and electricity. They determine how it will be used.

      It's not a very optional choice for most people. Like I said elsewhere, what you seem to support is "democracy on your own time" -- and feudalism at work. If you're happy with that arrangement, that's fine, but I don't see why we should be.

    4. Re:you missed something by mattdm · · Score: 1

      You have to look at why we have rights at all. At the most basic level, you don't have any "rights" to anything -- it's a harsh world. But in order to build a working society in which each individual has the highest possiblity of reaching full potential as a human beaing, we develop a system -- society and all that. If you want to make that system favor the wealthy, I guess that's one way to do it, but I don't think it's the most productive structure of rights.

    5. Re:you missed something by toupsie · · Score: 2
      It's not a very optional choice for most people. Like I said elsewhere, what you seem to support is "democracy on your own time" -- and feudalism at work. If you're happy with that arrangement, that's fine, but I don't see why we should be.

      No one is pointing a gun at your head and telling you to work for someone so it is 100% voluntary. If you want "democracy" during business hours, start your own business. There is no right that forces someone else to give you a job or income.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    6. Re:you missed something by mattdm · · Score: 2

      No one is pointing a gun at your head and telling you to work for someone so it is 100% voluntary. If you want "democracy" during business hours, start your own business.

      Not everyone has the resources to do this -- not just the resources to get started, but more importantly the resources to fall back on if it doesn't work out (and most new businesses don't). I agree, getting out of a "wage slavery" situation and working for yourself is a good goal, but it's just not always possible for everyone.

      There is no right that forces someone else to give you a job or income.

      Of course not. But there are rights which dictate how someone can treat you when you work for them.

    7. Re:you missed something by toupsie · · Score: 2
      Of course not. But there are rights which dictate how someone can treat you when you work for them.

      Name one listed in the Constitution with full text and explanation. The problem you have is that you think the US Constitution relates to all things. It does not. The US Constitution only relates to the relationship between citizens and Government--limiting the power of Government for the most part. It has nothing to do with the relationship between employers and employees. Those are laws not rights. Two different things.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    8. Re:you missed something by mattdm · · Score: 1

      Name one listed in the Constitution with full text and explanation.

      Um, I think we're going in circles here. The constitution explicitly states that there exist rights not enumerated there -- that's what I said at the beginning of this thread.

      The problem you have is that you think the US Constitution relates to all things.

      I certainly don't think that and said nothing that would imply I do.

    9. Re:you missed something by toupsie · · Score: 2
      Um, I think we're going in circles here. The constitution explicitly states that there exist rights not enumerated there -- that's what I said at the beginning of this thread.

      So we have the "Right to Free Ice Cream", the "Right to live in a neighborhood without 'those kinds of people' moving in" and the "Right to Sit in the Middle of Street". Of course not. Nor do we have the right to use other people's property without their permission for our personal business. The reason you think we have gone around in circles is that you are trying to use the 9th Amendment to grant yourself the right to steal from your employer and declare it "My Privacy!". That was never the intention of the 9th Amendment as stated by Justice Goldberg ruling I listed before.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    10. Re:you missed something by mattdm · · Score: 2

      Don't be silly. Of course we don't just have whatever rights happen to pop into your head as ridiculous examples. However, it is beneficial for there to be certain rights to make society work smoothly and to allow each individual the best chance possible. What those specific rights might be is a long discussion, but most people can agree on generalities -- after all, we're in this same society together. Property rights are certainly an imporant and useful class of these rights, but I don't see why they should be elevated above all others -- and I can see some strong reasons why they should be kept in check.

    11. Re:you missed something by ZoneGray · · Score: 2

      You have to look at why we have rights at all.

      It seems self-evident to me. We are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. To secure these rights, governments are instituted.

      Sorry, but I get really upset when something as profound as fundamental rights of liberty are bastardized to argue for any number of trivial material privileges. I'm all for a society that shares and in which the well off help provide for the less well off. But that has exactly NOTHING to do with the profound rights with which we are born.

  54. Did anybody read this one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On that internal memo's site, there was a pretty funny memo:

    http://www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php ?memo_id=780

  55. use ssh of course! by Nakago4 · · Score: 0

    This is why I do all my personal email through a ssh connection to my home server. Makes snooping a bit more difficult

    1. Re:use ssh of course! by tengwar · · Score: 1

      Won't help you if your site uses an HTTP proxy and blocks everything else!

  56. Good and Bad by chill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The last place I worked, I had to do something like this. We had a problem with an employee who was suspected of leaking company trade secrets to a competitor.

    It turns out she was using a Yahoo e-mail account to send CAD files of complete circuits to her "ex" boyfriend at a competitor. She was doing this from computers at work, and yes she had authorization to access the CAD files in her job.

    Because we were able to monitor the activity, the company knew what/when/where the files went. She was fired for cause and we contacted the competitor and waved the evidence. They had little choice but to fire the person on the other end and we watched them close to see if they introduced any "new" products over the next year or so that were based off of our designs.

    * * *

    Fast forward to my new company -- a once major telecom giant -- they now block all webmail sites they can find via their firewalls.

    Simple fix? Squid proxy on your home computer running on port 443 (HTTPS) and requiring a username/password.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Good and Bad by Telastyn · · Score: 2

      Not in cases like the one you described. If you've enough suspicion for something that bad, then a keystroke/mouse logger would be a possible course of action that would note what you were sending out before it ever hit the encryption.

    2. Re:Good and Bad by Exocet · · Score: 1

      Actually, my employer (Intel), has a fairly smart firewall that blocks damn near everything.

      Example: You can't SSH out. So, I tried setting up SSH on 443. No go. I hated the thought of reading my email unencrypted, so I finally setup SquirrelMail and modssl/apache (on port 443).

      Why one encrypted protocol is blocked and another is not is beyond me, but that's what the case is.

      As many others have already pointed out, much like copy protection ...people will find a way to beat restrictive firewalls. It may take some time and work, but unless the firewall blocks all outgoing traffic...

      --
      Exocet Industries - Taking over the world, one computer at a
    3. Re:Good and Bad by indiigo · · Score: 2

      We don't block anything. We respect user's privacy rights, until OTHER signs of abuse show up.

      As an admin that is the first course we take on suspicion of abuse. We don't have time to look through logs, because many legitamate uses of sites will contain illegitamate links, such as pop-up porm on a non-porn page. This way we directly taget the person and do not interfere with other's privacy as a result.

      I doubt this could be done in a large corporate environment, but the users are happier overall that we trust them and aren't condecsending about what they can and cannot see.

      --
      fslg503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-86 8650 3-985-fdsg8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-9
  57. And the moral is: Read the links. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    This software = keylogger on steroids.

    Essentially, it doesn't matter if you're using 183903248099041-but SSLv329780132 encryption between your computer and the mail system, because the monitor is ON YOUR COMPUTER and logs the email before it's encrypted.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  58. Isn't this just a sniffer? by samoht · · Score: 1

    I rather enjoy:

    Fowler wouldn't describe particulars about how the technology
    worked,

    In combination with:

    a judge wouldn't be able to rule on the legality of the software
    without knowing exact particulars about how the technology works

    So, they seem to have written a TCP/IP sniffer with a set of filters
    to catch email sent to/from web based email but they're not going
    to admit it because they don't want to get arrested for potentially
    making it easy to break wiretap laws without really meaning to.

  59. Blocked freemail at school by bgfay · · Score: 2

    I teach in the public schools in NY state and we have had all free email sites (yahoo, netscape, etc) blocked by the damn firewall. The reason given is that such things allow for malicious attacks on the network. Is there any truth to this? I imagine that there are better ways to attack out school system's network than My Yahoo (not that I'm looking for those ways). I just want to use my Yahoo account to read mail on my free period and communicate with students.

    Can anyone give a compelling reason why this should be firewalled or, better for me, a compelling argument as to why it need not be?

    --
    Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    1. Re:Blocked freemail at school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a public school; if they can find any little reason to pile on more rules, they will. Even though I managed to stay out of trouble until I graduated high school, my observation was that a *lot* of administrators in public schools are (with the lack of a better way to say it) power hungry.

    2. Re:Blocked freemail at school by ibennetch · · Score: 1

      At the public school in Pennsylvania where i went and worked; the proxy server we were forced to use by our provider, the IU we're a part of, blocked freemail (incidentally, one site pro-linux/OSS site, perhaps sourceforge, was blocked as porn). This wasn't anything we had control over, but it would have been blocked anyway. Why?
      District's time - teachers, students, whoever; shouldn't be emailing on school time. It was annoying for students who could otherwise hvae emailed work home or to themselves, or who needed to ask a question online; but it was deemed important to block because of the amount of time students "wasted" checking their mail. And there was a lot of waste, but some good too....
      in short, for us there's definately no way to get freemail back because of the polical climate of the district and provider.

      [insert standard $0.02 joke here]

    3. Re:Blocked freemail at school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure I can give you a reason. You have tech people that are probably making half the industry average. They don't know the answer, there aren't enough of them to fix things when something goes wrong, and thus they lock everything down. Since there isn't enough money sent along with the computers to prove true tech support, they simply prefer that you not use the computer.

      I found this hilarious at my own school site. The teachers there voted out the Mac's because they wanted IBM's so they could by and install their own software for their home machines in their classroom.

      So the district came in, installed a bunch of of Win2000 machines and gave everyone user accounts.

      They (as a result) obviously can't install anything. So now the computers are used even less than before.

      Ain't life grand...

    4. Re:Blocked freemail at school by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "I teach in the public schools in NY state and we have had all free email sites (yahoo, netscape, etc) blocked by the damn firewall. The reason given is that such things allow for malicious attacks on the network. Is there any truth to this?"

      With many children accessing free e-mail, there would be huge infection by virus downloads from clueless kids who really think they are being sent a loveletter.vbs or free pr0n. At the office where I work, once free webmail was blocked at the firewall, virus infections on the network dropped to 1/8th intensity.

      As much as we don't like it, users needed to be protected from themselves because in any large group, you are guaranteed to have some stupid idiots who cannot easily be educated in these matters and will feck up the network and open the klez virus every time. IMHO, the aggravation saved from having the network down half the time is an acceptable tradeoff for having no free webmail.

      Furthermore, the high school I went to was just getting internet before I graduated, and it was always unusable because kids were in the open lab using their hotmail all the time and surfing pr0n until the admin set up netbus. We only had 128k for 100+ computers and if all unacceptable things were not blocked, then the system was useless because of free games, hotmail, etc. Unless your school has huge bandwidth, there is no other option than to block the sh~t, otherwise the resources will be useless.

    5. Re:Blocked freemail at school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brings back memories. My previous workplace used to block freemails too. And each time a site used to get blocked we would spend an entire day tring to find alternate freemail services or tring different urls or ip addresses etc.

      We were all software developers. I finally found a way trick Squid proxy (our firewall). It was a clean attack. And I bet it still works.

  60. Re:..Your Ass We Monitor! - i would sue your ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I do not have any unresonable expectation of privacy, if I were working in your organization, I would take you to civil court and sue your ass personally as well as the organization as a whole. Clearly your company is making hiring and firing decisions based on personal information it finds out about it's employees. While this privacy concept is clearly non-tenable, the idea of doing what your company does is illegal in my state and many others. I believe it is also illegal under federal law.

    Consider a less "emotional" example. What if a manager learns one of his employees has become pregnant. Now this means she will likely take maternity leave. So, the company decides its best to terminate her now, because it would cost less for health coverage. Imagine further that she is unmarried, and the people making this decision become aware of this and take this into account in her firing decision.

    Many times things like this and other forms of abuse occur every day, but they are hard to prove. Often they occur but the human resources department never openly talks about it. I am sure the people in your organization will appreciate the fact that you personally have made this form of illegal job descrimination easier to demonstrate when they need to bring wrongful termination suits.

  61. Flip Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fine, then the following also applies:

    I will only work minimum required hours, no more.

    If I'm not being paid for oncall, then I am not contactable, I don't care if an meteorite hit the data centre, don't contact me.

    I will take all of my holidays each year

    If I'm even slightly Ill I will take a sick day up to the allowable maximum, I will not come in anyway to finish the project on time.

    The first job offer I get, I'm gone in the shortest possible time, most likely by taking any left over holidays. BTW you can forget about quality hand-over.

    Fine work time can be work time, and my time will be my time. Now who will be the biggest loser here?

    1. Re:Flip Side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you describe is essentially "Work to Rule", and can be a very effective means of industrial disruption. In many cases, Work to Rule is an effective alternative where strike action is not an option.

  62. A further point... by TheConfusedOne · · Score: 1

    Look at items like that lawsuit that an ex-employee lost about an idea he developed on his own time.

    More and more companies are attempting to lay claim to any and all thoughts that you have while you're employed with them. If they feel that they have the right to invade your brain and harvest the fruits of your spare time then they can't exactly complain when you confuse work and personal time as well.

    --
    --- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
  63. won't work either by archeopterix · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, dasher (and any other nonstandard text-entry interface) will only work against keylogging alone, not against keylogging + screen dumps. The only way to safely transmit information via a company computer (untrusted) is to enter already encrypted data into it. So, the solution is to have some PGP-like software on your (trusted) palm, or to learn to do PGP in your head (trusted, if you wear a tinfoil hat) ;-)

    1. Re:won't work either by lamp77 · · Score: 1

      yeah,

      if screen dumps are happening then it's time to get a new job.

    2. Re:won't work either by Nameles · · Score: 1

      What if I'm working on a paper at my school computer lab, and I forget a floppy to save to. I don't have a USB keyring HD (not that it's probably plug and play with w98, and not that it'd be fun to have to reach around the computers on the floor to get to the ports), and I need to email something to myself? Sure, if I have my own mail server running, it works sometimes. Other than that I usually have to find a semi-competent teacher, or one that doesn't think I'm another teenage idiot that thinks they know about computers and have them log in with teacher rights, and then have them watch me log in to one of my random mail servers.

      I really don't think investing in a Palm with a wireless modem would help either, and I don't have a cell phone, nor would I carry one in school.

      So there's no choice but to figure out new ways of getting by keyloging and screen dumps, even in non-office enviroments.

  64. Hotkey sequence by sdxxx · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the FAQ:

    11. So, if eBlaster does not show up anywhere, how do I get into it?

    ... if you do need to open eBlaster to change some settings, you simply type a Hotkey combination, which is 3 keys pressed simultaneously followed by a fourth key. (Nobody would ever accidentally type those 4 keys, so they won't accidentally discover eBlaster is present.)...

    So does anybody know what those four keys are?

    1. Re:Hotkey sequence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      CTRL+ALT+DEL THEN POWER

    2. Re:Hotkey sequence by cnoocy · · Score: 1

      Nobody would ever accidentally type those 4 keys

      So nobody would ever bang at their keyboard in frustration? Nobody would ever bring their kid to work?

      --
      This sig is not the Zahir. Lucky for you.
    3. Re:Hotkey sequence by AnonymousDot · · Score: 1

      [Ctrl]-[Alt]-[Delete], [Enter]
      Let me try...
      Please wait while Windows is shutting down your computer

    4. Re:Hotkey sequence by TFloore · · Score: 1, Redundant
      [Ctrl]-[Alt]-[Delete], [Enter]

      That's just about my favorite key sequence in Windows NT4 and Windows 2000.

      That doesn't reboot the machine. It screenlocks it. Very useful.
      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
    5. Re:Hotkey sequence by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


      On my WinNT box at least, it's "Ctrl-Alt-Del, S" and then you have to hit "OK" on the dialog box that comes up.

    6. Re:Hotkey sequence by muon1183 · · Score: 1

      Well, aside from all of this discussion about ctrl-alt-del then enter (aka, shutdown), I may know a thing or two about the key sequence. It's not as unlikely that the keys will be pressed as they think. For example, in my high school CS class, they had a piece of software (that shall remain unnamed) to keep unwanted programs from running. We knew that there was a quick key sequence to temporarily disable it, but had no clue what it was. Then, one day, somebody was very tired and decided just to rest their head on the keyboard. Lo and behold, the computer unlocked. After that, we just had to figure out which keys he had pressed. Turns out the key combination was alt-shift-m. If you're ever on a windows computer that seems to have the default loader replaced with a special one (so that programs without permission to run can't get loaded into memory), try that key combo. Of course, since this was a cs class, they had to allow any programs that we wrote to run, so it really didn't do that much good once we were decent at programming (it's amazing what overwriting their binaries will do).

      --

      There's no sig like SIGSEG
    7. Re:Hotkey sequence by Eamon+C · · Score: 1

      Also from the FAQ:

      eBlaster ... cannot be uninstalled without the eBlaster password which YOU specify...

      How does that work? Perhaps it's tedious to uninstall without the eBlaster password, but when it comes down to it, anything can be completely removed with a few file deletions and registry edits.

      I would understand if they said that only a user with administrator privleges could uninstall it, but this thing is being marketed to jealous husbands and paranoid parents. These people tend not to have the know-how to implement this on their home computers.

    8. Re:Hotkey sequence by flogger · · Score: 1

      So does anybody know what those four keys are?

      CTL-ALT-Del then S? ;-)

      --
      ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
      "First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
      -- The Doctor, "Doctor
    9. Re:Hotkey sequence by luap2000 · · Score: 1

      Nobody would ever accidentally type those 4 keys And what about the million monkeys typing away on a million microsoft keyboards??

  65. Coporate Ethics by txtger · · Score: 1

    Corporations will most likely argue that, because of sites like Internal Memos, companies need to keep a tighter grip on the information that flows in and out of their companies.

    It seems like they would have already figured out that ethical business practices are a good way to handle that.

  66. Windows only. Adaware?? by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2
    According to the FAQ, it has to be installed on Windows. The report can be sent to anything.

    I wonder if Adaware will be updated to kill it. It should be a simple matter to find the dir and delete it tho.

  67. This is why you encrypt your connections by MarvinMouse · · Score: 2

    Anyone who is skilled will know how to encrypt their outgoing connections. Or even will know a few free e-mail services (hushmail anyone) that can encrypt their connection when they check e-mail.

    Personally I try to SSH to my mail servers when I need to.

    Just remember though. If you are going to rely on SSL to protect your e-mail. Don't use IE (since it would be easy for a company to put a Man in the Middle attack on your IE). Use Mozilla or Something that does SSL properly.

    --
    ~ kjrose
  68. Is it safe at all? by dacarr · · Score: 1

    The last time I signed up for a hotmail account, I was bombarded with spam (bombarded being operative) within 48 hours. The typical user either deletes or "unsubscribes" to the email, which possibly carries the standard penis-lengthening advertisement. Why would one want to venture into that territory at work in the first place?

    --
    This sig no verb.
  69. this needs exposure - 'mod this up!' by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1

    I don't normally use the +1 bonus for 'mod this up' messages but in this case I will make an exception. Feel free to mod this down as long as you mod the parent up.

  70. Why?! by crull · · Score: 1

    Who actually use hotmail anyway? Still haven't figured it out why people use it.

    --
    this is not my signature.
  71. I'm about to explode! by Newton's+Alchemy · · Score: 1

    I don't know about anyone else, but I'm often under a lot of stress at work, and am often isolated from human contact. If I don't get to check my personal e-mails or chat occasionally with some friends, I get... twitchy.

    I work for a small non profit and happen to be the Sysadmin, so I get to WRITE the AUP if I wanted to.

    I'm so glad I work in a less than formal environment! :)

    --
    Why didn't you tell the world, eh?!

  72. Examples of privacy at work by dcollins · · Score: 4, Informative
    From the article:

    ...a personal letter through the company mailroom. The contents of such a letter are protected by U.S. mail regulations.

    Contrary to the large contingent of "company can do whatever it wants on its property" boosters, there in fact seem to be all kinds of legal protections and privacy expectations established for workers in corporate offices.

    The fascist model that says otherwise is not only frightening, it's untrue.

    The full quote from the lawyer in the article (in reference to the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act):

    Spyware like that produced by SpectorSoft and competitor WinWhatWhere Corp. has not yet faced a definitive courtroom test. But David Sobel, general counsel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, equated private Web-based e-mail account with an employee receiving a personal letter through the company mailroom. The contents of such a letter are protected by U.S. mail regulations.
    "The question is: Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy? I would argue that if a company.com account is provided to me for company business, I can assume it might be subject to monitoring ... but if I take additional step to set up a Hotmail account that I occasionally access from my desktop at work, I think that could be construed as an expression of an expectation of privacy."

    --
    We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  73. Re:blocked at work? Roll your own by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2
    . The setup here doen't bother me too much because I use an obscure free webmail provider (20MB, IMAP4!!)
    One day I'll drag the name of that webmail provider out of you!

    Why do you need it?
    Become your own webmail provider.

    I use fetchmail to grab mail from remote sites. I also point the primary MX for my own domain to my home box. This consolidates most everything into one email address.

    At that point, you can use imap(s) and horde/IMP to create your own webmail service... or just SSH in and start up your favorite mail program remotely. (I've even done it with Netscape/mozilla .. It's slow, but it works).

    20MB max?? HA! how big is your /var partition?

    The biggest problem I currently have is that, with Mozilla, the SSL Certs for my web server and imaps server collide. If I save the cert for one, the other claims that it's invalid.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  74. Just Blackholed (Much Of?) Hotmail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A new M$-WinXP laptop for some reason decided to try an https connection to a Hotmail netblock. So now the firewalls have

    OrgName: MS Hotmail
    OrgID: MSHOTM
    NetRange: 64.4.0.0 - 64.4.63.255

    blackholed anyway.

    Do y'all expect that connection resulted from the .NET/passport nag messages or from the MSN IM nag messages? (Which I think are somehow related anyway.)

  75. Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do by sckeener · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem I have with this sort of monitoring is it requires interpretations on the part of the reviewer. What should matter is whether I am creating a hostile work environment and whether I am doing my job. End of story. Mess up on either of those and you should be out the door.

    These sorts of issues are very similar to consensual crimes where the government wants to monitor what you do between consenting adults.

    --
    "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
  76. Geek Union by xyzzy-ladder · · Score: 1

    What about a telecommunication and computer workers union? Not a trade union, but an industrial union?

    http://www.iww.org/iu560/

    --
    There are two types of people; those who divide people into two types of people, and those who don't.
    1. Re:Geek Union by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that link. It may be just what my co-workers and I at Pomeroy have been looking for. The AFL-CIO affiliated unions can't be bothered with geeks.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    2. Re:Geek Union by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try these numbers.
      859-586-1515
      or
      859-586-0600
      They might be able to help you.

  77. plain text is all you need by mboedick · · Score: 1

    Who needs web-based email?

    Toolkit for doing things that you aren't supposed to do at work:

    SSH to Linux box at home and "screen -r -d".

    The best thing is it's all text, so it's indistinguishable from actual work to most people. And it's all encrypted.

  78. Sorry, but... by Stinking+Pig · · Score: 1

    If you're not using corkscrew to tunnel through their web proxy to your unix box at home to read your email in mutt or pine over ssh, then maybe you shouldn't be reading personal email at work anyway.

    Another way to say the same thing is: if you're not capable of bypassing the restrictions that are placed, then you're not qualified to bypass them and you should sit back and realize that the restriction is for your own good.

    --
    "Nothing was broken, and it's been fixed." -- Jon Carroll
  79. Actually interesting by Ztream · · Score: 1

    I actually find that interesting. What *does* a URL in text count as, linguistically? Is it one word, or several? Or is it something entirely different?

    1. Re:Actually interesting by walt-sjc · · Score: 2

      It's not really a word, but since it has no spaces in it, it would be usually be counted by word cout programs as a single word. I say usually because it contains punctuation. Some apps consider certain punctuation characters as a space. Consider "his/her" for example being 2 words, but 1234.45 is a single entity, so www.example.com would most likely be considered one entity, and http://www.example.com would be two, or four.

      But we are getting a little off topic :-)

      Basically, keyloggers kill ALL privacy regardless of the use of transport level security, and SSL is no longer secure anyway if you use IE due to flaws in the SSL code in Windows.

      The real answer is that if you expect ANY privacy at all, don't conduct your private business while at work. You may also want to consider working for a company that respects it's workers and their privacy instead of working for one that considers employees as "property".

  80. Sorry but if it's the bosses computer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...it's the bosses bytes.

    You shouldn't use the company PC for personal work. That said, one could always just VPN home and work from there remotely ;)

  81. Schools by Triforce66 · · Score: 1

    Does this scare anyone else that you know someone is probably going to use this on a school's LAN. Can you imagine how much info they can steal with probably 90% of everyone using AIM/AOL/Yahoo Mail/Hotmail?

    I'm at school now and I can see how much that would suck if someone runs that program here.

    Scary

    Triforce66

    1. Re:Schools by drfreak · · Score: 1

      If you aren't doing anything wrong, there is nothing to be scared of.

  82. Re:blocked at work? Roll your own by Door-opening+Fascist · · Score: 1

    Why use X-forwarding when you don't have to? Mutt and Pine do everything that Netscrape does, but at a fraction of the resource consumption.

  83. pot != crack, jackass by unformed · · Score: 2

    Smoking pot is not be any means equivalent to smoking crack. Someone who smokes crack is called a crackhead/ Someone who smokes pot is called an almost-blind person, or in some cases, a person appetitie challenged.

    1. Re:pot != crack, jackass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You said someone who smokes crack is known as a crackhead... but for some reason you didn't then go on to say that someone who smokes pot all the time is known as a pothead. That is a common phrase for someone like that. I don't understand the point you were trying to make.

    2. Re:pot != crack, jackass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Someone who smokes pot is called an almost-blind person, or in some cases, a person appetitie challenged."

      Oh please. While there are some people who use pot to reduce the pain from glacoma (sp) the vast majority who use it doe it for recreation not because of medical reasons. If you truely belive otherwise you're just deluding yourself.

  84. Re:..Your Ass We Monitor! - i would sue your ass by Hrothgar+The+Great · · Score: 2

    That doesn't make any sense, what you just said. They found information proving that the man had lied on a job application. I work for the public sector; it seems pretty universal that you get asked whether you have been convicted of any crimes on your application. What other possible reason would they need for firing this guy?

  85. Acceptable Use Policies by Big_Lamer · · Score: 1

    Let me preface my comments. I am a staunch supporter of privacy rights.

    However, before you get too far up in arms, most companies have some form of acceptable usage policies. Typically these policies state what you can and can not do while at work. Additionally, most companies have within either their acceptable use policies or security policies, a section explicitly stating that the company owns all files and information on their corporate network. You usually have to read and agree to these policies when you are hired.

    I know that I have had to sign documents that stated that I have read and understand all of the companies security/privacy policies. If you don't like the companies policies, go get a new job.

  86. -1 Unsubstantiated nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    en tea

  87. [from the FAQ] by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 3, Informative

    18. I do not have physical access to the PC I wish to monitor. Does eBlaster support remote installation? eBlaster can be configured to send the program installation file to another email address. Assuming that the receiving email client will allow the receipt of a .EXE file attachment and that the user opening the email clicks on the file attachment, then eBlaster will automatically install itself on that computer. Once installed on the remote computer, eBlaster will send recordings from that computer to your email address. VERY IMPORTANT: You MUST be the owner of the computer to which you are remotely installing eBlaster. If you are NOT the owner, or have not received permission from the owner to install eBlaster on that computer, you could be in violation of state or local law by monitoring the activities of property that does not belong to you.

  88. Must have: Shell Account by nolife · · Score: 2

    A shell account at an ISP (or to home if practical) is like a Swiss army knife.
    By using SSH and port forwarding you can encrypt and protect yourself from almost any corporate sniffer, access blocker, or packet logger (at least plain text).
    Even if your not using it to "bypass" a restriction, its worth the effort simply for the encryption over the local network.

    My last job used to block DejaNews and Google groups. I used it for quick fixes and support. If your ISP is not running a proxy you can run your own small proxy like cj.pl (cookie_jar) or junkbusters and bounce from that.

    I guess my point is, if you need it, there is a way to get access to it. It may not be ethical and may raise suspicion and get you fired but it works.

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  89. Practical Applications. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's really interesting that when you click on the 'Practical Applications' link, it brings you to a page that reads "Coming Soon!". I love it!

  90. Meeting with my boss... by David+Wong · · Score: 4, Funny


    "Mr. Wong, we've been monitoring your incoming hotmail and we can only assume you've spent hours of company time sending out hundreds of inquiries requesting information on how you can lengthen your penis by 3-4 inches with some kind of herbal supplement..."

  91. how many of us are .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reading this thread and writing responses to it on company PCs/bandwidth/time :)

  92. Bleh by TheCrunch · · Score: 2

    Nothing ZoneAlarm and PGP can't solve.

    --
    My life is one big siesta in which I'm dreaming I wished my life was one big siesta.
  93. My Solution - tunnel private stuff through ssh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's my setup:

    - MY laptop (no company spyware), Win2k HP Omnibook 6100
    - SecureCRT - SSH client with the following tunnels setup
    * port 80 - to www.anonymizer.com for web traffic (pay service, worth it to me)
    * port 110 - my RH7.2 box - all incoming POP mail
    * port 25 - my RH7.2 box - all outgoing SMTP mail
    * port 1080 - my RH7.2 box - free socks5 proxy server from www.socks.nec.com (use this with my IM client software from trillian.cc to connect to MSN, AOL, ICQ all at once)

    Anyone out there have similar setups? Any ideas? My thought is that if my company shuts off port 22 outgoing, I will buy wireless service from Verizon or somebody to keep this up and running.

    I'm also running a perl proxy on 8081 of my RH box, that I mainly use to debug problems with HTTP stuff (I'm a web developer).

    ps. I'm a sports gambling fanatic (amateur) and that's why I jump through the hoops.

    get in touch:
    secret@blueplanetsports.com

  94. One Word: ZIPLIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.ziplip.com/

    Free email, accessed over ssl, supports SMIME for
    transport too.

  95. Hello!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KEYLOGGER!!! VPN won't help that. They'll get at least half of any conversation.

  96. Todays System Admin Ethics... by umask077 · · Score: 1

    This kinda crap makes me sick. I remember walking off a job because someone asked me to violate some one elses email. This "it belongs to the corperation" bullshit has to go. If I typed it its mine, If I sent it to another person its also theres.

    IMHO This is akin to the your mailman opening your personal email. Its really sad that idiots who subscribe to the corperate mentality of company first would do this.

    Sysadmin ethics seem to be gone forever and people wonder why the computer industry fell apart? Next you'll be wearing a tie to work. Glad I am retired cause I couldnt work with the type of asshole that would install this form of spyware.

    --
    --- Always remember. 99.36% of all statistics are inaccurate.
    1. Re:Todays System Admin Ethics... by xyzzy-ladder · · Score: 1

      Really good point. Once, I had to write a script to scan through mailboxes to find emails containing some mutant of Melissa. We had another programmer, a sysadmin, and myself. It wasn't even brought up - we all assumed that we must do this AND protect the privacy of the users at the same time. We were careful NOT to read people's email, or in any way infringe on our privacy - we all just took it for granted.

      But some manager wants to scan through people's emails to find out what people are saying about him, and we are supposed to HELP him?

      Just because something is legal, sure as hell doesn't make it okay.

      --
      There are two types of people; those who divide people into two types of people, and those who don't.
  97. Think of the company as your big brother by xyzzy-ladder · · Score: 1

    At work, they "own" everything, they say when you can and cannot go to the bathroom. They tell you when to go and when to leave. They tell you what to wear. They may spy on anything you do. If they give you a computer to take home, they may spy on that as well. Same with a phone. They can tell you what to say or what not to say.

    If you don't like it, you can go to another company that will do the same thing. We call that FREEDOM.

    Remember your last paycheck, when they took all those taxes out? Some of those taxes probably went to your employer, if you work in fincance, airlines, manufacturing, advertizing, defense, technology, etc. The computers that those companies bought with your taxes, that's their property.

    We call that CAPITALISM.

    --
    There are two types of people; those who divide people into two types of people, and those who don't.
  98. Why not Yahoo:Not safe for work? by i_luv_linux · · Score: 0
    Why not yahoo:not safe for work?, oh sorry, Microsoft doesn't own Hotmail, right?

    I am sick of these anti-Microsoft stupids.

  99. My company already does this by doublem · · Score: 2

    All mail is opened before being delivered to the recipient. I have NEVER received a sealed mail while working here.

    Well, twice. They didn't bother opening some junk mail on a Novell training seminar.

    At a call center job four years ago (Inbound only, I answered a warranty line) calls were randomly monitored. Same at the job I have now. I once heard a rumor that the company was looking into the cost of recording cell calls, but I think (hope) it was all talk.

    IM logging and blocking is a priority for the network admin (Per orders from higher up). Yahoo and AIM are heavily abused.

    There are a number of people in this company who would LOVE to get their hands on a copy of this software if they knew it existed.

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  100. Correction: by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1
    "adversly affected if you happen to use *YOUR* phone to make a call which would bring down the RICO act"

    Meant to say, you will not be adversly affected if he uses *HIS* phone to make a call which would bring RICO charges while he is billing you...

    --
  101. My feelings exactly.... by FirstNoel · · Score: 1

    I like the part about the mercenaries.

    My wife and I have 2 completely different views on work. I hold the mercenary philosophy, she thinks has to be a slave. I'm much less stressed. :)

    Sean D.

    --
    "Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
  102. WHY?? by Espectr0 · · Score: 0

    WHY do people use hotmail? Are they stupid? It's not like you need to have a hotmail address to use msn messenger. 2 megs of space and a limit of 1 meg of upload, it's not enough. To people that have a connection at home, use your isp email! To people that want an email to subscribe to stuff and keep your main address with less spam, then you may use a hotmail or similar address. I prefer http://www.inbox.lv , they have a great antivirus working

  103. The Law by eyeball · · Score: 2

    I'm no lawyer, but presumably a few people at Nolo are, like the person that wrote this article about your rights at work. Surprising you have very little.

    --

    _______
    2B1ASK1
  104. thank god for slashdot by voncheesebiscuit · · Score: 1

    At least I can still {my} use slashdot to {boss} send {is} super sneaky {a} encrypted {bozo} posts.

  105. Re:..Your Ass We Monitor! - i would sue your ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is not the question of firing the one jerk, but the solution used to do so is wrong regardless of the result. The ends do not justify the means, and it is clear that any company or organization that uses private information on employees to make such decisions risks doing so for the wrong reasons. Should police be free to monitor what people do in hotels and parked cars because they might catch a date rapist?

  106. Elemental, Dr. Watson. by OpenSourced · · Score: 2
    ... if you do need to open eBlaster to change some settings, you simply type a Hotkey combination, which is 3 keys pressed simultaneously followed by a fourth key. (Nobody would ever accidentally type those 4 keys, so they won't accidentally discover eBlaster is present.)...

    So does anybody know what those four keys are?


    I have consulted the oracles and they have spoken. The secret combination is Ctrl-Alt-Del and then 'T'. That will show the Task Manager (assuming you are in Windows), and there you can probably see the sucker running. :o)

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
    1. Re:Elemental, Dr. Watson. by doublem · · Score: 2

      Only if your acocunt is part of the admin group. Many users can only see the processes they started in Windows. Services are blocked from a lot of views.

      --
      "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
    2. Re:Elemental, Dr. Watson. by sachmet · · Score: 1

      Amusingly, you're right: The default *is* Ctrl-Alt-Del-T. And here I thought you were being sarcastic :-) The trick is that apparently there's a password, too.

    3. Re:Elemental, Dr. Watson. by sachmet · · Score: 1

      Er, Ctrl-Alt-Shift-T. Damn.

    4. Re:Elemental, Dr. Watson. by OpenSourced · · Score: 2
      Either way, its uncanny :-O


      I may start believing the oracles :o)

      --
      Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
  107. They use hotmail to read work mail at home! by SomethingOrOther · · Score: 1

    On a shortcut through the law department at my university, I noticed many of the Proffessors had posted there contact e-mail address on the doors of there offices.

    Without fail, these were all hotmail accounts rather than the official university address they are given.
    I can only assume this is because they don't know how to connect to the universities mail server from home (or more likely, assume it cant be done).

    The solution to this was to print out the regester article entitled Hacking hotmail made easy and stick it on each door displaying a hotmail address.

    Last time I went through the law dept, everyone had given up on hotmail!

    --
    Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
    Don't believe what you read is the truth.
  108. Hotmail AND Yahoo .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, I don't mind that /.'s editors are so blatantly anti-Microsoft. I mean, that's part of what /. is. What bugs me is when they go out of their way to do it. This article clearly mentions Yahoo! mail as also being just as "unsafe" for work as Hotmail is, but what's the subject? HOTMAIL unsafe for work! Good God.

    And anyway, like pretty much everyone else has said, if you want something to be private, don't freaking do it at work. Simple simon.

  109. Dangers of OSS Editing by doublem · · Score: 2

    Typing away in Emacs. "Damn, there's that blasted eBlaster again! Every time I try to run my HTML Tidy Lisp script...."

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  110. use of private email by drfreak · · Score: 1

    This is such a common-sense thing, that it's hard to believe
    people are hiring employees dumb enough to do this shit, then
    subsequently hiring more "employees" to spy on them.

    Network usage rule #1 in an office is to always assume there is some sort of spyware logging you, and even if there isn't.. ever hear of a
    camera?

    I personally have had to be in charge of confidential data before and
    i'll tell you, hackers are nothing compared to your own stupid employees. Just block *msn.com, *hotmail.com in your firewall and remind people that company time is not for private email and be done with it. Then you can go back to the server room and browse porn
    in peace.

  111. More should be leaked by dswan69 · · Score: 1

    It wasn't that long ago that companies were claiming they should be able to spy on their employees after hours, in their own homes.

    The only way to keep corporate scum in hand is have as much information as possible available to the public so we should be implementing systems to help more internal information to get leaked out.

  112. Where have all the libertarians gone? by indros13 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Normally, Slashdot abounds with the libertarian hardliners, spouting off "freedom" and "rights" like sprinklers. Why do y'all cave just because this has to do with the workplace?


    We don't give up all our rights just to work for The Man. I get breaks at work, I use the bathroom, and I get some privacy. As long as I don't abuse the resources given me or take outrageously long breaks, I ought to be able to make a personal phone call, check my e-mail, or read part of the paper.


    Having some personal time at work guarantees that I'll be sane enough to be productive the rest of the time. If I couldn't take a break and have a little privacy, I'd probably end up staring blankly at the screen drooling on my keyboard and I'm sure the IT folks would REALLY love that.


    -Me

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  113. Disturbing FAQ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I find this disturbing in their FAQ:

    18. I do not have physical access to the PC I wish to monitor. Does eBlaster support remote installation?

    eBlaster can be configured to send the program installation file to another email address.

    Assuming that the receiving email client will allow the receipt of a .EXE file attachment and that the user opening the email clicks on the file attachment, then eBlaster will automatically install itself on that computer. Once installed on the remote computer, eBlaster will send recordings from that computer to your email address.

    VERY IMPORTANT: You MUST be the owner of the computer to which you are remotely installing eBlaster. If you are NOT the owner, or have not received permission from the owner to install eBlaster on that computer, you could be in violation of state or local law by monitoring the activities of property that does not belong to you.

    Even considering their warning, the mere fact that they put this in their FAQ means that they are pandering to people who want to use this to prey upon the multitudes of "dumb users" who are willing to click on random enticing .EXE files in their email. We can argue back and forth about the moralities of monitoring employees/kids, but this entery into the FAQ makes THEIR morals seems much more questionable.

  114. Oh please, like you know me by BlackMesaResearchFac · · Score: 1
    If someone knew how to parent they'd know that if they had a real relationship with their kid they wouldn't have to snooping around all the time in order to figure out what the heck they were doing.

    There is a difference between being aware/concerned and asking questions and rummaging through their stuff (diary, notebooks, etc). It's one thing if you have a specific reason to be suspicious (as I previously noted) but otherwise you're just putting yourself in a position for more harm than good.

    If one can't see that then maybe they should be looking into the mirror when they say "you've got some growing up to do."

    --
    -- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
  115. Compatibility? by caluml · · Score: 1

    "Built for Windows

    eBlaster is fully compatible with Windows XP, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT and Windows 2000."

    Well, thank god for that.
    [calum@womble calum]$ uname -a
    Linux womble.umtstrial.co.uk 2.4.19 #1 Fri Aug 9 15:21:00 BST 2002 i686 unknown

  116. Re:To be honest (aha!) by Klync · · Score: 1

    You must work for the government, right?

    That's pretty much exactly why I quit and went into IT. But, then again, it's not just the governments that do this; almost any large bureaucracy can tend toward this.

    Isn't that what we're really talking about here? Dealing with employment that turns people into widgets?

    --

    ----
    Not to be confused with Col.
  117. Hotmail=transport/encryption=manual by pseudorand · · Score: 1

    If I understand correctly, hotmail does encrypt the transmission of the password, but not the data session. I imagine the software is just reads the network traffic, but has not locally installed component. Maybe we should all get usb keychain hard drives on which to store our private PGP/GPG keys and use hotmail as the transport layer. Plus, there has to be a free webmail service out there that supports https (My old college account does: webmail.colostate.edu).

  118. Antivirus for squid ! Re:blocked at work by frankie_guasch · · Score: 1

    Instead of block, a good alternative is to install viralator
    in a linux with squid.
    Viralator calls the antivirus from the web proxy when a file is downloaded,
    if it's clean the user can download it.

  119. remote connection to my pc == termination by afxgrin · · Score: 2

    If i ssh, vnc, or just use the internet for ANYTHING that is not work related, it leads to instant termination. Apparently not even a warning.

    Now, they had clearly laid out what is work related and what is not, but it's just the fact that if I do a google search it could lead to my termination.

    Then again, I work with a VERY large database of people's private information. (Everything from names, phone #'s, social security #'s, credit card #'s... etc etc) I think the largest fear is that someone could start sending customer data back to their home PC. The other fear is infecting the network w/ a virus. (It's all Windows 98 - 600 machines...) That virus would spread like wild-fire through the company.

    If I was in IT, I'd get them changing some things, but that's me. Possibly the reason why I'm NOt in IT. oh well.

    So yeah - make sure you're allowed to remotely access your home PC, cause if not, you can be fired.

    1. Re:remote connection to my pc == termination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you didn't write this at work...

  120. What do you think Salshdot? by greymond · · Score: 1

    Depending on how there software works - at my current work we use a program called "websense" (normally used to block mp3 and porn sites) but we also block external email sites like yahoo and hotmail - basically they don't want us surfing the net - anyway what I have been doing is basically VCN to my home computer and surf the sites from there. If i'm using SSH2 when I connect does anyone think they would still be able to grab that info since it is not local?

    Other variables - I am on a mac connecting to box A (linux) and/or box B (windows)

  121. Public Key Encryption Question by Farley+Mullet · · Score: 1

    Please excuse my ignorance, as I'm not 100% sure on all the mechanics behind PGP, GPG and other such encryption schemes. But if someone is using a program like eBlaster on your computer that captures not only outgoing e-mails but also keystrokes, would having access to both the encrypted message and the plaintext (via keystroke logging) make it any easier to deduce your private key? If this is the case, then eBlaster could severely undermine public-key encryption.

    Again, sorry if this is stupid or alarmist. I'm not trolling, I'm asking out of curiousity.

    1. Re:Public Key Encryption Question by zemkai · · Score: 1
      If they're logging your keystrokes, they don't need to "deduce" your private key -- they have it (You need to type it in, remember?).

      -ZK-

    2. Re:Public Key Encryption Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they don't need to "deduce" your private key -- they have it (You need to type it in, remember?).

      Actually Farley Mullet is kind of right. You don't type the private key (that would be very difficult to remember wouldn't be?), but if you have the passphrase and access to the PC (in which the private key is stored)then you have the private key..You can change it, decrypt personal data and sign as if you were the key's owner!

    3. Re:Public Key Encryption Question by zemkai · · Score: 1
      Quite correct and thank you for clarifying my pre-caffeinated statement (passphrase + "access to passphrase protected private key" = private key is what I meant).

      Of course, one could keep the private key on some form of removable media... but in the real world, that never seems to work out, does it... Speaking of which, do any widely used mailers support tokens (like the Dallas Semiconductor iButton) for key storage?

      -ZK

  122. You have the right to use private email at work? by danbeck · · Score: 1

    Let me get this straight:

    You use the company's computer and the company's bandwidth to read and send your private email. And, you do it during the time you agreed to be working for the company.

    And you bitch if they are monitoring what is being done on company time with company equipment over company bandwidth?

    Do you refund the company the money you wasted in salary while you sat around emailing your girlfriend or forwarding that latest idiotic joke email? I doubt it.

  123. Kinda naive, huh? by jc42 · · Score: 2

    > Just like security cameras in a department store or bank. There is normally no trouble, so nobody looks at the tapes.

    Here in the USA, there have been quite a few news reports of the fuss when people discover the hidden "security" cameras in rest rooms and dressing rooms.

    If you believe those tapes are only used when there is some sort of trouble, you don't understand the real motive for installing them.

    "Hey, there's trouble in dressing room 3." "What sort of trouble?" "This chick walked in carring several swimsuits." "Ooh! We've gotta make sure there's nothing illegal going on in there."

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  124. As I read these posts... by mcg1969 · · Score: 1

    As I type this, a nice man named Dennis is installing a furnace and new ductwork in my house. While he's at work, he is not checking his personal email or surfing the Web.

    Why is that? Because he doesn't have access to a computer here, of course. And I don't plan on providing him that access, because he doesn't need it to do his job. He seems OK with that.

    The phones, computers, etc. that we use are provided for your use by the company because they believe that you need them to get your work done, and for no other reason. If suddenly your job requirements changed and that computer was no longer necessary, do you really believe they'd shell out the IT dollars to keep in on your desk so you can check Slashdot for updates? Not a chance.

    The next time you want to complain about a company exerting restrictions on personal use of their resources, just imagine how often you would be checking your email while you were running gas line or rooting out sewer pipes.

    Now having said that, of course it's reasonable to expect a certain amount of flexibility in the office environment. But if they have a good reason to crack down (corporate espionage, virus transmission), tough noogies.

    By the way, compared to many engineers, the money's better in plumbing, and the work is more recession-proof... something to consider...

  125. backwards by spoonyfork · · Score: 4, Funny

    So, they want to read my personal email but they don't want to read my ideas on how fix some corporate IT problems?

    Perhaps I should put my suggestions in personal emails sent through Yahoo!, that way they might get some attention.

    --
    Speak truth to power.
  126. bad management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your employees have nothing to do, they will fill their time accordingly.
    If they are surfing HALF the day, obviously they can do TWICE the work they have been doing.
    Managers, it is your fault your people are wasting time, deal with it. If you don't want to trust anyone, don't expect any respect in return, and don't expect ANYONE to go the extra mile when needed. First replace the managers, if they cannot manage, buh bye!!
    You are lazy and have no honor.

  127. E-Mail Addictions by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 1
    You are correct, sir.

    I wish all the "cracks" of our e-mail systems were so easily fixable.

    My observation is that people have become addicted to e-mail, whether personal or professional.

    It amuses me to think that many of the people who slag the poor cigarette smokers for taking their productivity-siphoning nic breaks are themselves logging into their personal e-mail accounts, I-M services, or message boards constantly throughout the work day.

    But because this can be done while staring at a monitor, as opposed to shivering in the parking lot, it is overlooked. Or, based upon the post that has sparked this conversation, was overlooked until now.

    Interact with co-workers at work. Interact with your personal contacts off-hours. Full stop, end-of-story. It seems so incredibly simple to me, that any other angle just seems a rationalization for one's e-mail/Web addiction.

    ...and I understand that there are 12-step programs to cure that now...

  128. Re:blocked at work? Roll your own by kevinz · · Score: 1

    Not everyone has the resources or ability to do that. Even if we all did, as someone else pointed out your employer can block access to your server just as easily as they did Hotmail.

    --
    kevin zollinger - kevin@mailsoap.com Spam Free Email!
  129. uhhh by segfault7375 · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    Hotmail: Not Safe For Work?

    Cancer: Not Good For You?

    Thanks Captain Obvious!

  130. these immortal words come to mind... by zentex · · Score: 1

    what part of "duh" dont you get?

    but then companies using hotmail is no surprise and is more common than most of you think. why? because one reason or another; such as there are some 'old boys' high up that like easy stuff, cost cutting, etc OR the people are just not with technology...

    yes, even in seattle with UncleBill looking over your shoulder this is more common than one would think. I could name names, but then someone would probably kill me.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  131. Rights vs brains by MountainLogic · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Sure, it's the company's system, but any smart manager knows that allowing employees to take an occasional personal phone call or email is going to make for more productive worker. Someone stewing about a sick child because they can't get a call from a caregiver is far less productive than a worker getting a quick email every hour with the childs temp.

    There are two types of workers, those who WLL get the work done regardless of distractions and those who will NOT get the workdone even if placed in a locked room. Hire and trust good people! Big brother tactics just makes the productive people less productive and won't fix the duds.

  132. Not a solution by jareds · · Score: 2

    Read the article.

    eBlaster is a fancy keystroke logger. Encrypted network connections are completely irrelevant.

    1. Re:Not a solution by f00Dave · · Score: 2

      Tell me how a keystoke logger is going to stop me from *pasting* something over a secure session? And even if they do, somehow, notice a suspicious paste, how do they know *what* was pasted?

      The solution is quite clear, actually: bring your own machine to work. That or put a provision in your contract that allows you to have unmonitored access to your home machine. Or, if working with sensitive data that must *not* be jeopardized, just accept that you're "air gapped" from personal/public connunications and move on, though in these cases (I've worked in one establishment like this), the establishment usually provides 'public-access' machines for people to use for non-work-related activities while on breaks/outside normal hours.

      It's the same as a phone, really. Some places record and monitor all calls, most places don't, many just don't care. Caveat signor (f00'lish for "Let the contractor beware")!

      --
      .f00Dave
  133. Big Deal by PotatoHead · · Score: 2

    SSH, Pine, VNC, anonymous web services--choose whatever gets through the firewall, and keep your mail yours.

    If you are on your employers time and equipment expect this sort of thing. Too bad for them, that they cannot have it both ways. Either they allow open communication or not...

  134. Best reason yet to use Linux: by mblase · · Score: 2

    "eBlaster is fully compatible with Windows XP, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT and Windows 2000."

  135. New from SpectorSoft by BigJimSlade · · Score: 2

    Software that monitors what web pages you view... Wait until they see how much time you're spending at /.

    Wait, what are you doing here now? GET BACK TO WORK!

  136. How is this different than a trojan? by DiveX · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Aren't other trojans like Back Orifice and NetBus marketed as 'network tools'? How long before anti-virus programs either add this to their lists or are somehow convinced (bought out, coerved) to intentionally keep this from their list like that did with the FBI's Carnivore program? If you purchase the software eblaster you would think it is yours ,
    but that is not the
    case.

    Spector soft designed the software to periodicly register its serial number with there database. This way if the software is installed in one or more machines they disable your software. Sure a firewall would prevent this communication, but it should also prevent the program from working anyway. I also woant to know what level of trust would one place into a company that can then have total control of your system. Are all those emails marked 'confidential' being sent to the company president also being routed to some other location? In this case security is only as strong as this software company's security. Could someone not take over and then have instant access to hundreds of corporate zombies? Sorry, but I am not about to take that chance.

    --
    Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
  137. Three words: read the FAQ by mblase · · Score: 2

    From the HushMail FAQ:

    Can HushMail protect against keystroke recording?

    Hush cannot protect the user against this kind of security threat as our system is designed to ensure secure transmission of data between computers only. If a HushMail user's private computer has been compromised or if they are accessing their HushMail account from the workplace where keystroke recording software is installed, their HushMail passphrase may be accessed by a third party.

    To combat keystroke recording software, we suggest you:
    * Change your HushMail passphrase regularly
    * Choose a secure passphrase
    * Update your virus checking software regularly
    * Send sensitive communications through your private/home computer

  138. Well... by mindstrm · · Score: 2

    As much as it's evil... information privacy is a tricky business.

    Forget the law, forget everything else, let's talk morals and common sense here.

    I'm your boss. It's my network, outright. You work for me.
    Should I be able to read all your emails and learn private details of your private life? Should I be able to learn which other poeple in the office you've been sleeping with? Of course not, that's personal.

    But.. when information worth millions suddenly appears on the black market, and SOMEONE leaked it, should I be able to look through a log of ALL my network traffic and find out who sent it? DAMN STRAIGHT I should.

    Yes, it's hard to draft a law that says this, as there is always room for abuse.. and that's the problem. It's a fuzzy thing.

    Limiting access to information is one thing.. but controlling the USE of that information is far more critical.

  139. internal memos is hilarious by shren · · Score: 2

    This afternoons events in the restroom.

    The events eluded to are funnier than an outright statement of what happened would be.

    --
    Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
  140. Would be illegal to tap my phone email by Lavos · · Score: 1

    The arguement for businesses to read your private email is that they own the network (there is another arguement that they Must read your email.) Since they don't own the wireless network for your phone or your phone, then they couldn't legally tap into it. Don't get me wrong, I know some slimey HR types that might agree that it'd be good to tap cells and the payphones at my ex-employer, but it's still not legal.

    --
    "Tax preparation software eliminates errors your[SIC] may make...." From IRS home page.
  141. Not a big loss........ by Ride-My-Rocket · · Score: 1

    In all of the jobs I've worked at, access to web-based mail systems that don't directly relate to work are blocked. Which is really how it should be anyway....... I waste enough time as-is putzing around on the Internet without compulsively checking my personal mail accounts every 15 seconds.

  142. Simple, OpenSSH-tunnel work arround by depsypul · · Score: 2, Informative

    When I'm using a Linux box away from home, and I absolutely don't want my web traffic to be able to be sniffed, I use this semi-quick solution.

    I installed Squid (the proxy server) on my box at home (which has a cable connection) and then use this simple one-line SSH command to create a SSH tunnel, which forwards all my web browsing to my proxy server at home, across an encrypted channel.

    ssh -o ProtocolKeepAlives=15 -q -f -N -C -g -L 45855:localhost:3128 myusername@MY.HOME.IP.ADDRESS

    Then I just have a copy of Opera on my machine away from home, set to use a proxy server on localhost port 45855. Works beautifully for web browsing that a company can't sniff.

    Note that I used the "-g" option of SSH, which allows other machines to connect to my locally forwarded ports (i.e. they can use the proxy server back at my home by connecting to the local port on my machine.) Take it out if you don't want this.

    1. Re:Simple, OpenSSH-tunnel work arround by oobeleck · · Score: 2
      I totally agree.
      They started "monitoring" all email traffic here at work and I just started using secure shell tunnels back to my house. Between mutt and rdesktop I have all the access I ever need. And all the cisco weenie can see is garble.....

      My .02

  143. nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm positive that the details vary from co. to co., but even the most draconian agreements I've had in the US (in spite of the fact that we seem to be seriously lagging in terms of little-guy "us" protections) *only* applied to work in the same field as what I'm employed in, and only if I used company time (i.e. *not* what I do on weekends) and resources.

    If I do it at home on my own time, it's mine and no one elses. If I do it in a lab at work, then they own it.

    Very simple, really. (again, maybe I've been lucky in every single job I've had). I'm an engineer, in case that makes a difference.

  144. buttinsky by Satai · · Score: 1

    Um, do you think the poster knew that Homer's usage of the term "buttinsky" was a not-very-veiled derogatory term used toward a homosexual character? Not so sure that it works in this context...

  145. Enforce your constitutional rights at work howto? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, is there a way to encrypt my e-mail? I imagine not if I'm using Yahoo, but not sure.

    Is there a howto somewhere that would left me talk to the (mostly) unencrypted masses safely? Or would I be "stuck" sending and receiving e-mail only from fellow geeks? (I guess I'm a geek, just not a CS geek. )

  146. Blah blah blah... start working, quit bitching by ret · · Score: 1

    If you're at work, you're supposed to be working, that's why you're being paid to be there. Most companies do allow you to access hotmail, etc as long as it's not affecting your productivity, but they don't have to and as long as you are doing it with their equipment while they are paying you, it is their business. Actually, most of you probably signed contracts stating that any information you put through the network at your place of employment may be monitored, read, deleted, and so on.

    1. Re:Blah blah blah... start working, quit bitching by luap2000 · · Score: 1

      why don't *most* companies pay overtime then? i've worked so many hours for 'free' at my company that it's not even funny.

      i read (somewhere/sometime) that some employers don't mind the occasional online banking or email to make up for all the time employees devote to a company (hoping they don't tank like Enron, etc...)

      CEOs make at least a hundred times more than the average worker and they want to read our email too? something's just not right with the system... and they say slavery is dead...

  147. Attn Yahoo Users by spacefrog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just a quick FYI

    https://mail.yahoo.com

    This won't stop them from tracking you, but at least your content will be private.

  148. What's wrong with SSL? by benb · · Score: 1

    Most webmail providers now have SSL access, not? If your employer snoops on that, it's hacking and it's most likely illegal. If your webmail provider doesn't offer SSL, then switch. If your employer blocks webmail providers, ask your boss to open it. If he doesn't do it, bad luck.

  149. Grow up... by toupsie · · Score: 2
    If this is a problem for you, QUIT! No one is pointing a gun to your head and forcing you to do this. You something called FREEDOM. Use it. It sounds like you have no clue as to how to negociate an employment contract because if you did, you would not bitch about this.

    There is constitutional right to have your employer to kiss your ass and take care of you.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
  150. Fortunately by kaoshin · · Score: 1
    My company would have to do a massive hardware upgrade to run any additional software because we can barely run the applications we have without locking up every 5 minutes.

    I check my email while I'm logged onto my box through webmin over SSL, which is WAY cooler than having to put up with the lack of filtering options, and other limitations of webmail. I also restrict the ips that connect to webmin, activate the service through an email trigger, and deactivate it thru the interface when I'm done. I don't have anything to hide. I just hate fscking webmail.

  151. Better Answer by toupsie · · Score: 2
    The fourth amendment which states the rights of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects.

    From Government intrusion not from corporate monitoring on corporate property. Big difference.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    1. Re:Better Answer by No+One · · Score: 1

      That's right. So the fact that the right to privacy isn't mentioned in the Constitution doesn't mean that it doesn't exist in our relationship with employers either. By your own argument, your claim that "There is no such thing as a "right to privacy" in the United States. Check out the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You won't find find it..." is completely invalid. Furthermore, more than one law and court decision quoted elsewhere in this story have restricted our employers' right to monitor our activities at work using company property. These laws and decisions were based on a human right to privacy. Therefore, legally, in the US, the right to privacy exists and is not automatically surrendered by the use of company equipment. The only claim you can make is that this monitoring isn't an illegal invasion of the right to privacy and privacy laws, and that's for the courts to decide.

      --

      There is no sin except stupidity -- Oscar Wilde
  152. With this, no help to encrypt your connections! by Nonesuch · · Score: 3, Informative
    Please read the linked web site before posting.

    Encrypted communications will not help here, as the software is a "trojan" installed on your PC, logs every keystroke, and intercepts content of email after it has been decrypted.

    Basically, if you cannot trust the PC that you are running your HTTPS browser on, you should assume that the encryption is not giving you any protection against the owner of that PC, or anybody else who "0WNZ" that PC...

    Personally, I bring my personal laptop to the office each day, run a local firewall on that laptop, connect it to the office LAN, and never install any company-provided binaries on that laptop.

    The company provides a corporate-owned business desktop, and I use that machine solely for messages and network traffic that I would not have any problem with the helpdesk people reading -- since the corporate standard is to install LanDesk, I have to assume that the HelpDesk people can and do have access to anything on that machine.

    Keep your business life as distinct from your personal life as you possibly can.

  153. Possible abuses by necrognome · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I can only imagine the mischievous ends the following can be put to (from the FAQ):

    18. I do not have physical access to the PC I wish to monitor. Does
    eBlaster support remote installation?


    If you purchase the eBlaster Remote Install Add-On, you may be able to send the program installation file to another email address.

    Assuming that the receiving email client will allow the receipt of a .EXE file attachment and that the user opening the email clicks on the file attachment, then eBlaster will automatically install itself on that computer. Once installed on the remote computer, eBlaster will send recordings from that computer to your email address.

    VERY IMPORTANT: You MUST be the owner of the computer to which you are remotely installing eBlaster. If you are NOT the owner, or have not received permission from the owner to install eBlaster on that computer, you could be in violation of state or local law by monitoring the activities of property that does not belong to you.

    For more details on whether the eBlaster Remote Install Add-On is right for you, click here.

    --


    Let's get drunk and delete production data!
  154. jesus christ by unformed · · Score: 2

    three words: tongue in cheek

    if you don't know what that means, it's not frenching

  155. So install your own web-based mail script by Goldenhawk · · Score: 2
    I work for the government. My organization is installing a network-wide VERY secure firewall. All POP3 access is about to go belly up, and I'll bet Hotmail and AOL web mail are out along with it. Not good for me, but no sense grousing about it. So I dug around on the net and found a PERL script to install on my web server, that lets me check my POP3 mailbox at will - via HTTP. Check out ThinMailer for details.

    It runs on my own server, not a commonly-blocked Hotmail server. It even lets me reply to messages. And because it's on my own server, and written in good-ol' PERL, I was able to completely customize it - to filter spam a dozen ways from Sunday, including naughty-word lists, friend lists, and blacklists. I can do much better filtering than common POP3 programs (Netscape, or Eudora, or Outlook Express) because I have absolute control - I can filter on any part of the message, strip out HTML, limit download size, you name it. In fact, I like it so much I have started using it FIRST to identify and delete spam before I run OE to download the mail onto my PC.

    Don't grouse to me about server space; I'd bet 90% of /. readers have server space with cgi-bin access. If not, and you're getting blocked at work, this might be a good reason. Are you unwilling to pay $5-10/month for this?

    Com'on, instead of whining about it, do something useful.

    --
    --Brandon / Split Infinity Music

  156. Hmmm....phone home E.T. by Gimpin · · Score: 1
    (Watkins v. L.M. Berry & Co., 704 F.2d 577, 583 (11th Cir. 1983))

    Employeers are not allowed to record person phone calls made from company phones and/or on company time....this does NOT however cover for the fact that your are using company time for personal business.

    --
    "Simon Says, Fuck You" - George Carlin
    1. Re:Hmmm....phone home E.T. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Knoppix, DemoLinux, DyneBolic or any number of other bootable CD or floppy-based distros and a modem are dandy workarounds if your BIOS isn't password protected. The addition of an appropriate Windoze screen cap as wallpaper would complete the BOFH simulation of work for passers-by. :)

  157. People Persons by Mulletproof · · Score: 2

    Unless your workplace and network are used by experienced computer people (ie; those who are competent in their operation and know all the risks they might be open to in there use), then your fellow coworkers make computers not safe for work. Email. Surfing. Games. Programs. Sticking their tongues in electrical sockets. Sure, security helps, but you can only do so much for the gimp behind the keyboard.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  158. Confirmed before I signed. (Re:To be honest) by phorm · · Score: 1

    I confirmed that projects made on my own time, that don't use company resources (including work time) are my own. When you're starting a new job, it really doesn't hurt to ask about right-of-ownership. Most employers I know didn't find the question offensive, in fact many found it intelligent - and indicative that I enjoyed what I do (if I were also the type to code on my own time).

    Just as a safeguard, you can also request an anmendment to your contract indicating that your work at home is your own, and what constitutes non-company owned work.

    In my case, much of what I work personally I offer to the company free, but allowing that I may offer the non-proprietary stuff elsewhere, and use it personally, so long as it's clear that I will never charge my employer for the use of said code/knowledge (even should I be terminated or quit).

  159. (resume) Re:To be honest by phorm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And when you've had the "screw it" attitude for the past 3 years, and either quit jobs or just generally been an ass, then how do you find another job when you have no good resume references from former employers.

    Interview/Application Question: Previous employment
    Ummm.... I've worked at many companies, but prefer not to name them as they now hate me. It's all their fault though, really!

    I prefer to do a good job, enjoy my work and take pride in what I do. I do check my own emails, post to/read slashdot, etc.

    However, I try to not tie up a lot of time I could be being productive. It also helps that when I ask for a day off, or a perk/raise, I often get it or at least get reasonable consideration. There's no reason to work like a slave, but a little honest dedication tends to have its rewards.

    1. Re:(resume) Re:To be honest by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


      And when you've had the "screw it" attitude for the past 3 years, and either quit jobs or just generally been an ass, then how do you find another job when you have no good resume references from former employers.
      ...

      I prefer to do a good job, enjoy my work and take pride in what I do.


      Who says you have to cop an attitude, be an ass, and not take any pride/enjoyment in your work? The idea is simply being aware of the reality of today's corporate employment environment.

      I can't remember who stated it (it may have been a Slashdot post) but I read an interesting piece of advice once. The company owns your job... you own your career. Don't confuse the two.

      I am a hired technical gun. I have no personal loyalty towards any employer (and that's hard to maintain sometimes, I admit). But I am a professional. I expect to be compensated for personal sacrifices just as my employer expects to be compensated for allwowances made to personal matters. I produce the best work I am paid for. I do not betray the trust that is a very large part of my job. And I have always maintained a civil, if not friendly, attitude with coworkers and business contacts. Consquently, I have a rather large pool of former colleagues that have, and continue, to give me glowing references.

  160. hotmail? safe? by RestiffBard · · Score: 2

    was hotmail ever considered a secure way to do anything?

    --
    - /* dead coders leave no comments */
  161. Re: maybe. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    keylogger will intercept stuff before encyption
    (hardware and software)

    the best you can do without a portable computer is protect your paraphrase with something like tinfoil hat linux (until it allows video-game-style text entry for things other than paraphrases)
    even with that, you still have to enter the data before it's encrypted
    with a portable computer (palm/iPaq/laptop), you could write the message on the portable, encrypt it, and transfer it to desktop for sending.

  162. It's a Trojan also! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can install it even if you don't have physical access to the machine.

    Check out the optional remote install where they tell you how to install a trojan version of their software:

    http://www.spectorsoft.com/products/eBlaster_Windo ws/remoteinstall.html

  163. Re:blocked at work? Roll your own by mlong · · Score: 2

    At that point, you can use imap(s) and horde/IMP [horde.org] to create your own webmail service...

    Don't bother with horde. Get Squirrelmail and you won't regret it.

    --
    //m
  164. Does anyone... by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 1

    ... actually use hotmail for anything other than a spam folder when you need to sign up for a website that requires an e-mail address?

    I wouldn't trust MS to hold on to any information I considered important.

    --
    "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
  165. "Breathe on your own time, dammit!" by tlambert · · Score: 2

    "Breathe on your own time, dammit!"

    Had to be said.

    -- Terry

  166. SpectorSoft gets a copy of the Email, too. by Firebird77 · · Score: 1

    InterHack reports that SpectorSoft sends all captured data (this includes the emails) through their own servers. Employers that monitor their employees with this software will also be giving Spectorsoft a clear view of what their employees are doing. Proprietary and otherwise sensitive data are certain to fall into Spectorsoft's hands. Who is Spectorsoft, and why should you trust them to keep your secrets? Read the report here.

  167. I agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If as a parent you have to snoop your kids e-mail account (yeah, it's wrong. Yeah, the kids will find out. No, they won't -nor should they - forgive you) then I have to suggest that there are deeper problems than e-mail in the kids life.

    I'm sure a lot of people won't agree. I think this is sad.

    I look at it this way, if you're snooping it's either because

    a) the kid refuses to tell you what's going on in their lives (u're already not a part of it)

    b) you feel you can't believe what the kid tells you (therefore there's a lack of trust on both parties, and when kids lose trust in their parents, snooping won't do any good).

    I guess I'm saying that parents that think they need this probably would do better to read a book or learn to treat their kids with the same respect and honesty that parents demand (and the software won't do a bit of good).

    Besides, who are we kidding? Parents (maybe not /. ers) are gonig to need help from their kids in setting up the software in the 1st place!

  168. What you have to keep in mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The companies are only acting in their best intrest. Anything that YOU as an employee send out from their establishment, they are liable for.

    I dont blame them
    If you want to make a 'private / personal' email, do it at home. NOT at work. IF you are using your companies resources, it is certainly NOT private.

    Dont know if this has been said before but to lazy to sift through the 500 something posts that are made

  169. Yes but by einhverfr · · Score: 2

    This is not an ideal solution. Basically you get a lot of spam, some personal email, and maybe the occasional company memo. Especailly if you monitor inbound mail, I think there are some issues not only with privacy but also with effective security and draning resources from places where they would be better spent.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  170. Copyright Infringment by gnovos · · Score: 2

    Never fear, the law is here... Don't worry that your company is secretly copying all your emails, becuase you own the copyright on each and every one of them. And even if you have signed them away, your friends happen to own the copyright on all the emails comign into the system.

    It will become very expensive very quickly for companies to keep copies of employee emails when people begin sueing for license fees ($4,000 per email, right?)...

    --
    "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
  171. Our real hope is by einhverfr · · Score: 2

    That these companies will simply lose competitive advantage from the waisted time and energy monitoring the emails.

    Remember, though, where I work we have a site license for VMWare. This does NOT prevent me from installing GPG and incryping the memmo with a GPG key on a floppy disk and then attaching it to an outgoing email (or uploading it to my sftp server at home).

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  172. Is it just me? by Tink2000 · · Score: 1

    I really don't agree with the software being offered here (as apparently much of you don't either). I have had internet access for just about as long as commercial ISPs have been offering it (for a cheap price, naturally), and to me it seems that if there are employees screwing off on the company's dime, it is just as much the fault of the manager of that employee as it is of the employee themselves. You motivate your people to take pride in thier work, and they have good output, despite the fact that they might check yahoomail or /. from time to time. If the output is quality work, who really cares what happened between instruction of task and completetion? (barring of course, those fools who surf pr0n all day on work and subject themselves and the company to a fat sexual harrassment lawsuit, of course.)

  173. the end of loyalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Loyalty works both ways. I think some of the children on slashdot forget that.

    I respect that your company understands the concept of loyalty, but you're in the minority. These days, you can work your ass off for most companies, but when the time comes that you need some reciprocation, there's none to be found.

    For example: My wife's supervisor got pregnant and had to take a sabbatical to go on doctor-requested bed rest for about 6 weeks. She was a hard worker, but the second week she was gone, they were already training her replacement. When she comes back, they're moving her into a new position -- the one that nobody wants, the one that temps quit after a day. It's a way of forcing her out without firing her.

    I've seen this happen many, many times. It's just the new modern style of management. So I find myself reluctant to push as hard as I once used to. Where I used to volunteer to do the hard jobs, only to have them expect me to do them from now on, now I take a wait-and-see approach. I evaluate multiple factors before I take on additional responsibility. And I cringe when I watch the new guy get screwed.

    Ultimately, I think businesses have just gotten too big. In a small business, relationships really make a difference. You feel like you're in it together. You feel like a team. In most large companies, though, that feeling of teamwork is gone. Managers put on phony smiles and give lifeless cheerleading routines. They often hate their jobs, too.

    At any rate, if you've got loyalty, you're doing something right. Keep it up. Don't let your business get so big that it loses the small things that make it special.

    1. Re:the end of loyalty by SJC_at_work · · Score: 1

      If you like your wife's supervisor, and feel like helping her, you can inform her that she has a case for 'Constructive Dismissal' in situations such as these. SJC

  174. This software would have saved WALT DISNEY by newestbob · · Score: 0
    the embarrassment of having one of their brilliant dotcom execs get arrested for soliticing sex from underage girls while he was supposed to be working

    I think that any responible company would get this software to protect themselves from the Patrick Naughtons of this world.

  175. Re:blocked at work? Roll your own by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2
    Unless they're blocking everything under the sun, chances are that they won't get around to blocking you. -- Besides: if they're blocking hotmail because all the nubes are downloading and running viruses, then the fact that you know enough to set up your own webmail would be an indicator that you (hopefully) know better than that.

    (Just don't go selling access to your home box to all the nubes that download and run viruses).

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  176. Are there any free alternatives? by Reziac · · Score: 2

    Not to encourage the concept, but there are times when it's necessary to know what's going on, if only to protect yourself.

    I have a good friend who due to a nasty personal situation (not of her making), is in need of a keystroke logger with capabilities to match EBlaster (*must* be able to capture mail sent and received thru Hotmail and the like).

    But my friend really can't afford EBlaster's price. So...

    Does anyone know of a good free equivalent that runs on Win32? It must hide itself from the reasonably computer-literate (tho need not be geek-proof -- just staying out of Task Manager would be sufficient) and the ability to forward captured mail, a la EBlaster, is a major plus.

    My friend thanks you in advance for your help.

    (Email me if you don't want to be seen posting such stuff: rividh at earthlink dot net)

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  177. Oh, you mean the one-fourth amendment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The right to be secure in my person, place, articles and effects against unresonable search and seizure has been egregiously trampled by the War on Drugs(tm) and the War against Terrorism(tm), so much so, that cops derisively refer to the fourth amendment as the one-fourth amendment.

    Arguablely the 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th and 14th amendments and their penumbras enumerate a right to privacy. However the fourth amendment has been thougoughly castrated by incompetant judges and power-mad politicians. I wouldn't hold my breath on positive change until after a liberal Congress and Executive branch has been elected and liberal Judges appointed to the Supreme Court.

    And by liberal, I do not mean Democrat, since those plutarch assholes are just as worthless as the Republicans!

  178. buttinski by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taco's spelling is won-dur-ful as usual. It's buttinski, not -sky.

  179. Re:blocked at work? Roll your own by Emperor+Palpatine · · Score: 1

    Even better IMHO, give OpenWebmail a try. Easier to install than IMP/Horde and Squirrelmail really only works well if you're running IMAP.

  180. Excuse me?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Violation of state or local law?? These guys really are slimy if they don't warn customers that Uncle Sam's law enforcers would be involved.

  181. How to tell if your company is using this... by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 1

    Write a little program that accepts SMTP or POP connections on localhost and then just loop some rediculously large garbage messages through those ports. If eBlaster grabs sent emails based on port activity and forwards them to the boss, you should know if your company is using it about the time your company's email server fills up and crashes. Of course you might have a little explaining to do...

    The keystroke logger bothers me a bit. That is very invasive. Of course it wouldn't be too hard to have a program that sends "My boss is a tool" a few thousand times to notepad or Word while you're away at lunch either.

    --

    'Same speed C but faster'
  182. What did we all agree to at hiring? by Ringthane · · Score: 1

    For my job (I do off-shift engineering support in the semiconductor industry), I had to sign a conditions of employment agreement... It had all the usual intellectual property clauses I'd expect from a tech job -- but it also had stipulations that company resources (phones, faxes, data systems) were for business use only... For anyone who signs such an agreement, hey, there are no expectations of privacy in the areas controlled.
    And, yep, I've seen people fired for violations of the "business use" guidelines. If you sign away a right to privacy in order to get a job, it's not really being violated if the company snoops on your email.

    --
    Friends help you move... Real friends help you move bodies...
  183. Yeah sure. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Then companies have no right to call us out of hours or making us work overtime with no pay, no matter what the situation is.

    Most sensible people know they have to be flexible to meet work requirements, I expect a sensible company to do likewise.

    BTW all my posts are made mainly from my office during idle moments :-P

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  184. Re:Just Use Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YHBT man, YHBT....

  185. Get the facts straight by DnemoniX · · Score: 1

    Reasonable expectaion of privacy is established under the guidelines of our policy, which every employee signs. By signing the documents they testify and agree to this. Period thats it. The policy has went through several lawyers and is 100% enforcable in court. There is nothing to sue us about you moron. We haven't taken any action against the guy as of yet. That is a matter for our lawyers. And it sure as hell is not illegal. The whole point is he is a registered sex ofender. You may live in some liberal state but here we have laws. If you are a registered sex offender there are disclosure laws. You move into a new city, the residents of that city are to be notified about you, your address and your criminal history. It is the law, no exceptions! I didn't write them but I happen to work at a place that enforces them. As for backround checks, they are only completed on people working in certain areas. They are not cost effective to do for every employee at $1000 each.

  186. Re: Hotmail: Not Safe For Work? by Bob+Bitchen · · Score: 1

    >Corporations will most likely argue that, because
    >of sites like Internal Memos, companies need to
    >keep a tighter grip on the information that flows
    >in and out of their companies. But attempting to
    >spying on private e-mail??

    Paprikash, I say!

    I think you're logic is flawed here. You're assuming that
    leaks occur predominantly via email.
    But everyone knows that email is unsafe.
    Maybe there are people stupid enough or that just don't care
    if they are caught.
    I bet most use their own
    secure method to post.
    ssh to your own box and then upload later from
    home.

    Maybe internalmemos will post a graph showing
    percentage from real companies vs. ISPs.
    (although that may not prove anything since
    the net has become "blurred")

    And as for spying on personal email,
    it's no longer personal once the bits are traveling over
    their "wire".

    This is not new insight, right?

    --
    http://tinyurl.com/3t236
  187. EEWWW by jbuilder · · Score: 2

    Someone at the EPA is *spunking* on keyboards? How THAT is seriously SICK....

    --
    Polymorphism -- It's what you make of it.
  188. what? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

    That's like saying that a company can't force you to take a company administered colonoscopy unless you fart. (Assuming farting is against company policy.)

  189. Er... by Dthoma · · Score: 1

    ...was Hotmail particularly secure to begin with?

    --

    Note to M1-ers: a curt but otherwise insightful message is not "Flamebait" or "Troll".

  190. To be blindingly obvious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...airplane pilots on commercial carriers are forbidden to drink for up to 24 hours prior to flights as this affects their reaction speeds. ...a lawyer who is consistently drunk before showing up in court may not do a great job defending you from murder or a substantial civil judgment. ...a doctor about to go on shift should probably not have been doing an all-night rave with E less than an hour before. ...YMMV.