Slashdot Mirror


AOL Selling AIM Gateway/Listener To Employers

PizzaFace writes "After pushing free instant messaging to more than 100,000,000 users, AOL is now selling AIM-monitoring software to businesses that want to monitor and control the messaging of their employees. AIM Enterprise Gateway will reportedly sell for about $35/employee/year."

267 comments

  1. Yet another reason to use Trillian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because you can encrypt your messages.

    1. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by NightRain · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Except of course that most employers that are willing to spy on your IM's probably aren't that keen on you running non standard version of IM software...

      Ray

    2. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by MrFredBloggs · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, right.

      "Hey boss, Karen in Accounts sent out 54 megs of messages last month"
      "What were they about?"
      "Dunno, they were all just squiggly characters"
      "Ok, well lets just assume its work related. After all, like all other companies, we use pokey messaging software to talk to clients. Let me know when it looks like she's wasting my time and money."

    3. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this idiocy insightful? This is about companies using a special version of AIM as their internal instant messenger service. This is not about users who install the regular AIM or any other messenger on their machine.

    4. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by Kaa42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Still, as far as I know Trillian does nothing to prevent a man-in-the-middle attack (no certificates, no way of knowing 'who' you're talking to.

      The attack is especially easily performed in this situation when your employer has complete control of all gateways through which all your packages has to pass. (Assuming it is external clients you would be devulging their secrets to)

      I see from their site that they are working on "More features and greater security enhancements" to come "soon", but at this moment I wouldn't trust the security of SecureIM too much

      --
      .oO Kaa Oo.
    5. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by WowTIP · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd rather say "yet another reason not to use any client using a protocol owned(!) by AOL". Jabber looks like a better choise for each passing day.

      If I now just could convince everyone on my 100+ contactlist to change from icq to jabber... ;P

      --

      --

      "I'm surfin the dead zone
      In the twilight, unknown"
    6. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by Tassach · · Score: 5, Informative

      That is why you open a SSH tunnel to a trusted outside server with access to a squid proxy, and set your AIM proxy to point to the forwarded port on localhost: ssh -L 3128:proxyhost:3128 trusteduser@trustedhost Substitute plink for ssh if using Windows.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    7. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by phyxeld · · Score: 2

      Have you gotten that to work though? Just pointing the AIM client at localhost and tunneling port 5190 sure doesn't seem to work... I'll have to give it another shot with the proxy settings. Currently I'm quite happy running naim on a remote system with screen installed. Always on, always encrypted, and to my immediate upstream all they see is the same ssh connection thats already carrying my mail tunnels. If you tweak the colors it's almost usable in Terminal.app, but I usually run it in Eterm.

      --
      __
      Choose mnemonic identifiers. If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem. - Larry Wall
    8. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by Zeinfeld · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Because you can encrypt your messages.

      Odd thing is that the actual AOL announcement was actually about trolling out precisely this kind of service. The Washington post take on AOL's move is kinda wierd, employers can already monitor AIM use, what was announced was the encryption piece. The Wash post mentions this, but only mid way through:

      Instead, AOL plans to offer private companies and federal agencies a premium version of the service early next year that will enable employees to send encrypted instant messages that can only be read by designated, registered recipients. America Online is developing the encrypted system in partnership with VeriSign Inc., an online security firm.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    9. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by Tassach · · Score: 2
      It's very easy to get working assuming you have a friendly *nix box you can connect to outside of work (In my case, this is a linux box hanging off my cable modem at home). In my case, the *nix box runs sshd on port 22 of my public address, and squid on port 3128 on a private subnet.

      Using plink as my SSH client on my work machine, I run:
      plink -L 3128:localhost:3128 -C tassach@ssh.rapiertech.com Then I set the AIM proxy to localhost:3128 and i'm good to go.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    10. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by rocca · · Score: 1

      Or if your messages are so private and numerous to avoid detection, perhaps you could just work during business hours.

    11. Re:Yet another reason to use Trillian by Teknogeek · · Score: 2

      >> America Online is developing the encrypted system in partnership with VeriSign Inc., an online
      >> security firm.

      I fear the arbitration policies already.

      --
      I mod down anyone who uses M$ in their posts. I like to live on the edge.
  2. Why a big deal? by NightRain · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Employers already monitor staff's email etc, why is this any different? I mean you're on their time, I can sort of understand why they won't want you wasting it on your own thing.

    AOL is just catering for that market. I don't see anything insidious, evil, or otherwise overly noteworthy about this...

    Ray

    1. Re:Why a big deal? by sirket · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is a big deal because AOL went through a LOT of trouble to make AOL a pain in the ass to filter with a firewall.

      Now they come up with a solution designed to do exactly that? That bothers me.

      (You can block access to AOL's login servers, or configure a proxy to block it, but that is not easy when they keep changing the protocol and servers. The fact that AIM operates over port 80 makes it even more difficult to block. MSN and ICQ are worse though because there are more servers to block and they can use almost any port.)

    2. Re:Why a big deal? by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      I don't see anything insidious, evil, or otherwise overly noteworthy about this...

      You are exactly right. What's next, a Slashdot petition to ban Sun from including snoop with Solaris?

    3. Re:Why a big deal? by sirket · · Score: 2

      Ok they did not go through a LOT of trouble, but they did make it a lot more difficult than it had to be to filter. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is open for debate.

    4. Re:Why a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Employers already monitor staff's email etc, why is this any different? I mean you're on their time, I can sort of understand why they won't want you wasting it on your own thing.

      AOL is just catering for that market. I don't see anything insidious, evil, or otherwise overly noteworthy about this...


      You missed the point of the article. The article itself was noteworthy because AIM has not been leveraged for financial gain until now.
    5. Re:Why a big deal? by Ponty · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a big deal because it's brilliant! It's a fantastic business plan and a wonderful idea. Get everyone to use your program such that it becomes a scourge, and make people pay to get rid of it. I love it.

      They even made it so that they could be the only ones to kill it.

      Brilliant! It makes me laugh out loud, what a wonderful move this is for AOL!

    6. Re:Why a big deal? by BShive · · Score: 1

      Beat me to it, this was my thinking too when I read the article.

      It's already possible to snoop on IM conversations, and it should be EXPECTED by anyone using a corporate network for personal use when they own/pay the infrastructure. If you're stupid enough to do something illict/illegal on a corporate network you deserve to be caught.

    7. Re:Why a big deal? by 1155 · · Score: 1

      I thought it was port 5192.. but the last time I checked was 2 years ago...

    8. Re:Why a big deal? by Inda · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This sort of argument always goads me and I'll tell you why.

      I was surfing around on my home PC last week and found an interesting application that could save me some time at work. I downloaded it, put it on a floppy disk, took it to work next day, installed it and saved myself 20 minutes work for the week. This was on my time; I would never have been surfing at work to find it. I have saved my boss two days work this year, and next year, the year after and so on.

      Should I charge my boss for this? It doesn't really seem worth to me. It only took me a minute.

      Should I complain that my work life is interfering with my home life because I sometimes think about the job even when I'm not there? I think he might laugh at me. This is the year 2002 and the boundaries, rightly or wrongly, between home and work are close.

      If a company cannot trust its staff to make the odd instant message or personnel phone call then they probably are doomed. If they have the money to spend spying on staff like this then there is something terribly wrong with their attitude and I wouldn't want to work for them. If someone in the company is not pulling their weight because they are chatting all day then it will show - you don't need spying software for this.

      It's about a bit of give and take. Not spying on conversations with the missus.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    9. Re:Why a big deal? by phil+reed · · Score: 3, Informative

      Officially, yes. However AIM has this obnoxious habit of trying all sorts of non-standard ports. One network I set up (the managers wanted AIM shut down), I had to put up a http proxy server and close off port 80 from the users, and it snuck out port 53 (DNS). The AIM programmers went out of their way to evade firewalls.

      --

      ...phil
      "For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
    10. Re:Why a big deal? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Employers already monitor staff's email etc, why is this any different?

      Ease off the throttle there, Captain Capitalist. A few points to discuss:

      • Your employer does not assume ownership of your rights of person during business hours. You can take a non-business related phone call and use the bathroom during business hours, and it is illegal for them to monitor any of those activities.
      • While monitoring IM's doesn't yet fall under the protection of wiretap laws, there is something tragically ironic about a company which provides a free chat tool which will port scan your firewall to find a way out to the internet, and then sell the managers a tool to monitor its activities. If you think this is respectable business practice, I bet you can't wait to see the egress!
    11. Re:Why a big deal? by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 3, Informative

      It definitely is a sneaky program. I noticed it even trying to connect out on port 20/tcp trying to masquerade as an active ftp data session. Thanks AOL dickheads. You couldn't isolate it to ONE port and let the network administrators choose whether to allow it or not could you? In my book that's the number one reason to ban AIM from the network even if it means filtering all AOL address space. Fuck 'em.

    12. Re:Why a big deal? by NightRain · · Score: 2

      True enough, if a little idealistic. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work like that. Quite often you have underpaid staff that don't really want to be there. They don't do anything for their employer that they do not need to, and the employer doesn't do anything for them. Customer Support, Data Entry etc come to mind immediately.

      Sure, in a small division/business, or if the staff member is somewhat satisfied in their job, the risk may be worth it, but in a large company, where it's all completely impersonal, this sort of behaviour is to be expected

      Ray

    13. Re:Why a big deal? by buswolley · · Score: 1
      """"I mean you're on their time, I can sort of understand why they won't want you wasting it on your own thing.""""

      On their time hunh? That is the biggest misconception. ) "Why do we spend so much of our time fighting for our freedoms, only to throw it out the window, when we go to work?"(1) That is a huge % of our lives that we spend at work.

      (1) {copyright of Green Mars, Kim Stanely Robinson, Bantom Books}

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    14. Re:Why a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AIM runs over port 5190, not port 80.

      ,
      tankdawg7

    15. Re:Why a big deal? by NightRain · · Score: 2

      You aren't giving up your freedom if you are there of your own free will. You can walk away, find another job, or start your own business whenever you want. And that IS freedom.

      But from the employer's point of view, sure you can choose to make a phone call, surf the net or whatever, but expecting the company to then pay you to do it? Not so much... And if this is a problem within the company, then such software is useful for them.

      Ray

    16. Re:Why a big deal? by eyeball · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's a big deal because it's brilliant! It's a fantastic business plan and a wonderful idea. Get everyone to use your program such that it becomes a scourge, and make people pay to get rid of it. I love it.

      They even made it so that they could be the only ones to kill it.

      Brilliant! It makes me laugh out loud, what a wonderful move this is for AOL!


      This reminds me of the Telco telemarketer story on /. a short time ago (selling call blocking to customers, then selling a method to defeat that to the telemarketers, then selling...)

      So AOL gives away IM service, makes it impossible to block, but then sells a sniffer. What's next? They'll sell super-encrypted service for a fee to the user base, then a few years down the road, they'll sell an unencryption ad-on to the sniffer, then...

      --

      _______
      2B1ASK1
    17. Re:Why a big deal? by scoove · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now they come up with a solution designed to do exactly that?

      Not exactly a new business model - "get employees hooked on something for free that is a pain in the ass for businesses, then offer an expensive solution to fix it to the businesses."

      Remember Pointcast? Early innovator of "push"? Gave away their news receiver/news screen saver and overwhelmed company T1 lines? They later came out with a sort of proxy system for business subscribers that allowed a single thread to be downloaded and then fed to the inside users.

      Apparently they didn't sell enough of them. Pointcast as it was known is gone and now points to Infogate, the acquirer of Pointcast technology (can we say 'assets only'?)

      Then again, maybe there's something to this break it and offer a fix approach. Imagine IPOs of virus and trojan-writing entities with awesome virus protection scheme revenues. Or what if chinanet.cn (world class sponsorer of spam and intrusion attempts) offered a protection racket?

      Internet Insurance, now there's a business model. From that perspective, AOL may have finally found a profitable model.

      *scoove*

    18. Re:Why a big deal? by Havoc'ing · · Score: 1

      Anyone heard of desktop policies? I've got over a 1000 users and lock'em up tight.

    19. Re:Why a big deal? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2

      These are two different issues. One is the use of resources, and the other is privacy. It may be appropriate for an employer to ask about an employee's use of the phone for non-business related calls, or to lock down th desktop to prevent unauthorized software installation. That is a separate issue from the question of actually spying on the content of phone or IM communications.

    20. Re:Why a big deal? by RevDobbs · · Score: 1

      sure, it's port 5192... and 5190, and it can proxy itself over HTTP, and servers have a gaggle of IP addresses, so without blocking access to every conceivable service on half of the internet, there ain't much you can do.

      Of course, you can run NT/2000 and not let anyone install software... or migrate to UNIX desktops, which has the added bonus of users not knowing how to load 12MB images as their wallpaper or install CPU-crunching screen savers on database servers.

    21. Re:Why a big deal? by Disoculated · · Score: 1

      What's the big deal here? Blocking AIM is a cinch, for anyone who actually cares on examining the problem. Block out the toc.oscar.aol.com hosts and the login.oscar.aol.com hosts on your firewall. Or just 64.12.161.x and 64.12.163.x networks. You'd think this was rocket science.

    22. Re:Why a big deal? by sagien · · Score: 1

      I rather think its genius of AOL to do this.

      It's called capitalism. Yay!

    23. Re:Why a big deal? by CharlieG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess you've never worked at a job where they DON'T allow personal phone calls, OR monitor bathroom breaks - Yes bathroom breaks! Work on an assembly line, and they limit the number of BR breaks

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    24. Re:Why a big deal? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's noteworthy is that AOL is getting companies to pay AOL to fix a problem AOL created themselves. Pretty sweet deal. Kinda like the Far Side cartoon where a guy gets a brick thrown through his window, and attached to the brick is an advertisement for a window glass repair shop.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    25. Re:Why a big deal? by sunilhari · · Score: 1
      I don't think AOL is going to make quite the killing on this app as they expect - most large corporations already completely block AIM/AOL access, for exactly the productivity reasons mentioned in other threads. And especially given the high cost of monitoring, complete blockage is much more cost-effective.

      If people want to communicate with each other "real time", that's what the phone is for. As any college student will tell you, AIM is possibly -the worst- time waster available, and simply blocking access lets employees focus on what they're PAID to do.

    26. Re:Why a big deal? by ruvreve · · Score: 2

      It is not that big of a deal to block all IM traffic on your firewall. You tell your junior sysadmin that once a month he is responsible for testing if any IM programs can be used on the company network.

      All he has to do is sit on the firewall and then log into AIM/MSN/YAHOO noting what IP is accessed and block that IP. And during the summers if you have an intern they should be an even cheaper solution depending on how much you pay them.

      Your diligent IM'ers may find that they can use IM occasionally if/when AOL/MSN/YAHOO change server addresses frequently.

    27. Re:Why a big deal? by ScuzzMonkey · · Score: 2

      What I tell people is "as long as it's free, and doesn't obligate us to anything in the license, and it doesn't take IT time to install it, go ahead--but if it breaks anything, you're at the bottom of the list".

      That covers software; personal use is another matter, but I figure you should judge based on whether or not the person is getting the tasks they are assigned accomplished quickly and competently, not how much of the rest of their time is spent doing something not 'work related'. It depends on the exact nature of the position, of course, but too often employers assume that ten minutes spent doing anything other than your job means ten minutes faster your job could have been accomplished, and that's usually not the case.

      --
      No relation to Happy Monkey
    28. Re:Why a big deal? by darkweasel · · Score: 0

      But why is that ? I'd argue that the large companies should care more for their employees. So what if they make only 9 billon instead of 10 billion in net profit. If their employees are happy, then every one is happy. Corperate America's habit of squeezing every last bit of work for the very least pay makes for a bunch of people who hate their lives.

      I'm glad I work for a company who's first obligation is to their customers, and next to their employees. As long as we are profitable, we are not focused $.

      --
      .sig.
    29. Re:Why a big deal? by Tassach · · Score: 2
      You are forgetting the prime axiom: the Internet detects censorship as damage and routes around it. If your users can talk to a single arbitrary external server on one port, they potentially have access to everything on the 'net. SSH + Corkscrew talking to an outside proxy server can overcome just about every imaginable firewalling scheme known to man.

      All AIM does is hide a lot of the complexity from the (l)user, which is IMHO a good thing. From the user's perspective, this is unquestionably The Right Thing: you just install it and it figures out how to connect to the server. If they didn't build this kind of flexibility in, the service would have never taken off and would be a nightmare to support.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    30. Re:Why a big deal? by Quixadhal · · Score: 2

      It's just another step back towards the days when an employer was a fancy name for master. Once upon a time, your employer had absolute control over your life, they could do whatever they wanted provided their own lord didn't forbid it. This was called serfdom.

      After many centuries, the politicol power of the kings was diminished and the efforts of labor unions brought about the ideas of civil rights, and even the rights of workers to not be fired because they were 5 minutes late for work after their leg was chopped off in an auto accident on the way in.

      Many employers would like a return to the Good Old Days of serfdom. No forms to fill out, no pesky civil liberties to deal with. An employee lived to do the bidding of his or her employer, and their own life meant nothing to them. Ahhh, take those pesky instant messanger clients for an example.

      Which would YOU prefer? An employee who is content and does his job well, though wasting a few minutes of each hour to talk with other humans, or post things to silly discussion forums? Or one who devotes ALL his time to putting out the minimum level of production to keep from being fired, all the while plotting the death and dismemberment of everyone above him?

      There has to be SOME level of trust given by your employer. They have to trust that you'll do your job to the best of your ability, and likewise you have to trust that they'll give you work you can actually do. To micro-manage to the level of spying on email, phone conversations, or instant messanger use is to say "We think of you only as unit #45712 -- do only what we assign you. The spoons are counted nightly." Obviously, such an employer not only doesn't deserve you as an employee, but they also have too much free-time on their hands (or too many middle-management types on the payroll).

      Having said that, I never understood why p2p networks of all kinds (messaging, file transfer, etc) don't encrypt ALL the data being sent? Encryption is easy these days people, use it!

    31. Re:Why a big deal? by Tassach · · Score: 2
      OK so your users don't have local admin rights on their machines. Can they save an .exe file and run it? If so, they can run PuTTY and tunnel out. Oops. Back to the drawing board...

      OK, they can't save and run .exe files now. Can they run Java applets? If so, they can run javassh and tunnel out. Oops. Back to the drawing board...

      OK now you have them locked down so tight they can't surf, can't run java applets, can't save files, and so forth. Unfortunately, they can't do anything productive either. Oops. Back to the drawing board...

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    32. Re:Why a big deal? by syntheticsanityOS · · Score: 1, Insightful

      it's a market they helped create (with a free program no less)

    33. Re:Why a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      So AOL gives away IM service, makes it impossible to block, but then sells a sniffer. What's next? They'll sell super-encrypted service for a fee to the user base, then a few years down the road, they'll sell an unencryption ad-on to the sniffer, then...

      Is it just me, or does that business plan sound familiar?

    34. Re:Why a big deal? by Ponty · · Score: 0, Troll

      Sell a Dr. Seuss book, teach kids how to read and ... continue to sell them books? I don't see the parallel.

    35. Re:Why a big deal? by Dephex+Twin · · Score: 1

      They also don't tend to have computers at the employees' "desks", because they would just get whisked away and end up jammed in the machinery down the line.

      --

      If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
    36. Re:Why a big deal? by ThePlumber2 · · Score: 1

      What are you an idiot? You would take this shit software to work and install it on your bosses computer? All your shit is being monitored at the im hub fool. That means, if it saves you 20 min to lose company ip, then it saves shit, not to mention the time that it takes to get the crap software off of your employers computer.

      This is why companies have security policies.

      What are you some fucking lawyer? Lawyers always do stupid shit like this. With customer sensitive data no less.

      --
      Thanks, Steve
    37. Re:Why a big deal? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2

      You are forgetting the prime axiom: the Internet detects censorship as damage and routes around it. If your users can talk to a single arbitrary external server on one port, they potentially have access to everything on the 'net. SSH + Corkscrew talking to an outside proxy server can overcome just about every imaginable firewalling scheme known to man.

      You are forgetting that these users are employees. It is the prerogative of the company to decide who gets to use what and 'routing around it' is a potentially sackable offense.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    38. Re:Why a big deal? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2

      OK, so you remove all these restrictions and tell them the rules and the penalty (up to and including firing). Now They can do their job and you get rid of the slackers.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    39. Re:Why a big deal? by lordgert · · Score: 1
      Your employer does not assume ownership of your rights of person during business hours. You can take a non-business related phone call and use the bathroom during business hours, and it is illegal for them to monitor any of those activities.

      I was working at an investment bank last summer and they most certainly can and do monitor all phone calls/emails/etc. They make sure you're aware of it in advance, and then it becomes legal. Anything you conduct on their time/computers/resources/etc can and will be monitored.
    40. Re:Why a big deal? by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      "Your employer does not assume ownership of your rights of person during business hours. You can take a non-business related phone call and use the bathroom during business hours, and it is illegal for them to monitor any of those activities."

      As my father likes to say, "Wrong, moosebreath." If you're making a call on a company phone, or sending email from your company account, the company can monitor or record anything it damn well pleases (to make things clean and easy, it should create an official HR-blessed AUP, but it doesn't really HAVE to). Hell, the company can put bugs in the conference rooms, if it wants - the space and communications devices belong to the company.

    41. Re:Why a big deal? by SirCrashALot · · Score: 0

      My school has local security policies. in effect you can only run their applications like word etc. Its a registry thing, setup by a login script. Of course, since it is win98, Word VBA lets you run programs and modify the registry, even though regedit is disabled. The end result is that one can edit the registry to their wishes, crash Explorer with alt-ctrl-del, which reloads the registry settings into explorer and removes any policies. I have done this many times at my school because they limit what i can run, and the lab admins like me and dont care, but can't allow me access.

      My point is that client side security is basically null, there are hunders of other ways to "unsecure" a system EVEN with 2000/XP.

    42. Re:Why a big deal? by zentigger · · Score: 1
      It looks to me like AOL has really only made a good argument for the IT manager to include "will not use AIM" as a clause in the corporate acceptable use guidlines. Then anyone using AIM is instantly kicked out onto the streets where they probably belong anyway...

      --

      the above is my personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect that of the little voices in my head

    43. Re:Why a big deal? by drbyte · · Score: 1
      Everything is monitored. Be it by the employer, or by the federal government.

      As to how efficient it all is, that is the question. AOL is basically trying to have fun with a market that has potential, hoping it'll be a cash cow. It may, or it may not.

      With such licensing schemes, I somehow doubt it.

    44. Re:Why a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah right, like all the girls who work in the financial aid department and the computer illiterate numbnuts working in sales are gonna install PuTTY.

    45. Re:Why a big deal? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      I was surfing around on my home PC last week and found an interesting application that could save me some time at work. I downloaded it, put it on a floppy disk, took it to work next day, installed it and saved myself 20 minutes work for the week. This was on my time; I would never have been surfing at work to find it. I have saved my boss two days work this year, and next year, the year after and so on.
      Should I charge my boss for this? It doesn't really seem worth to me. It only took me a minute.

      Guess who'll catch hell when his boss finds out he loafed for 20 minutes this week? Hint: it ain't me!

    46. Re:Why a big deal? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Which would YOU prefer? An employee who is content and does his job well, though wasting a few minutes of each hour to talk with other humans, or post things to silly discussion forums?
      Or one who devotes ALL his time to putting out the minimum level of production to keep from being fired, all the while plotting the death and dismemberment of everyone above him?
      With the example coming from above, can you blame underlings for wanting to kill and dismember everyone above them?
    47. Re:Why a big deal? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2

      My point is that client side security is basically null, there are hunders of other ways to "unsecure" a system EVEN with 2000/XP.

      My point is that this is a social issue. Even win95 and its crappy security can keep you out if it's backed up by a lab admin that actually cares what you do.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    48. Re:Why a big deal? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      As my lawyer likes to say, "Try it and see".

      Monitoring telephone calls without the permission of at least one party of the call is illegal in all 50 states.

      Even if you want to go there, you can't disprove my point. Employers are required by law to provide for your personal safety, as well as any disability you have. They also can't force you to have sex with them. Point: at will employment != slavery.

    49. Re:Why a big deal? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      Ease off the throttle there, Captain Proliteriate.

      I popped popcorn at Wal Mart for two years, and despite draconian loss prevention procedures, and Victorian HR practices, including being locked in the building to work off the clock, none of the bathrooms had cameras in them.

    50. Re:Why a big deal? by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      Here's the employment agreement: our acceptable use policy for our company property notes that we (the company) reserve the right to monitor your conversations at any time. Don't like it? Don't work here. There are a certain array of _explicitly_ defined limitations on employment at will (can't fire for being black, can't fire for not having sex, can't fire for being deaf if the job doesn't require hearing, etc.). Beyond that, it's fair game.

    51. Re:Why a big deal? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

      If your state is a "one party" wiretap law state, then you are in the clear and your employees are stupid.

      If not, then your company is in violation of criminal law. Criminal liability cannot be waived by contract.

    52. Re:Why a big deal? by sirket · · Score: 2

      Actually, it runs over any port it wants to. It starts out on 5190. It will then switch to any other port to try to get out.

      -sirket

  3. Going to war using AIM? by RobertTaylor · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Ritter anticipates that encrypted instant messaging will appeal greatly to federal agencies that want secure, interagency instant messaging. "Our military and intelligence customers are more interested in the secure version," Ritter said."

    Jeez, better off with RogerWilco than AIM to communicate on the battlefield ;)

    1. Re:Going to war using AIM? by gruhnj · · Score: 1

      The grunts on the ground are not going to use this stuff period. When you can talk much faster than you can type, this will go nowhere. OTOH, their commanders will love this. On a battlefield the person that is in charge of a particualar area might get changed on a frequent basis and, more importantly, its probably the person you need to talk to the most that just changed. For combat support units, this would be great. No more setting up phone lines everywhere as well as computer cable, you just IM the guy and you know that he understands and even better you get instant knowledge of if he is alive and kicking. It would jsut be another piece of the puzzle of automating the force.If their commander was smart enough to use it, the flow of info would be wonderful.

      That said, most of the commanders are in a PHB type position in combat support, not to mention a distrust of the leading edge especialy in tech. Most of them use their computers soley for email, the enlisted do the rest.

      PFC Gruhn
      U.S. Army

  4. other messaging programs by xo0m · · Score: 2, Interesting

    this could help move more and more users to use alternate messaging utilities in fear of getting fired from sending IMs to their friends...msn anyone?

    1. Re:other messaging programs by Alpha_Nerd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh yeah, great idea...

      Use a product from a giant evil corporation trying to get away from a giant evil corporation!

      I'm sure M$ won't catch on to this stuff... *rolleyes*

      I wouldn't be suprised if M$ already was monitoring your communications on msn...

    2. Re:other messaging programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MSN? Worked out how to stop it from logging you off when you`re in the middle of writing a message to someone yet?
      Why not just use email? That way you can reply in your own time, and not have some idiot buzzing you or saying `Are you busy? I mean, you`ve gone quiet and I didn't get an immediate reply. I know you're at work, but still...`.

    3. Re:other messaging programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worked out how to stop it from logging you off when you`re in the middle of writing a message to someone yet?

      What are you talking about? I use MSN at home and at work and I never remember it logging me out in the middle of writing a message. Perhaps you should check you internet connection?

    4. Re:other messaging programs by xo0m · · Score: 1

      basically what i was trying to say was that there are many office employees that dont know what gaim/trillian/etc is (let alone know how to install it)...infact there are equally as many office network admins that don't really do their jobs...which basically means there will be many offices with msn messenger installed by default without employees having to do a thing...thus making it much easier to turn to msn as an alternative...

    5. Re:other messaging programs by swordboy · · Score: 3, Funny

      this could help move more and more users to use alternate messaging utilities

      In other news, corporate phone bills are on the rise.

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    6. Re:other messaging programs by santajon · · Score: 0

      But M$ already does!

      Ever try sending an mp3 with it's filename the track/artist name in it to a friend over MSN messenger? Never once has it worked for me.

      And yes I am not behind a firewall or proxy.
      (I have been able to rename the same file to a generic name and gotten it to transfer!)

    7. Re:other messaging programs by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      The thing about e-mail is that if you send it from a non-personal computer (work, college?), it's virtually *guarenteed* also to be dropping into the mailbox of a few network admins. I dunno about you, but that pisses me off.

  5. encrypt it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone will have to bust out their best pig latin.. Miay otay erapay yma sbosay ntheay tshooay nheroiay dbehinay ethay ophotay rcopieay.

  6. Create the Drug, then the antidote... by EminenceFront · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now there's a pretty good subscription based service! Get people hopped up on IM'ing, then monitor their every move for lude and lavicious comments. Every Human Resources person must be loving the potential of this. No more 'downsizing' excuses, or we've eliminated the position.' Now is just, 'remember that comments you made two years ago...''

    1. Re:Create the Drug, then the antidote... by richlb · · Score: 2

      Next comes AOL Snoop-blocker, to keep your bosses from monitoring your IM conversations. For just $4.99/month.

      And introducing AOL SUPER SNOOPER. Available to businesses, it's able to monitor even more IM communications, including employees who use AOL Snoop-blocker technology. Just $55/employee.

    2. Re:Create the Drug, then the antidote... by 4of12 · · Score: 2

      [With memories of boss.el for Emacs...]

      You'll want the more sophisticated AOL Boss Spoofer continuous stegonographic translation so that phrases like:

      "Kewl! Didja see Britney's midriff last night? I swear she's gaining weight or pregnant!"
      are only visible in the realm of approved keywords with gratifying cleartext like
      "Yes, I find that our corporation's responsible and visionary management practices are beginning to pay off and be appreciated for how much they offer employees over our competitors."
      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    3. Re:Create the Drug, then the antidote... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      And then AOL Peon Buster for forging IM logs of employee activity. Never worry about another wrongful dismissal suit! Select embarrassment factor.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  7. Privacy = Bye Bye by docstrange · · Score: 5, Funny

    *friendly aol voice speaking*
    "You Got Fired!"

    --
    Remember that you are unique, just like everybody else.
    1. Re:Privacy = Bye Bye by Dog+and+Pony · · Score: 2

      Cue ICQ flower icon to the right: "Uh-oh." :)

    2. Re:Privacy = Bye Bye by the_othergy · · Score: 1

      *friendly aol voice speaking*
      "You Got Fired!"


      No no no no no... You have to use AOL's classic grammar...
      You've got fired!

  8. Is it just me or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Has anyone with a packet logger and a campus LAN been doing this for years? Mine just finds any trafic with the (html)(body right next to each other (and the close html body tags nex to each other too). I have yet to get a false positive.

    1. Re:Is it just me or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      glad mfaim doesn't waste bandwidth sending these tags.

  9. This explains a lot by georgeha · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought it was just an unfortunate coincidence when my boss and HR popped into my cube when my pants were down around my ankle due to that hot chat with an 18/f Solaris admin.

    1. Re:This explains a lot by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 5, Funny

      Solaris admins? Freak. Why can't you just be into feet like everyone else on the Internet?

    2. Re:This explains a lot by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      He must just like 18/f Solaris Admins for the "Hunchback of Notre Dame" look.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    3. Re:This explains a lot by Alsee · · Score: 2

      hot chat with an 18/f Solaris admin.

      Wow! You found an 18/f admin online? Cool.
      That's almost as good as the threesome chat I had yesterday with Alyssa Milano and her identical-twin sister. Whew, that was HOT!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  10. to hell with aol! by claude_juan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1 - for $35 an employee, it would a wiser decision for such a company to simply ban the use of aim, and either use else, or develop their own, in house. 2 - i see this as a bottom of the barrel effort by aol to generate some revenue. hopefully, this signals the beginning of a near end for aol.

    1. Re:to hell with aol! by Disoculated · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it's not a sign of AOL's demise. A lot of companies are reluctant to use free instant messaging software because they don't have any control over who's talking to who about what, who might be listening in on those conversations, and don't have anyone to talk to on the phone if they have a problem with the instant messaging client. Paying for "secure AIM" lets AIM into the coveted business market by making managers feel secure while giving them a very small benefit over the free service. Plus it lets AOL get money for something that they used to do for free.

      It's a lot like how people will rather pay for some software than use the open source version. ::sigh::

    2. Re:to hell with aol! by invenustus · · Score: 2

      I know of a much cheaper two-command method to accomplish this goal....

      1. apt-get install dsniff
      2. msgsnarf

      That'll be $35 per employee, please. No personal checks without ID.

      --
      grep -ri 'should work' /usr/src/linux | wc -l
  11. AOL is loosing it at least in germany! by viggen · · Score: 1, Interesting

    In germany AOL is already on the downward spiral, The only strong base they have are the dial up accounts,and they are growing slow,then the jumped on the broadband wagon way too late and now this, AOL lost its battle for market share in germany already this wont do anything to improve it.

  12. encrypted messages by cscibri · · Score: 1
    Instead, AOL plans to offer private companies and federal agencies a premium version of the service early next year that will enable employees to send encrypted instant messages that can only be read by designated, registered recipients. America Online is developing the encrypted system in partnership with VeriSign Inc., an online security firm.

    Hey isnt this what PGP is for? Well, it works for me, anyway....

  13. Are you thinking what I'm thinking? by iamwoodyjones · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That people already have been encrypting their messages through reverse engineered AIM protocol clients which aren't the standard one that AIM allows people to download.

    And on the flip side, people already have been snooping on AIM conversations through the regular sniffing tools that come with any standard linux distribution.

    But! If you make it official that you will remain in control of your protocol instead of opening it up, and roll your own equivalent tools up, and sell them at a decent price, then they will bite. I agree.

    However, at 35 bucks a head a year at a large company, I'd be tempted to just have the employees use a stock client distribution with/without encryption abilities and hire a technie to take care of the snooping if I care to do that. Or just ditch AOL and use one of those others ones like jabber with all the same abilites.

    But hey, sometimes you just get that knack to spend your corporate money you know?

  14. jabber by kwj8fty1 · · Score: 2

    Now is your chance to move to jabber. Jabber is an open source server/client/protocol. Some of the clients even support ssl (encrypted) messages. You have to be careful, however, as the auth is still plaintext, even using ssl. But still, jabber may be a good answer: It supports 'gateways' to AIM, yahoo, etc.

    1. Re:jabber by wraithgar · · Score: 1

      That's what we ended up doing where I work. We installed jabber, made it auth out of our company LDAP directory, then closed all other IM ports on our firewall.
      We admins are loving the security it added (we're using SSL to connect) and Management likes the control it brings them (no non-work related chatting on company time, etc).
      To those who would say the company has no right to control your chatting I would say this: It's their network. While I agree that it is unethical to monitor your chats without your knowledge, not letting you get to site a b or c is their choice.

  15. Add Campaign by brandido · · Score: 2, Funny
    I can just see the add campaign now -

    Think you have some slackers around the office spending all their time chatting online, spilling the beans about your financials, or just bad-mouthing the CEO? Take AIM and blow them away with our instant message monitoring software!

    --
    First Falcon-1 to orbit, then Falcon-9. Then I can die a happy man.
    1. Re:Add Campaign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the ad campaign?

  16. More Secure? by PhoenixK7 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "A new, more secure version of AOL Instant Messenger, or AIM, will enable businesses to read instant messages sent by employees"

    How, under any definition of security does this make it more secure?

    side note: does slashdot seem very slow to anyone else today?

    1. Re:More Secure? by mgs1000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Marketing people use a different dictionary than the rest of us.

  17. I just use a script on the firewall box by Adam+Rightmann · · Score: 2, Interesting

    a little snoop based on ip address, then grep out the relevant stuff.

    I only do this when directed by management, for bandwidth reasons, but it's nice to know that I'm doing my part to save marriages and relationships.

    But if you want to line the pockets of AOL/Time-Warner, go right ahead.

    --
    A. Rightmann
    1. Re:I just use a script on the firewall box by dubious9 · · Score: 1

      Man, I've had it with your IM bashing. IM is NOT evil. I respect the fact that you try and help people in their relationships, but no technology is evil. It's like saying a rock is evil.

      Besides I've found that IM can improve relationships. One of my close friends is a contractor and thus is on the move alot. His wife, however, is a teacher and must stay put. AIM has helped them stay in contact while apart.

      Please realize that you must treat the people, not bash the technology.

      --
      Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
  18. Jabber's a cheaper way of doing this. by cduffy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can appreciate the need to do this -- but Jabber seems a better solution.

    Company runs its own Jabber server. Everyone there has a user@yourcompany.com address. Internal messages between folks in the company never go outside. Admins who want to do monitoring or whatever can do that. Users who want interoperability with AIM or whatever can do that -- *if* the admins decide to install the AIM connector on the server. And it sure doesn't cost $35/seat.

  19. More interesting part of the article: by mattsouthworth · · Score: 1


    This: "AOL plans to offer private companies and federal agencies a premium version of the service early next year that will enable employees to send encrypted instant messages that can only be read by designated, registered recipients".

    It's easy enough to listen to generic AIM traffic anyway, recording those messages shouldn't be upsetting to anyone. In fact, this'll have to happen before some enterprises will allow IM in their walls. If IMs are being used for business purposes, make the users accountable for what they say.

  20. Jabber uses SSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's an open system. nuff said.

  21. What's the big deal? by Waab · · Score: 1

    I don't see what the problem here is. AOL is well within their rights to produce and sell the monitoring software. Your employers are well within their rights to purchase and use the monitoring software. You, as an employee, have probably agreed at some point to have your network activity monitored to ensure you aren't wasting company resources, time, and money. In fact, encrypting your IMs could very well put you in violation of your company's computer usage policies and lead to some rather unpleasant consequences.

    Of course, I'll be curious to see if M$ signs up for a copy to keep an eye on their own employees.

  22. This is why... by Alejo · · Score: 1
  23. Insert Subject Here by Veovis · · Score: 5, Funny

    My managers are listening to my phone calls

    My managers are reading my e-mail

    My managers are reading my IMs

    My managers are monitoring what candy I get from the vending machine

    You know for someone who is supposed to be in charge of managing a department/whatever, has work (or should have) of their own to do, he's taking a really big interest in what I'm doing back here.

    1. Re:Insert Subject Here by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 4, Funny
      Dave, get back to work and stop posting on /.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    2. Re:Insert Subject Here by eyeball · · Score: 2

      In all seriousness, what's needed is some sniff routing software that will look for patterns and forward the conversations to the appropriate parties. i.e.:

      # ruleset file format: rule \t department to route to

      /boss/ "boss" # so he can see what you're saying about him
      /candy|lunch/ "benefits" # so they can raise your insurance rates
      /stock|buy|sell/ "SEC" # goes right to the auditors
      /chick|babe|hottie|hunk/ "HR" # Sexual harassment

      Heh, can I patent that!?! :)

      -----

      --

      _______
      2B1ASK1
    3. Re:Insert Subject Here by Mika_Lindman · · Score: 1

      No wonder they never notice how I don't do any actual work. They are just too busy tracking my other doings.

  24. I hope it's not too late by alen · · Score: 2

    MS has had IM as part of Exchange 2000 for 2 years now. Other vendors have sold similar products. I always wondered why AOL never used their IM clout to make money in the enterprise market and try to lock MS out of it in at least 1 product.

  25. From my company's employee handbook... by Gruneun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Employees should have no expectation of privacy for any information placed into the business equipment of the Company/government... This policy shall serve as notice to any and all that Company/government equipment may be monitored without further notice.

    There is plenty of other text that details this, but that's the meat of it. Companies have a right to monitor any traffic to protect their interests. If you don't want your AOL messages watched, find a company that supports employee privacy on company equipment over covering its own ass. Good luck, because I've never heard of one.

    I think it's kind of shady on AOL's part to suddenly roll over on its user base. However, there are a lot companies that don't allow IM because it's more difficult to keep an eye on than email. AOL may benefit from more acceptance as a result of this move.

    1. Re:From my company's employee handbook... by fishbowl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "find a company that supports employee privacy on company equipment over covering its own ass. Good luck, because I've never heard of one."

      My previous career was as a legal secretary.

      One very nice thing about that job was that you could very safely assume that you had privacy while working, using the equipment, phones, faxes, etc. Reason? EVERYTHING you touch has Attorney-Client privilege and is either employee- or company- confidential. Anyone who is not supposed to be privy to your data, communication, files, etc., would be putting the company at risk by snooping, and no-one, not an IT manager, not the president, has authority that supersedes an attorney's requirement for privacy.

      So, if you work anywhere in the legal field, you won't have to put up with this kind of thing (routine transcripts of your commo without clear accountability at every step.)

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  26. But.. by WiredOni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The companies can still get around this, don't assume that they are that inept and encryption will protect you. One thing they can do is install and hide key logging software, software that takes screen shots of what you are writing, etc.

    1. Re:But.. by HeelToe · · Score: 1

      So, see what I posted the other day...

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=44029&cid=45 84 412

      This should help you deal with the problem.

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

      that does nothing for hardware loggers.

    3. Re:But.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      easy solution:

      encrypt your brain

    4. Re:But.. by HeelToe · · Score: 1

      Nope. At some point you just have to give up. They own the hardware, network, etc.

  27. Secure IM for government? by drunkrussian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ritter anticipates that encrypted instant messaging will appeal greatly to federal agencies that want secure, interagency instant messaging. "Our military and intelligence customers are more interested in the secure version," Ritter said.

    This is certainly at least a little bit of an exaggeration. You can't put classified information on any system that has any kind of communications software or hardware on it. You have to physically disconnect all connections before starting in classified mode. The only exception is machines on a network that has only classified systems and uses some form of secure line for transport between the nodes in the network. There are only a handful of such networks, and you won't have one on your desk. There will most likely be only a few such machines per facility.

    There already is a system for the transmission of classified data between different personnel in the government. It's called, to use technical terms, the "secure telephone." For documents, you can use a technology called the "courier" - an organic system that has advanced intelligence functions and is capable of defense through the use of an integrated firearm.

    Much of the unclassified stuff is transmitted in the same way as classified information. There are also secure networks that are used for the transmission of unclassified but sensitive information.

    If it's anything that requires encryption, it will be transmitted over a secure network, or will be handled through other procedures. This IM system really has no application to the military or intelligence communities.

  28. Quick Fix by CaffeineAddict2001 · · Score: 2

    So - Fred the McDermitt file, where can I find it?

    Yeah. the game was great! The beer girl ... oh my god...

  29. The emoticons are a plus on the battfield. by iamwoodyjones · · Score: 5, Funny

    But with AIM you could write very important messages across the battefiled such as

    Solider5554: Sarge! We're under fire! We need help! :-(

    Sarge0034: Hang in there. You're doing a great job solider :-)

    Solider5554: Arrrghhh!!!! I've been hit! :-O

    Sarge0034: God, these whining soliders never know when to quit, that god they're dispensible. ;)

    Sarge0034: Oppsss. Wrong person sorry.

    Solider5554: What!? I need a chopper. I'm losing a lot of blood over here. >:-@

    Sarge0034 (warn 10%): Hey, just because you've warned me anonymously, doesn't mean I don't know it's you.

    Sarge0034: brb *door slam* as sarge leaves

    *door open* as sarge enters

    Sarge0034: Sorry had to reboot, did I miss anything?

    Solider324: uuuuhhhhhh I don't think I'm going to make it

    1. Re:The emoticons are a plus on the battfield. by BinBoy · · Score: 1

      Soldier2671: a/s/l?

    2. Re:The emoticons are a plus on the battfield. by Theaetetus · · Score: 1
      3n3my S01d13r: Hahahaha!!!!111 Got u!!1``

      Sarge0034: Hey, who is this?

      3n3my S01d13r: U R 0wn3d!!!!```

      Sarge0034: Damnit!!!111

      3n3my S01d13r: a/s/l?

  30. Not so expensive && Slashdot is SLOWWWWWWW by Wills · · Score: 3, Informative
    USD35/employee/year is not really expensive for the benefit to employers of being able to demonstrate that they are "doing something" to monitor and prevent inappropriate comms. It's a reasonable step for an employer to take given the lawsuit risks these days. An employer who doesn't take any steps to monitor comms doesn't look good in court if they end up being sued, for example, in an employee-employee harrassment case.


    P.S. Rob, Nate, Jeff, your change of hosting service this week from Exodus East to Exodus West has made Slashdot incredibly s...l.........o...........w....... from Europe. It's taking 2 minutes to load a page compared to 10 seconds on the old host. Did OSDN pull the plug on your funding for the larger pipe at Exodus East? It's understandable but a shame nonetheless because it's going to stop people visiting.

  31. Translation: by Cervantes · · Score: 1
    "Awww, fuck, man, you can do that? Shit! I better stop AIM-ing about my secret fantasy to rape small goats... ummm, ok, I can get out of this, I'll just insult the parent. Yeah, that'll work! Ok, lemme get the checklist out... fag, luzer, unimaginative.... ok, I think I can work with this..."

    If you're going to be a bitter little AC, at least do a better job of hiding the fact that you didn't think of it first, k?

    Baaaa....

    --
    If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  32. Open Source Alternatives? by jeffroe · · Score: 1

    So where are our open source alternatives to the proxy? Maybe the gaim and squid guys should get together? The only compelling feature I see is the direct-IM for internal users (i.e. not using up your internet bandwidth). The encryption might be nice, but you can already do that with gaim plugins. Everything else just seems like spyware, but maybe some companies need/want that?

  33. hehehehe... easy way to make cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i'll sell your boss the ethereal settings to be able to filter out all traffic on a network except the aim messages for only 100 bucks. It shows the screename they send to and recieve from, and each message is in cleartext on one line, with no other random crap. it only took me 10 minutes of reading the ethereal documetation to find out how but can be yours for only $100, unlimited license. great for digging up dirt on people in your dorm floor too....

  34. This is nothing new. by playmyth.net · · Score: 1

    AIM transmits in clear text, I've been 'monitoring' AIM via ettercap and my iBook/802.11b for over a year; I'm sure others have been doing this for much longer, 802.11b just made it a lot easier to get behind a switch.

    1. Re:This is nothing new. by panZ · · Score: 1

      Yup, I was going to say the same thing. I'm not even admining my small companies network but I ran a security audit on my own corner of the network one day and I could see everything with ettercap. Its free people, if you want to monitor, don't buy from AOL. The other fun thing is that you can insert spooffed text in to IM sessions. Not that i'd ever do such a thing. But ettercap is great! if you want to prove to your admins or boss that they should offer SSL or encrypted logins on the email server, just hand them a list of their email passwords. =) Of course, if you don't know what you're doing when you poison the ARP table, you could take the network down for a couple of minutes. Play with it at home if you don't understand how ARP (layer 2/ethernet to layer 3/IP addressing) works.

      --
      --Let's hack root on 127.0.0.1 --panZ
  35. How is this different.... by bobthemuse · · Score: 0

    ...than a keystroke monitor on the local PC? On another note, employers have been monitoring unencrypted IM conversations for years with via packet sniffing, most people assume it's not being monitored. All this does it make the public more aware of the monitoring possibilities.

  36. Underestimating AIM Users by Shamanin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Most AIM users manually encrypt their message using a collection of complex command line tools. Therefore, the content IS secure.

    I thought everyone knew that!

    --
    come on fhqwhgads
  37. Re: AOL's business plan by dameron · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    1. Give away AIM for free
    2. Charge companies $35/user to monitor AIM
    3. Sell un-monitored "AIM Platinum" for $50
    4. Sell "AIM Platinum" monitor for $100/user

    Someone needs to write OSS that monitors AIM connections for $0/user. Oh what changes we'd see in AOL's client then...! "Protect your Privacy! Unmonitorable AIM Platinum - GOLD EDITION!"

    Of course writing such software would seem kinda evil to most slashdotters, and far too proactive. If it stops being profitable to rob people of their rights and privacy, corporations will stop doing it.

    -dameron

  38. Into the fire, you say? by burgburgburg · · Score: 2

    Let's see: I've got issues with the trustworthiness of a large corporation and their fairly ubiquitous software. Why don't I install and use the not nearly as ubiquitous software of a large convicted monopolist company that has time and time again shown explicitly that they can't be trusted with anything, ever. Logic like that will lead straight to upper management.

  39. Here's one by digitalsushi · · Score: 2

    Any other netadmins out there figure out how to block the kid in the back with a Voicestream cell doing dialup for his IM? He's actually got enough free minutes to stay dialed into his ISP during all 9 hours of the business day, 20 days a month. The boss made me take the tin foil down. What else can I try?

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  40. AOL's reason for not creating a standard IM format by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    AOL's Senior Vice President says that they are not cooperating with other IM companies to make a standard IM format similar to email so anyone could have their pick of IM software because,
    "We don't believe standards are at a place that makes us comfortable we can ensure customer privacy and security as well as network performance."
    And then they turn around and release this product whos very purpose is to invade customer privacy! The guy's a comedian!
  41. Good method for short inter-employee communication by tprox · · Score: 1

    I would use it to send quick messages to a co-worker or friend if for whatever reason the phone isn't an option. It's much better than using NET SEND anyways :) Besides, where I work, nothing online is private. You get used to it after a while and know what you should and should not do.

  42. As the old saying goes... by Soko · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and you get to sell him fishing gear for a lifetime." :-/

    Soko

    --
    "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
    1. Re:As the old saying goes... by ELCarlsson · · Score: 1

      I always thought it was "Give a man a fire he's warm for a day, light a man on fire he's warm the rest of his life"

    2. Re:As the old saying goes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This saying was changed a while back:

      Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and get rammed by a U.S. nuclear submarine.

  43. Why this matters by Unseelie · · Score: 1

    Some industries, like Finance for instance, are required by law to keep a record of all communications with their customers. Sadly, some customers insist on communicating with their brokers via a lame piece of software like AIM. This would allow the company to automatically keep a record of all communications between brokers and their customers. Now, whether that's all it will be used for is left as an excercise for the reader.

  44. free version of this software by phaetonic · · Score: 1

    tcpflow-0.20.tar.gz and a connection to a spanned port on a switch

    1) tcpflow port 5190 &

    2) cat logs and enjoy conversations

  45. My Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I run everybuddy (although any other *nix client would work) remotely using X tunneled through an ssh session to my home machine. That way, all my conversations are logged at home and exist in unencrypted form only on my local X server at work. It's not unbreakable by any means (especially when they own the computer I'm working on), but it makes it unlikely that they'll bother, and it's not particularly inconvenient for me. I don't use it to do anything sketchy. I just prefer to have my personal conversations kept private.

    -TUAC

  46. aol is NOT monitoring aim by jfruhlinger · · Score: 5, Informative

    AOL will NOT be monitoring AIM communications -- what this product essentially does is set up a private network WITHIN a company, based on the AIM protocols. It is that internal communication that is being monitored -- and not by AOL but by the company that buys the software from AOL. I imagine that the users will be able to use their clients to communicate with other AIM users outside their network, but if they don't want to be monitored, they can just download the standard free AIM client and use that instead.

    Several of my friends work for IBM, and they have been using something like this software, called Sametime, for a couple years. Sametime may have been a beta of this product.

    jf

    1. Re:aol is NOT monitoring aim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Sametime was developed by Lotus (which is now part of IBM). It's supported monitoring at the gateway level and secure gateway to gateway communication for years.

    2. Re:aol is NOT monitoring aim by jfruhlinger · · Score: 1

      mmmkay, didn't know that. sametime *does* interoperate with aim clients though (i can use aim to communicate w/my friends using their sametime clients), which is why i thought this might be the same thing. i imagine the new product will work very much like sametime, at any rate.

      jf

    3. Re:aol is NOT monitoring aim by turbine216 · · Score: 2

      just for sake of clarification, SameTime does not interoperate with AIM. The SameTime client has a built-in AIM client that can be used from the same contact manager window (think of Trillian), but SameTime and AIM are still very separate (that is, a SameTime application can be used for chatting with other SameTime users or AIM users, but not in the same chat "room").

    4. Re:aol is NOT monitoring aim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      also, if a corporation wants to use instant messaging/AIM as a business tool, they will want to log all communications not necessarily for monitoring purposes but so the employees can refer back to what they or other people have written. the logs become a knowledge repository, not unlike your email archive.

  47. selling the solution! by billwie · · Score: 1

    Looks like they finally caught on and are selling the solution (to a problem they created)! Now if they could only sell me some snake oil that would keep me from recieving their stupid disks in the mail! Perhaps we are looking at the future of marketing here, pay the corporations hush money or they will bug you to death.

    Consultants - If you can't be part of the solution, there's money to be made redefining the problem.

  48. Simple solution by L0neW0lf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As a network sysadmin, I generally don't want anything on the computers I work on that I didn't put there. Simple solution: user rights. My users cannot install any software without oversight. Limited privileges = no instant messaging software = no viruses transferred through IM software, pr0n, mp3's, etc. =no need to govern over IM use in the first place. Problem solved.

    --

    Never look down your nose at others. Someday, someone is bound to see your boogers.
    1. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Jawohl! Seig Heil, mein network nazi!

      ~~~

    2. Re:Simple solution by Zed2K · · Score: 1

      Well except for you and your other admin buddies...

    3. Re:Simple solution by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 2

      You just wait until you have a job in an IT department. Answering to corporate suit types. Restarting computers and getting snide remarks because you always tell users to reboot when their computers crash. You HAVE to limit what users can do. I'm not bitter about it, I just know that the freedom that competent users want can't always happen on computers at work. If you don't like it, get a job in the IT department, or go someplace else. IT's job is to ensure that those computers can run those mission-critical apps, and sometimes that means locking them down.

      --
      I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
    4. Re:Simple solution by Reziac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're right, of course -- simply disallowing problem software solves the problem from the gitgo. But let's say AIM is one of the programs your company uses, so it's already installed. Seems to me the AIM-monitor's goal is preventing unscrupulous employees from sneaking confidential info and files out thru the AIM client, not preventing employees from using it in the normal way. Even if you don't catch 'em in the act, logging everything should make it easier to figure out how and by whom something was leaked, yes?

      [Disclaimer: I work for myself so have no stake in this; however I do use AIM for groupthink with other folks.]

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You just wait until you have a job in an IT department.

      I'd rather starve that be some wanna-be who couldn't get a programming job off on a power trip enjoying all the great things I lock the "users" out of.

      ~~~

    6. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, but both AOL and Yahoo offer Java browser-based clients. Do you have your IE/Mozilla/Netscape/Operas set to not run Java?

    7. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, soup kitchens prevent idiots like you from starving.

    8. Re:Simple solution by L0neW0lf · · Score: 1

      Actually, I have the sites to download the clients blocked by our internet filter (this is a school district, btw). Double whammy. I'm not out for being a control freak here. As for the person who made the Sieg Heil comment, you've obviously never administered a network. Try troubleshooting a machine with three IM clients, Gator, CometCursor, a screensaver with slides of the family dog, and Desktop Themes installed. Quickly becomes a task of "What's REALLY causing the system to screw up". This does not include what happens to your bandwidth if 30 people install KazAa and download music all day. Due to today's adware/spyware/etc. our policy is that a user can come to me with the software he/she needs installed. If it is related to this person's work (in this case the education field), and we are licensed to run it, I install it with a smile and set it up for them. If it is not, I explain politely why we cannot put it on our network. It prevents illegal software, pr0n, viruses, and copyright violation, and therefore protects my organization.

      --

      Never look down your nose at others. Someday, someone is bound to see your boogers.
    9. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Dream on, punk. I hope you enjoy your little pathetic power trip at the office, until they downsize your ass.

      ~~~

    10. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      you've obviously never administered a network

      Yes, I have. I'm just not so lazy or incompetent as to not be able to do it without going on a power trip. But I moved beyond janitorial duties years ago.

      ~~~

  49. Try firing him... by SwedishChef · · Score: 2

    Add a section to your employee policy document that prohibits using whatever he's using and then fire his ass when he ignores it.

    --
    No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
    1. Re:Try firing him... by digitalsushi · · Score: 2

      For the purposes of trivia, though, is there any tech solution to this?

      --
      slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  50. You are not alone, slow from Santa Clara, CA too! by Geekonomical · · Score: 1

    I just waited close to 1.5 mins for the page to load after clicking "Reply to this". What an irony! /. just got /.ed.

  51. The trouble with this... by Boss,+Pointy+Haired · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... and every other kind of IT employee monitoring solution is that they are implemented by the IT DEPARTMENT.

    Who by definition are the worst offenders.

    And because they're all buddies, they "bypass" the monitoring for their own IP addresses.

    Total waste of time.

    1. Re:The trouble with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Awe C'mon, you're just jealous =)

  52. PLAC by EvilOpie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't see what the big deal about this is, it's not like you couldn't find this stuff out in the past without this.... and for free no less.

    I work at a college, and the network admin here wanted to try out this mini-distro called PLAC for Portable Linux Auditing CD. Basically it's supposed to be small enough to be burned onto one of those business card sized CD's, and they're bootable. So basically you can pop it into a CD drive and boot a machine to this auditing software. Well, since he wanted to try it out, we setup a small box just inside the firewall here to see what it could find. Well... to be honest, it found a lot. It could grab URL's that people were looking at, emails that they were sending out, and yes, even AIM messages.

    The amazing thing is that it would sniff the network packets, but yet report everything in a simple, easily-readable format. It's amazing how much private stuff on the internet isn't private.

    This makes me appreciate licq with an SSL connection even more.

    --
    -Through the server, over the router, off the firewall... Nothing but 'Net!
  53. Re:Not so expensive && Slashdot is SLOWWWW by Huge+Pi+Removal · · Score: 2

    Damn right... thought it was just Telewest being crap (S-W England), but from being able to load /. instantly (maybe a couple of seconds), it's now taking around 20-30 seconds *consistently*. Certainly makes posting comments a tedious chore. Grrrr.....

    --
    - Oliver

    The right to bear arms is only slightly less stupid than the right to arm bears...
  54. Whose security? by drew_kime · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A new, more secure version of AOL Instant Messenger, or AIM, will enable businesses to read instant messages sent by employees, just as businesses can now monitor their workers' e-mail.

    How is allowing someone else to monitor my communications more secure?
    "We are familiar with the Wall Street group," Stewart said. "We don't believe standards are at a place that makes us comfortable we can ensure customer privacy and security as well as network performance."

    Instead, AOL plans to offer private companies and federal agencies a premium version of the service early next year ...

    Just keep in mind who the customer is. In the mass market, the customer is rarely the user.
    --
    Nope, no sig
    1. Re:Whose security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a sysadmin that has setup email monitoring software for managers at a consulting company. The reason they needed it was not to spy on personal email or find jabs at the boss. They were there to make sure that confidential material was not getting leaked. When you look at it from that angle, yes, it is a security issue, not a privacy concern.

    2. Re:Whose security? by DrewCapu · · Score: 1

      Their website was pretty vague when it comes to security.

      I did see a brief mention of supporting SOCSK 4/5 or https.

      Also, from the AIM Data Sheet:

      Security credentials can be issued by AOL using technology that provides a reliable method of encrypting data between AIM users. A unique one-click system makes credential issuance easy and virtually transparent to users. Credentials are based on industry-standard security technology. Alternatively, enterprises can use existing Public Key Infrastructure services to import security credentials.

      Note that this is for AIM itself, not the Enterprise Gateway they are pitching.

  55. marketing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "So easy to spy with, no wonder its Number 1!"

  56. So let me get this straight... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1

    ALO gives away AIM. People download it by the tens of millions of copies. Millions of these copies are on work computers (indeed AIM is designed to work through corporate firewalls). Every day, millions use AIM at work, causing huge uses of corporate bandwith and wasting many hours of employee's time. NOW..AOL is going to help companies FIX (reason for caps soon) this by selling (these affected) companies software to control AIM usage by said companies. Pretty clever AOL, but hardly new.. See, AOL is doing exactly what heroin dealers do every day. They give heroin away to get the people hooked.. then said people have to buy their FIX (see?)from them. I knew that AOL was going down the tubes..but this is a new low....even for them....

  57. What a great way... by Alethes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    to demonstrate a company talking from both sides of its mouth.

    In April 2001, AOL filed a motion to quash Nam Tai's subpoena, arguing it should not be required to reveal subscriber information because it would "infringe on the well-established First Amendment right to speak anonymously."

    1. Re: What a great way... by elemental23 · · Score: 2

      Apples and oranges. You should have no expectation of privacy on a corporate network. Some companies already monitor web browsing and e-mail. How is this any different? You're using their equipement on their time. Sure it kinda sucks if it's happening to you, but then, you're supposed to be working, not chatting with your friends.

      --
      I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
  58. Ethereal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ethereal always works for me in a pinch. . .

  59. IM and security issues by roc_machine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Funny how this topic came up because just yesterday I sent a long-winded email to our LAN Support Admin practically begging for a more feasible (and responsible) way to use IM in the workspace.

    The company I work for uses ICQcorp, which, AFAIK, is dead software and has sat in beta since it was released in 1999.

    Now I won't get into most problems our company has had with instant messenging (the second biggest being users abusing their broadcasting rights), but I will dwelve on one...

    ICQcorp is terribly insecure... well, at least the way it was implemented in our office environment. In my department, most people don't have a workstation they can call their own. When you get in, you pick an NT box, log in, and that's that. The problem is that anyone who used that particular box (and logged into ICQ) can have their history of messages viewed easily. The *.dat files can be opened through notepad, and sit locally on the C: drive in the ICQcorp folder. Albeit, the formatting is bad, but you can definitely read it. Since I've discovered this, I've really toned down my instant messenging to the point where it is pretty much all work related, and if I actually remember to do it, I'll delete my own .dat file on the computer before I log off.

    I just recieved a response back from LAN support and it wasn't very encouraging:

    " There are no other departments ... that use any type of instant messaging and the justification for changing this system has not been met."

    I think it's time I maybe had a chat with Corporate Security. Do you guys agree?

    P.S.
    On a totally unrelated note... anyone else experience unbelievable slowness with /. the last 2 days? My dsl connection seems fine everywhere else. Did a traceroute but didn't see any noticeable jump.

  60. Re:Not so expensive && Slashdot is SLOWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is incredibly slow from the east cost of North America too. 15-20 sec page loading times, as opposed to 1-2 sec before. Brutal.

  61. Legal/Auditing Requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read the article before reading some of the /. comments. I was then surprised by the focus on the monitoring aspect.

    For me, the interesting part was that this is a localized server supporting a widely implemented client program -- no user mindthink upgrade required, no roll-your-own or half-baked client programs. An internal corporate chat system that can also talk to the outside.

    I'm all for vivre la software libre but in this case the suits who are stuck on AIM/AOL for chatting, this is great news. Allows one to fence in the chat traffic that shouldn't be leaving the premises, and also provides logging.

    Logging isn't necessarily a bad thing -- in particular, in the financial sector there are legal requirements for auditing all of the public and private messages, and long-term archival.

    Good job.

  62. Re:Slashdot is SLOWWWWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MUUUUUUUUUUUCH slower in the D.C. area too. Someone screwed up.

  63. um... RAM? by Dawang · · Score: 1

    512MB req'd for Windows, but 2GB req'd for Linux?

    Can someone please explain that (bottom of page) to clueless me?

  64. Did NO ONE look at what this is? by batkiwi · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not a magical AIM filter, which is what all the comments are suggesting.

    It's a way to run your OWN aim gateway server at your business.

    So I am at franks widgets (fwidg). I install the gateway server. Everyone at fwidg logs into the company aim server instead of the official AIM server, as employee@fwidg.com.

    So now we have intranet messaging, and apparently others can add us to the contact list as well (outsiders).

    OBVIOUSLY since all communication is going through this server, they can log/etc it. But htis is not some sort of magical firewall dropin that listens to aim conversations... there's been opensource projects that can do that for years now.

    It looks to me like it's aiming at the jabber and MSN/exchange messenger market. It's a locally hosted central server, so your business stuff isn't going out over the internet, and it authenticates against stuff you already have, according to their marketing. I'd guess that means ldap and active-directory.

  65. ace up their sleeves? by losretardadovaquero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    are there any parts of the AIM protocol that still haven't been reversed engineered or published in some form or another?

    at 35 dollars a seat per year per head, that's a lot of money to be charging for the same sort of monitoring you could achieve with ethereal and a basic understanding of the AIM protocol (isn't there already an AIM decoder in ethereal?).

    either way, it's a pretty nice business model of there's. i guess i'm just worried to see if there's any 'extra' information stored in the AIM protocol that might be of added benefit to management.

    otherwise i say no big deal..

  66. Why would I want to see what AOLers are saying? by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's great. Now I can sit at my desk and see what AOLholes have to say:

    hpyrabbit1981: Ya! LOL! :)):)
    dlscowboys0101: hi rabbit how r u?
    tina23992: me 2!
    hpyrabbit1981: @->-- cowbyos ;)
    memphisflowershop2: me too! a/s/l?

    I don't want that. I let the AOLers have their little messenger and chat rooms and they can crap all over it as much as they want. I much prefer slashdot, where frist porst's and goatse.cx reign supreme!

    --
    I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
  67. Is AIM comparable to a virus? by jpetts · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This story immediately put me in mind of anti-virus software companies, although in this case it appears to be a matter of the company that sells the solution having caused the problem in the first place.

    I'm sure that AOL did not have that in mind* when they first developed AIM but I can't believe that they are not relishing the opportunity to generate even more cash from the monster they created.

    *Or am I not being paranoid enough?

    I'd rather fall off Ilustrada than ride any other horse

    --
    Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  68. Just take it out... by TrebleJunkie · · Score: 1

    If AOL would just take AIM out of the netscape install, that'd save a number of companies a bundle, right there.

    Kind of disgusting, though: A company forcing the problem into an organization, and then selling the solution for an obscene amount of money. That's extortion. See that, DoJ? SEC? FTC? E-X-T-O-R-T-I-O-N.

    --

    Ed R.Zahurak

    You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.

    1. Re:Just take it out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one puts a gun to your head to use AIM, retard.

  69. Proper Admin... by Havoc'ing · · Score: 1

    Devils Advocate... Ok this is obviously for people who dont know how to properly admin thier networks. Block AOL or other apps at the door (FW or Proxy) or better yet setup some friggin policies. Thier is no reason for this unless corps want to intentionally spy on thier employees. Dont get me wrong, I'm a free net kind of guy but when you got over a 1000 users clogging up the veins what choice do you have?

  70. This is a good product. by GangstaLean · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Ok, I'm getting ready for the flames, but I can see perfectly well why this is a good product for corporations.

    1. Gives security conscious corporations a reason to allow AIM rather than ban it (not so long ago, I seem to remember, the AIM client had a security hole. Wasn't that '99?)
    2. Allows companies to unify their methods of IMing, a product which is actually a really good business tool. If you're on a conference call, phone call, in a meeting...there are lots of times it's great to have a live medium to communicate with a coworker. Easier than remembering Joe down at helpdesk is B1gP3n1s.
    3. The CYAN (Cover your ass network). Hey, I know that you don't have to worry about this when you're down at the bar putting the moves on the blonde, but do that at work and it's all of a sudden the company's liability. Of course, you could lose your job. But they could lose money and time too. Don't forget, not every company out there is a big evil CORPORATION.

    Those are three fine reasons. Hey, we don't open up the firewall and have mail delivered to a server on every desktop, why do the same with IM? It's a logical way to start partitioning off Instant Messaging, rather than having massive servers off somewhere else handling messages. And in a lot of cases, companies are leery about plaintext running around the web with potential trade secrets. It's silly, when it could route locally.

    I'm not saying that AOL's solution is the one and only, but the idea is a good one. For the same reason we use mail servers, file servers, PBX systems, it makes sense. With companies convinced that IM is necessary for productivity, it opens the doors for other solutions, non proprietary in nature. And it opens the demands for secure features to be built into clients. Hey, somebody's gotta pay the bills, right? And we know that it won't be AOL people dialling up...

    --
    -- Bird in the Bush: The Renewable Energy Blog http://www.birdinthebush.org
  71. On the other hand... by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    Will having this AIM-sniffing software help free software projects like GAIM and Everybuddy?

  72. Brilliant by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Create a wide spread business problem, then sell the solution to the problem...

    Who ever thought that one up gets 2 points..

    10 years ago it would have been called a fraud.. but in todays world....

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  73. Why pay when there is tcpdump and similar? by fire-eyes · · Score: 2

    Heh. Why "violate the privacy" on one protocol (it's not a viloation on work time...)? When I could run tcpdump and maybe a custom app somewhere to ferret out anything?

    Wee.

    tcpdump + large fast disks + promiscuous NIC == all your bits are belong to me now.

    Mental Image: O'Really: Snooping Email for Fun and Profit :)

    --
    -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
  74. Re:Not so expensive && Slashdot is SLOWWWW by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

    Slashdot's quite slow even from the East Coast of the US :-/

  75. My solution to AIM monitoring... by Ageless · · Score: 5, Informative

    For the past few weeks I have been writing a program I currently call SecureIM. It is a encrypting proxy server that runs on your computer and allows you to have secure conversations over AIM. It's runs under Win32 and is tested with AIM 4.x and higher and Trillian.

    If you would like to check out the beta version, it's available at http://www.vonnieda.org/SecureIM

    The program will be getting a name change before v1.0 since there are several SecureIMs out there.

    Before you flame me about security or what not, please at least have a read of the Readme.txt file where I think I explain pretty well what SecureIM is and isn't capable of.

    I hope someone finds some use of it. Enjoy :)

    1. Re:My solution to AIM monitoring... by user32.ExitWindowsEx · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Trillian has encryption built in, but it only works with other Trillian users.
      It's named SecureIM too.

      --
      "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
    2. Re:My solution to AIM monitoring... by Ageless · · Score: 2

      Yep, Trillian's security is one of the many projects called SecureIM. One of the main reasons I am changing the name of my application.

      Once I am happy with the base functionality of my application I am going to look in to making it work with other IM security protocols, or adapt mine to theirs if it's better :)

    3. Re:My solution to AIM monitoring... by Eminence · · Score: 1

      Does your proxy support ICQ? ICQ uses same AIL servers as AIM anyway...

    4. Re:My solution to AIM monitoring... by Ageless · · Score: 2

      I does not currently support ICQ. ICQ uses a different protocol than AIM does and I would have to write support for that. I am waiting on that to see what AOL does with ICQ since there was a recent announcement to the effect of them being merged.

  76. I see where you're coming from... by Gruneun · · Score: 2

    but I think you just made a strong argument for why you shouldn't be using IM in that setting, anyway:

    EVERYTHING you touch has Attorney-Client privilege and is either employee- or company- confidential. Anyone who is not supposed to be privy to your data, communication, files, etc., would be putting the company at risk by snooping

    1. Re:I see where you're coming from... by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      Agreed, fully.
      At that time, there was some debate as to whether a FAX machine was appropriate for some commo.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  77. $35? HA! by Flamesplash · · Score: 1

    What employer is seriously going to pay $35/employee to monitor their IM usage? Especially when most people use IM for personal reasons. There is a much cheaper solution. If you don't show a need to use an IM client at work, then you don't get too.

    --
    "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
  78. $35 per employee and ... by Havoc'ing · · Score: 1

    another 200K in storage space and the 80K salary for the security nerd to read them. Or could we just post the strings as an entertainment service aka something like dub, dub, dub office-watercooler.com?

  79. OR.... by FunkyELF · · Score: 1

    you can install ethereal

  80. Nonsense by dachshund · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If companies just want to monitor your bandwidth use, there are simpler solutions that don't require them to shell out $35/employee/year.

    The whole point of this system is not to determine whether employees are using lots of IM. It's to insure that employees aren't using IM services for "inappropriate" purposes such as cybersex, or to give away sensitive information. (Or both, as the case my be.)

    Incidentally, if I had my employees using IM for intra-company communications I would damn well want them encrypting their communications. Do you really want company data going through some untrusted external server? If I didn't want my employees using IM at all, I'd just block the ports.

    1. Re:Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      cybersex, or to give away sensitive information. (Or both, as the case my be.)

      53xx33Gur1 Are you touching yourself?

      k0rp0r@73dR0n3 Oh yeah, baby

      53xx33Gur1 Tell me something sexy, baby

      k0rp0r@73dR0n3 Uh huh, we're expanding into the Korean peninsula FY 2004 and out 3rd quarter profits were up by 7.2 percent. I have a nine-inch cock.

    2. Re:Nonsense by cduffy · · Score: 2

      Incidentally, if I had my employees using IM for intra-company communications I would damn well want them encrypting their communications. Do you really want company data going through some untrusted external server?

      Not all IM solutions require use of an external server when talking to folks outside the company. See Jabber.

  81. Great business plan ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Create 100,000,000 monsters
    2. Set them loose
    3. Sell monster traps

  82. Us Crazy People by DeadBugs · · Score: 2

    Now we can install this at home to find out what our other personality is saying about us. Both of them.

    --
    http://www.kubuntu.org/
  83. Just an idea for secure communications. by $criptah · · Score: 1

    Last year I took a networking class and I started a project that involved some openssl libraries and chat software. I am wondering how hard would it be to modify current software or write something new that can encrypt and decrypt messages with help of some ssl libraries. If you want to be very extreme, you can setup a pair of public/private keys per friend that you want to talk with. Provided that the number of friends you have is relatively small and that the computers that you use are somewhat fast, it can be done. Thanks,

  84. sig. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

    I need a filter to delete posts where people mention moderation in their sig file.

    Like yours?
    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    1. Re:sig. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      To the moderator who said "overrated". I hope you realize that by definition it's not actually possible for something that hasn't been rated yet to be "overrated". Seing "overrated" as the first and only moderation so far doesn't make any sense at all. Hopefully a metamoderator will notice this fact.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  85. This isn't all about employers snooping by jfortier · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot of companies have a very important need for this, other than just the desire to "snoop" on their employees. For example, many firms such as brokerage houses are required to monitor and keep records of their employees' interactions with clients. The article alludes to these groups slightly, without going into much detail. These companies would like to be able to use instant messanging to communicate with clients, but right now regulations stop them from using AIM, unless they somehow develop their own monitoring software. It's companies like these that AOL is really targeting with this product. Of course, a lot of these companies are also demanding that all the IM providers adopt and open/interoperable standard, which AOL isn't quite as willing to do.

  86. sig. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There is no "not funny" moderation. If you punish levity because you don't get the joke, I will M2 you unfair.

    If you assume all silly illogical posts are jokes, you are giving posters too much credit.
    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  87. Why Trillian wouldn't solve it in this case by evil_one · · Score: 2, Informative

    Trillian only can establish a secure connection if it has the ability to contact the other computer directly.
    If both ends are behind an IPmasq or similar firewall this won't work.
    OTOH, pgp/gpg would work fine, so long as
    1) both parties have it
    2) you have eachother's pubkeys
    gAIM and similar clients allow not only protocol plugins, but also general purpose - I don't see why gpg support couldn't be added in.

    --
    Desperation is a stinky cologne
    1. Re:Why Trillian wouldn't solve it in this case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not true. You don't need a direct connection to use Trillian's encryption.

  88. It's too bad by quintessent · · Score: 2

    It would actually be nice to have something that's somewhat private like a phone call, but more convenient. Oh well.

  89. Priv Domain User Names & Federated Authenticat by DrewCapu · · Score: 1

    I was reading some of the "features" of this mess and found the following:

    -Allows enterprises to create screen names that follow the structure: user@company.com

    -Enables an enterprise to validate and manage screen names from the corporate directory

    I especially like the first one.
    So it makes ents that AOL's next 2 projects in attempts to get more revenue will be:

    -ProcIM for AIM
    -SpamAssassin for AIM

    (Yeah yeah, they can't really use those names, but you know what I'm talking about.)

  90. Agreed, but... by raretek · · Score: 2, Informative

    I agree they've made it tough to block if you're just targeting AOLs resource(as in time) sucking software. My experience is that most of the time for most offices (not counting tech companies), you don't want your users running ANY of the many time/bandwidth suckers out there. In that case, the following is extremely effective.

    Block all internet traffic for your desktop machines at the router/firewall/whatever, and force all web browsing through a squid proxy on a server that is not blocked. This breaks virtually all messaging and file sharing software, while also generally accelerating web browsing. Any users with special needs can be explicitly allowed through the router.

    Be sure to have a cache only dns server on your side of the link, and voila: Instant messanger stops working (and Aol doesn't get jack), you improve the web browsing experience for your users, and any new messaging programs/file sharing programs won't work. Win win win!

    Then you can spend that 35 bucks times X number of employees, which in my case comes to over 10 thousand bucks, on new hardware like switch upgrades, router upgrades, and the like, which will really make you look good.

    --
    Show me an effect without cause and then I'll believe in chaos.
    1. Re:Agreed, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't forget to block slashdot.org

  91. Re:Not so expensive && Slashdot is SLOWWWW by Reziac · · Score: 2

    I did notice that the per-employee price was lower than the average for software priced that way -- but 10 billion sales at a buck apiece is a whole lot more dough than one sale at 10 million bucks.

    As to the slashdot-slows -- I'm in California, only about 350 miles from the new server. Til this morning the new server was VERY slow to respond -- never less than 15 seconds, often more like 1-2 minutes. Once it *finally* coughs up the desired page, it comes across about 2x as fast as with the old server.

    However as of 8am this morning, initial server response has sped up considerably, tho it still has spasms of taking 15 to 30 seconds. But at least it's not affecting every single request, like it was yesterday!!

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  92. open world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    aol is really goign to have to change there business plan if they want to survive.
    Microsoft is obviously quite smart, and them "opening" up there code is showing that they see wehre the future is going.
    if you can't beat them, embrace it.
    i' can't wait till the ms version of sourceforge is like.
    probably faster bandwidth and no sites going down.

  93. Logging by mrbrown1602 · · Score: 1

    I can see it now, the logs will be filled with "Tina765432107457: Watch as my sister gets beaten with my whip Click the -->[ENTER HERE]-- to see!"

  94. Ettercap... by kaoticus · · Score: 1

    good prog.!

  95. Why is this news? by Alkaiser · · Score: 2

    It's been happening for a loooooong time. I got told about it when I was at work, they complained that they had online conversations that some of us were having and told us that if we didn't stop leaking information, we'd get canned.

    --
    Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
  96. I wonder by shweazel · · Score: 1

    How could this software stop something like QuickBuddy that runs in a browser?

    1. Re:I wonder by TeddyR · · Score: 2

      because it still uses the AIM protocol / port.... {only the application here is written in Java/ActiveX instead of C}

      --

      --
      Time is on my side
  97. Or, easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh. Or you could just ssh to a trusted server and run TAC on the command line. Anyway, one ssh session is less distracting and easier to minimize than all those AIM windows.

    It was odd.. the last place i worked at, the ONLY port they blocked was ssh. They didn't monitor that i was aware of, but i suppose that in the case they did decide to monitor someone they just really, really didn't want them to evade that monitoring..

    1. Re:Or, easier by Tassach · · Score: 1

      Blocking port 22? Run sshd on port 443 instead. No fuss, no muss.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    2. Re:Or, easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's relatively simple to put an ssh listener on any port, even if you don't have root on the server.
      observe: ssh -g -f -N -L 2222:hostname:22 -lusername hostname

      The ssh client is now running in the background, forwarding connections to port 2222 to sshd on port 22 (and -g makes it externally accessible). You can't use the -f -N options to background ssh1 though, so you'll need to keep yourself logged in from elsewhere to keep it alive on ssh1 machines. Changing the sshd_conf file to listen on a different port would obviously be ideal if it's your own server... But this technique can work on a lot of public servers too!

    3. Re:Or, easier by octalc0de · · Score: 1

      run TAC [freshmeat.net] on the command line

      Before I clicked that link, I thought you wanted me to TAC the server. Little use that would be, I thought :)

  98. 20 minutes a week? Wow! by swb · · Score: 2

    Hopefully it saves the time on a single task, done once per week, otherwise you're not saving 20 minutes per week. Time isn't aggregatable like that -- you can't turn four minutes per day into 20 minutes per week, or 20 minutes per week into "2 days per year".

    Plus the idea that you saved 20 minutes per week is kind of a joke in and of itself -- what good is 20 minutes, unless you're job is one of those hyper-monitored jobs where they know how many keystrokes/min you type, but based upon your post I'd say not.

  99. SSH permitted heh... by kingsqueak · · Score: 1

    If there is a serious effort at security at all SSH won't be permitted. Any site that would bother paying $35/seat to essentially proxy AIM will have forced proxying of any other outbound traffic. It is fun when SSH is open though, gotta love the forwarding of your own private squid to avoid the jobsite web proxies.

    1. Re:SSH permitted heh... by Tassach · · Score: 1

      Corkscrew will tunnel SSH through a http proxy, rendering the forced proxying useless. For extra fun, run sshd on port 80 or 443.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  100. This could only sell in the US by CrystalFalcon · · Score: 2

    I as SO thankful several countries in Europe outlaws eavesdropping by an employer like this.

    (And don't get me started about it's their equipment, etc etc etc. I don't care whose equipment it is. I am a human being. I want to communicate without being monitored - "freedom", as some would call it. Laws guarantee me that privacy, just as they outlaw listening to my phone conversations or opening and reading my dead-tree letters. People whose knee-jerk reaction is that "they own it, they set any rules they like" need to look around and realize that it actually need not be like that.)

  101. errr simple network sniffer by Archfeld · · Score: 2

    or hardware logger could handle this, at quite a bit less than 35$/user/year...WOW. If they could sell this they could start giving away their lousy net service for free...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  102. How is this possible... by SecGreen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article states "A new, more secure version of AOL Instant Messenger, or AIM, will enable businesses to read instant messages sent by employees..."

    Umm... if it's more secure, how can the employers eavesdrop? The answer, it's not more secure!

    --
    Dupe posts are /.'s tacit protest on the rights of users to time-shift content...
  103. One realistic solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You talk in key words/ a made up language that only those who you talk to understand. You could try it in another language, but if they where detrmined they propbably can get the stuff translated.

    You still can get caught, but they will not have a clue as to what you are really saying. Then again, they could take you to court about it.

  104. Thanks Freshmeat! by Magus311X · · Score: 2

    Invade privacy for free!

    AimSniff

    --

  105. Rock is not evil, but IM is another matter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of my close friends is a contractor and thus is on the move alot [sic].

    Item: IM destroys the natural and God-given human capacity to spell.

    But it goes further than that. As this Don Juan of a friend of yours travels through the several states, seducing his way through the cities and towns, leaving the shattered wreckage of broken homes and mangled lives behind him, as the wails of bereft children pursue him on his loathsome path, is it really of such great moment that IM enables him to maintain a flimsy, repugnant facade of decency with his own long-suffering helpmeet?

    I think not.

    In future, please consider all ramifications before you speak. You do our once-great nation no favors with your thoughtless casuistries.

    1. Re:Rock is not evil, but IM is another matter. by dubious9 · · Score: 1

      Item: IM destroys the natural and God-given human capacity to spell.

      True, spelling isn't my strong point, but it's not because of IM as I haven't had the need to use it in years.

      as the wails of bereft children pursue him on his loathsome path, is it really of such great moment that IM enables him to maintain a flimsy, repugnant facade of decency with his own long-suffering helpmeet?

      -1 Flamebait

      Well, since you are an anonymous coward, I'll take your comment as sarcasm, but if you really want to defend your point of view, reply again.

      --
      Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
  106. How Microsoftian... by Krokus · · Score: 1

    I know that when Microsoft gives something away for free, it means they're up to something.

    I thought AOL was just preying upon the non-internet-literate, but I now see that AOL falls into the same category of evilness as Microsoft.

  107. Another reason for Corporate IM by aikido_kit · · Score: 1

    Another reason that Enterprise IM is becoming a necessity is that it is intra-business communication, equivalent to memos and emails. You'll also want message logging/recording and other stuff required for compliance with HIPPA or the SEC. The intent is to make messages loggable and available as proof of communication, as evidence. Imagine if Arthur Andersen sent an IM instead of a memo telling people to shred documents.

  108. And do the hokey-pokey and turn yourself around by complexmath · · Score: 1

    My God. All this just to chat at work?

    1. Re:And do the hokey-pokey and turn yourself around by corey_lawson · · Score: 1

      ...it's either that, or buy some of the new software for doing essentially this from Lotus, Documentum, Microsoft, etc. Granted, the IM in those suites? clusters? of applications allow much more than just little text message xfers, they also cost a lot more per seat.

  109. A Free Solution Exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Its called tcpdump written to a file,
    and processed by some clever regexes.

  110. Good. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    This is a reasonable method of making money. It's not like they're going to start charging for the client, or take down their free servers.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  111. Bwa ha ha ha!!! by failrate · · Score: 1

    I don't know if this is proof of evil, but I know I'm jealous I didn't think of this first. They must have gotten their business plan from the U.S. arms dealers.

    --
    Voodoo Girl is the bomb!
  112. Another market by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 1

    And then the uber geeks will release an IM encryption tool that hides the true content of IM messages.

    Why bother? Just use one of the hundreds of keyloggers out there. Much cheaper than aohell's version of employee monitoring.

    --

    eTrade SUCKS
  113. Secure IM by bruns · · Score: 1

    Hmm, if you are concerned about people watching, get Miranda ICQ and either the SecureIM or GPG plugin...

    Both work and will secure your data.

    --
    Brielle
  114. You've got a Flaimbait Sig by SailorBob · · Score: 1

    1/3rd of US foreign aid goes to 0.1% of the population [wrmea.com]

    Why are you posting an inflamitory offtopic sig linking to an anti-Semitic website which openly supports terrorism?

    And just to point out the bias here, Israel get's $2.5 billion (1.5 military, 1 civilian) a year in aid from the USA (the site you link to doesn't even get the basic numbers correct), while Egypt gets $2 billion a year in military aid. People are starving in the streets in Egypt, but the country refuses to convert even $1.00 of that military aid to civilian aid. And of course there's Jordan which averaged $284 million per year over the past 5 years and will go up to $300 million next year, which put together with what Egypt get's is almost identical to what Israel gets.

    And of course there is indirect aid to the Saudis. Ten's of thousands of American soldiers protect the biggest supporter of terrorism and bin-laden in the world. If you want to bitch about something bitch about the fact that the state department coddles and protects a government which directly (if "secretly") supported and still supports the people responsible for the Twin Towers bombing.

    Disclaimer: I'm an American Israel Jew. I also happen to oppose US aid to Israel, but for real reasons, not bullshit anti-Semitic ones.

    --

    Woopty Doo Basil, what does it all mean?!

  115. Logical next step... by Eminence · · Score: 1

    Logical next step for AOL would be to offer encryption plug-ins to employees.

  116. AIM Sniff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a free, open source product called AIM Sniff that will monitor aim traffic without any need for a special aim client or gateway device.
    http://aimsniff.sourceforge.net/

  117. Easy way around both this and IT policies by Theaetetus · · Score: 2
    At my job, the iron-fisted IT department has stated that "nothing shall be downloaded, nor installed on company PCs, or else your accounted will be deleted and your computer will be taken away".
    (while this makes sense for the majority of our idio^h^h^h^h users, it's a little extreme for us in the engineering department - including the ones who used to have IT jobs)

    However, I want to use AIM... So, rather than installing AIM, or Trillian or Fire or GAIM, or any other client (and this would also apply to companies wanting to install this new encrypted client - they probably wouldn't want their users installing other versions), I go to aim.com and use AIM Express - the Java applet version of their client.

    Nothing downloaded, nothing installed, no problem.

    -T

  118. port 80 by scubacuda · · Score: 2

    All the ones I've used--ICQ, AIM, MSN, Y!--can be changed to go out on port 80.

    You need some sort of gateway that can differentiate betwen *application* traffic on port 80.

    Or you need to lock down each desktop.

  119. meta recursive sig discussion - woah! by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    Don't label something silly or illogical unless you know enough about the topic to recognize a joke.

  120. AOL is going to mess this up by moini3 · · Score: 1
    AOL is going to mess this up like the Netscape Browser and iPlanet (acquired when they bought Netscape). Why? Because they are a media and consumer company and do not undertsand Enterprise sales, marketing and support. For example look at the glaring holes in their AIM for Enterprise product:

    - No LDAP Support - No Encryption support; - No PKI or X.509 support; - No support for companies with multiple locations (It does not support a distributed Server to Server architecture) - No Interoperability with other IMs; - No IETF standards support such as SIP/SIMPLE; - NO SDK to integrate IM with other applications; . - No track record for supporting enterprise customers;

    Plus: How are they going to sell this sucker. They have no Enterprise sales force. I do not see a CIO making a decison based on AOL CD Coaster in the mail.
  121. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    (German philosopher) Georg Wilhelm Hegel, on his deathbed, complained,
    "Only one man ever understood me." He fell silent for a while and then added,
    "And he didn't understand me."

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...