Slashdot Mirror


Where is the Line on Email Privacy?

A Conflicted Hosting Admin asks: "Imagine you're a webmaster running your own server. You provide email accounts to a third party as a 'service' in addition to hosting a web site for the third party. Now, suppose that one of the companies that you are hosting a site and email addresses for decides they need access to an email account for a previously disassociated employee. Does that company now have access to the email even though there is no written contract nor technology use policy? Where does the independent hoster look for guidance on something such as this?"

"It could be interpreted that the company is looking for evidence of impropriety or dishonesty on the part of the prior employee, but there was never a question before the sudden termination to suggest anything out of the ordinary was ongoing. I am such an admin. I am ready to allow access to the company requesting it. Several details are bugging me though. First, I have never been asked for access to any other terminated employees' email. Second, I recently inquired about preserving email for a different employee and got the short answer that all company ties had to be completely terminated. Third, the server is not owned by the company in question. I'm completely (other than the following item) independent of the company. Fourth, it's my relative's account.
I've simply not responded so far, but how far do I go? I'm not an ISP and I don't have agreements with the users. I'm also not the IT dept. Has anyone else had anything remotely similar, and if so; how did you respond?"

103 comments

  1. Is this a business account? by kinnell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the email account in question is a work account provided to the employee by the company for work use, then the contents of the account are normally the property of the company, not the employee. Normally, the employee should not be using the account for personal use anyway, so any violations of his privacy are his own fault. Business email accounts generally contain a lot of valuable information pertaining to the job of the former employee which the company is perfectly entitled to recover.

    --
    If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    1. Re:Is this a business account? by hummassa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      NOT here in Brasil. E-mail is by law on par with telephonical communications, so tapping without judicial warrant is a crime. Total privacy is expected.

      My personal policy in those cases is: the mailbox was empty at the time the account was blocked. All e-mail to it was bounced since.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    2. Re:Is this a business account? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can't legislate security. Laws do not stop people from listening to wireless telephone calls with baby monitors or scanners. If you want privacy in email communications then use PGP, or GnuPG.

    3. Re:Is this a business account? by MarkusQ · · Score: 1

      NOT here in Brasil. E-mail is by law on par with telephonical communications, so tapping without judicial warrant is a crime. Total privacy is expected.

      You, but no matter where you are a lot hinges on whose account it was--the company's or the employee's. Sometimes, it's obvious (bob.smith.personal@company.com or customer.service@company.com) but most of the time it's not. Many small companies have customers direct mail to an individual ("just send me your shipping info and I'll get that right out to you; my e-mail is bob@company.com") and personal mail occasionaly gets sent to company accounts.

      I'd say the correct answer is to let them have what they requested in good faith. In any case, if you don't trust them, you shouldn't be hosting them.

      -- MarkusQ

    4. Re:Is this a business account? by hummassa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, no, no, to the law only matters whose communication it is. So, my mailbox in the company account is mine. It's my communication. Even if stated in a contract, the clause can be voided because of this.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    5. Re:Is this a business account? by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 1

      If the email account in question is a work account provided to the employee by the company for work use, then the contents of the account are normally the property of the company, not the employee.

      This is incorrect. An employee has a right to privacy, even for work provided email, here in the EU.

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
    6. Re:Is this a business account? by (trb001) · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Specifically, whoever paid for the accounts is the owner. Assuming that the company is paying you to host the site/mail accounts, they own them all and 'sublet' the accounts to their employees. Once that employee has vacated, the account is yours again.

      --trb

    7. Re:Is this a business account? by override11 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but to perform that communication you are using work equipment...work bandwidth...work software licenses owned by the company. There is no reason that you should think that any of this belongs to you. If you program software on your work computer during work time, it is owned by the company, not you, why would email be any different??

      --
      No I didnt spell check this post...
    8. Re:Is this a business account? by MarkusQ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, no, no, to the law only matters whose communication it is.

      Fine, but that doesn't change my point.

      So, my mailbox in the company account is mine. It's my communication.

      It might be, but it might be someone you have never met trying to contact the company to get a problem resolved, order something, etc.

      My point is and was that you can't reasonably assume that all mail that comes to someone's e-mail account at work is an attempt to communicate with them and not an attempt to communicate with the company. If bdp@cryptic.com is answered by a guy named Bruce for a while and then subsequently given to someone named Betty, it might be a case where she's getting his personal communications (e.g. he's Bruce Donald Parsly and she's Betty Due Purdy), or it might be the company's (e.g., they both handle support for the company's Best Darned Product (tm) and he's just been promoted to janitor, leaving her stuck withall the support mail).

      The point? You can't tell for sure without more information.

      -- MarkusQ

    9. Re:Is this a business account? by mefus · · Score: 1

      a work account provided to the employee by the company for work use

      It's generally recognized, though, that individuals are permitted to do private things while at work. One's spouse calls on the company phone to have one bring stop at the store to bring home some tofu or whatever: the phone (and email) is a conduit to the private world.

      At the University of California a former employee's email account might be suspended but it is never released to that former employees nominal employer (the supervisor, the person who's paying the salary through grant money or whatever) and the former employee is able to maintain that account if he or she wishes by paying independently.

      My group was bitten by this once when we let an admin assistant go that was receiving email on behalf of our PI. We had to create a generic account for the next admin to use so we could keep control of the account.

      --
      mefus
      In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
    10. Re:Is this a business account? by fyonn · · Score: 1

      If you program software on your work computer during work time, it is owned by the company, not you

      I believe by UK law that is not the case. software programmed by you that has no relevance to your job whatsoever is still owned by you. Interestingly, you can also claim ownership of program code in your field of work if you come up with an innovation in that field that you would not be expected to produce, ie coming up with a brand new ultra high speed sorting algorithm while doing some low level grunt programming.

      dave

    11. Re:Is this a business account? by sudog · · Score: 1

      So? It's your own communication and you have an expectation of privacy unless your business specifically states something like, "Emails are being monitored for quality control purposes" or similar telephone conversations.

      You're stupid to think that just because someone else owns the lines, you suddenly don't have any privacy. The telephone company owns the lines you use to tell the latest dirty secret to your wife.. by your logic, they have a right to listen in.

      Duh!

    12. Re:Is this a business account? by override11 · · Score: 1

      We were talking about a company. About doing things on company time. Get a clue you screwhead, you are purchasing a service from the phone company, but when you are an employee you are doing work FOR someone. And I put disclaimers in both a login script and the company handbook about email being the property of the company, any admin that doesnt probably shouldnt be an admin.

      --
      No I didnt spell check this post...
    13. Re:Is this a business account? by NinjaPablo · · Score: 1

      You're exactly right. I work for a company which has taken the same approach, with great results. If we're paying you, we get to monitor your traffic to make sure you're actually working and not just goofing off posting comments on /.

      Oh wait...dammit.....

      --
      SmashTech - No smashing of tech involved
    14. Re:Is this a business account? by sudog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hey. Idiot. It's irrelevant whether you're doing things on company time. The company doesn't OWN the employee during the hours he's working for them. He does NOT become a zombie drone-slave, and there's this little thing called basic human rights that each of us enjoy--since, as you may or may not be aware, we all live in a first-world country that supposedly treasures freedom.

      The owner of the email is the employee, and the only one with the right to read it is the recipient, unless it's corporate email.

      Period.

      Since you seem to have trouble understanding the concept of an individual's privacy, and I'm very well aware that braindead idiots like you have no problem rationalising, let me ask you: Do you think the company has a right to put a camera in the same toilet you're taking a dump in, since it's a company toilet, company toilet paper, a company stall, all in a company bathroom?

      Get a clue, fuckwad. People like you are the same people who freely give away simple basic human dignity in the name of capitalism. YOU are the reason that companies can get away with everything they can get away with. YOU, and every other fuckstick who thinks just like you.

      Tard.

    15. Re:Is this a business account? by override11 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Its troll's like you that get fired because they fuck off on 'THEIR' computer because they feel the company owe's them something, then because of their own inability to cope with a work environment and function in society, they go on welfare and make me pay more taxes to support their fucking lazy bum asses while you marry some fat chick and have 6 kids to sponge off every welfare program available. Its called COMPANY EMAIL for a reason, it belongs to the company. You perform company business over it, it is housed on the company email server, your damn right I own it!! And when you leave, I will keep it, move it to other people to handle your accounts, re-assign your address to your replacement, etc. Its NOT yours, you cant save it on your happy ass way out of the office when I fire you for fucking around all day, and you certainly wont get a good referral, I will tell them your a lazy fuck!

      --
      No I didnt spell check this post...
    16. Re:Is this a business account? by sudog · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That the best you can do?

      You're damn fucking straight a company owes me something: Simple human dignity. If you treat an employee like a fucking scumbag, they're far more likely to act like one.

      And who's the troll? I have no problem putting food on the table, and I won't have a problem doing so for many years to come.

      If the only way to communicate with personal relations is via company email, the company has no right to listen in to the latest saga in that employee's personal health problems.

      You think you own personal communications between a man and his wife? How about a man and his lawyer?

      And you didn't answer my question, troll fuckwad. I've got lots of karma to burn; what about the toilets, you piece of shit? Ah, I see you side-stepped. Why? Because I'm right.

      What an idiot.

    17. Re:Is this a business account? by override11 · · Score: 1

      Bull, you can pick up the phone and call them FROM HOME! the point is that personal calls / emails / communications do not belong at work! THE CONVERSATION IS ABOUT EMAIL! I didnt say anything about toilets, jesus christ dude, I could give a crap about that. The whole point is that there should be a seperation between home life and work life. If you had an employee that YOU were paying spending 30% of their time penning emails home or sitting on the phone, you are saying you wouldnt care???? That you wouldnt audit their email and phone use to verify that they are spending a ton of time on personal business, then fire them for it???? Bullshit, when its YOUR MONEY, then come talk to me. Till then, you are just another peon.

      --
      No I didnt spell check this post...
    18. Re:Is this a business account? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      If you had an employee that YOU were paying spending 30% of their time penning emails home or sitting on the phone, you are saying you wouldnt care???? That you wouldnt audit their email and phone use to verify that they are spending a ton of time on personal business, then fire them for it????

      If they're spending 30% of their time on personal phone calls, their work won't get done, their job performance will be terrible, and you'll have adequate grounds for termination - without having to audit e-mail or phone use. Intrusive measures like phone auditing, e-mail monitoring, chemical drug screens, and so on, are just an admission that a company has no idea how well its its employees are doing.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    19. Re:Is this a business account? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Its troll's like you that get fired because they fuck off on 'THEIR' computer...go on welfare and make me pay more taxes to support their fucking lazy bum asses...Its called COMPANY EMAIL for a reason, it belongs to the company...your damn right I own it!!

      Quite aside from what the law says or doesn't say, it's asshole bosses like you who make companies fail.

      Treat your employees like shit, and you'll never get good performance. It is fundamentally impossible to have accurate communication with people who you're intimidating.

      Treat them like people - and that means respective privacy - and things will get done.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    20. Re:Is this a business account? by override11 · · Score: 1

      I am sorry, the prior poster was pissing me off. The last thing I want to do all day is look at ANYONE's email. I dont care, and frankly its none of my business. The whole point is the RIGHT to. As a company, the email and the equipment is owned by the company, and the fact that the employee feels they have the right to use them for personal business is rediculous.

      --
      No I didnt spell check this post...
    21. Re:Is this a business account? by stevew · · Score: 1

      In the US this simply isn't true.

      IF the facilities are owned by the company, then you have no privacy. It's as simple as that. Haven't you guys heard of all the neat spyware some employers use to watch the activities of employees? That's all legal in a work setting.

      The thing that puts this into a gray zone in my mind is that the company doesn't own the hardware. They own the email address itself to the extent that you own mycompany.com. Yet if this provider is doing this without compensation I would imagine that the hard line I mentioned in the previous paragraph gets gray. IANAL - but that is my understanding of what is allowed.

      --
      Have you compiled your kernel today??
    22. Re:Is this a business account? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      I believe by UK law that is not the case. software programmed by you that has no relevance to your job whatsoever is still owned by you.

      Really? If, as the grandparent post said, the software was written on work time, I'd assume (but it is an assumption) that it belonged to my employer.

      My employment contract does state explicitly that the company has no claim over anything I write using neither work resources nor work time, which seems a reasonable compromise on the "who owns it" question. I wasn't aware of anything in UK law that overrode contractual agreements in this case, but if anyone would like to provide relevant citations...

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    23. Re:Is this a business account? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      We were talking about a company. About doing things on company time. [...] And I put disclaimers in both a login script and the company handbook about email being the property of the company, any admin that doesnt probably shouldnt be an admin.

      Ah, so that's your bias here. You're not by any chance also based in the US, are you? This heartfelt attitude of "employees are slaves to their employers" seems to be peculiar to (management in) that part of the world.

      Fortunately, just because you wrote something doesn't necessarily make it legally binding, no matter how officially you state it. Even more fortunately, for some of us at least, most countries in the west explicitly recognise that employees are human beings and not robots, and provide certain safeguards that employers cannot overrule. One of these is often the right to privacy in communications; this varies from country to country, but in most places intercepting phone calls or e-mail traffic without good cause would be against the rules, and an employer with your attitude would get his ass handed to him in court.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    24. Re:Is this a business account? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      As a company, the email and the equipment is owned by the company, and the fact that the employee feels they have the right to use them for personal business is rediculous.

      But is it?

      Of course, as an employer, you're entitled to expect your employees to do their jobs to the best of their ability, in exchange for whatever compensation you agreed. That is not in question.

      However, you also have to recognise that you're employing real people with real lives. Some things basically have to be done during office hours, and if you're employing someone during those hours every day, it's only common sense that they can, e.g., make a five-minute personal phone call to a bank or mail order firm now and then.

      By the same token, I think it's reasonable to expect, unless explicitly stated otherwise, that an e-mail account may be used for personal reasons, provided that use is not an excessive drain on either the employee's time or the company's resources/chequebook.

      The question of monitoring communications is a tricky one. My argument, which I believe is enshrined in law in some countries fairly directly, would be that an employee should be entitled to reasonable privacy. If they're not abusing the system, they shouldn't be subject to monitoring or having their mail read by others, end of story.

      Obviously, some times an employer will genuinely have reason to believe that an employee is doing something inappropriate, and must have some recourse in that event. However, IMHO that should be done with the support of a court, just as any wire tap or other invasion of privacy would be (well, aside from things like the Patriot XXX Act, and so on :-/) and not just because an employer randomly decides to take advantage of their access. If it's serious enough that it needs an invasion of privacy, it's surely also serious enough that someone's future employment and reputation is in question, and that's serious enough to do things properly, through legal channels.

      Incidentally, I agree entirely with one or two of the other posters here: a smart employer won't rely on things like intercepting communications anyway, because it just breeds discontent amongst the staff, and that will damage productivity at best. It's also the surest way to ensure your good staff are the first to leave you for a more humane employer.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    25. Re:Is this a business account? by fyonn · · Score: 1

      hmm.. istr that what i said is true, but right now I can't find rteference to it online. I originally found it when I was in the library reading books abut copyright law, but it was a couple of years ago and my notes are in a notead elsewhere.

      not much help I know but if it's important to you, central libraries have lots of useful books about this kinda thing :)

      dave

    26. Re:Is this a business account? by Pete · · Score: 1
      override11 whined:
      [...] and make me pay more taxes to support their fucking lazy bum asses while you marry some fat chick and have 6 kids [...]

      I think you slipped and made your personal prejudices a little bit too apparant there.

      Pete.
  2. employee contact by !the!bad!fish! · · Score: 2, Informative
    IANAL, in the UK the standard policy is to quote the Data Protection Act and delete any evidence.

    If the employee's contract, like mine, states that the company owns all e-mail communication then they owns it.

    --
    Kids today are tyrants. They contradict their parent, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers. - Socrates 400 BC
    1. Re:employee contact by shaitand · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If the company's account without the ISP DOESN'T state the company owns it, wouldn't it actually be the ISP's property?

    2. Re:employee contact by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 1

      If the employee's contract, like mine, states that the company owns all e-mail communication then they owns it.

      Nope, because you are in the EU and the EU Human Rights convention grants you the right to have your privacy respected, as implemented in, eg in the UK, the Human Rights Act. There already has been a case before the EUCHR on this subject, i cant find reference to in google unfortunately, but the gist was that an employer read an employees mail and discovered they were gay and the employer was taken to the ECHR iirc.

      If you are an employer in the EU, the best policy to take possibly is to provide employees with a dedicated personal email address, eg @people.example.com and be very strict as to the seperation between work and personal email. (if your policies simply ban personal email outright, but its not really enforced and people use email for personal use anyway, and this is accepted, then employees most likely have a right to privacy).

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
  3. In my case by sdukaric · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm providing some of those services to some smaller bussines. If I've got information that some user is not longer working for that company, I would delete/remove all the data associated with him same moment. There is few catches about it, but as sooner You remove them, the less chance is to end up with some horny manager asking for mail from cute secretary which was fired. To sum up, I'll go with "right on time" removal of all former employee data, and in case employee still HAS account/data in my system, then customer have any right to see it since they ARE paying for it. I'm not going ethical into these things, I'm selling services...

    --
    Sinisa
    1. Re:In my case by JohnQPublic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not going ethical into these things, I'm selling services...

      If that's so, then you shouldn't be doing what you said you'd do. If your customer (the employer) tells you to delete the account, you delete it. But if they want the data, at least in the USA, it's theirs. And if you delete it, expect them to ask for the data to be restored from your backups.

      Failing to turn it over to them or deleting it without their permission may get you sued, and rightly so. Unless your contract with the employer says you can ... you do have a contract, right?

  4. Remeber who is paying by elp · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work for a shared website hosting company, our policy is that the entity paying for the site and the mailboxes owns them, in this case the company.

    How they choose to use the mail boxes is their business. Trying to override your customers idea of correct policy towards their staff will only cost you their business and the resulting bad reputation will hurt you.

    My sympathies if its your relative, you could always lie and say that the box was deleted when the employee left.

    1. Re:Remeber who is paying by hummassa · · Score: 1

      That's what I said in my other comment about my personal policy on this (and yes, I sysadmined six years);

      Scenario 1:

      Co -- hi. this is your client, company X, and we'd like to disable account to employee Y.
      Me -- ok, one minute, ok. the account is disabled.
      Co -- oh, and I would like the content of the mailbox to be sent to employee Z.
      Me -- ok, one minute, ok. the mbox was empty [NOTE: don't even bother to look].
      Co -- oh, and I would like to redirect all e-mail sent to it to employee Z, also.
      Me -- ok, one minute, ok. all done. [again, don't bother]
      After that, mail sent to X@Y goto /dev/null or, better yet, bounces, or better still, tarpits it to death (makes sender thinks problem is with his account), bounces as spam, or something.

      Scenario 2:

      Co -- please, reset password of sales@Y
      Me -- to whom do I send new password?
      Co -- employee Z
      Me -- ok, done.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    2. Re:Remeber who is paying by JohnQPublic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK, now THAT'S unethical. You're outright lying to your customer. I sure hope my company never does business with yours.

    3. Re:Remeber who is paying by hummassa · · Score: 1

      Man, if you don't make business with someone who lies to you, than you have no business at all.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    4. Re:Remeber who is paying by buysse · · Score: 1

      You email passwords? Unencrypted? In the freakin' clear?

      Dude... I'm nervous about giving passwords over the phone if I don't know the recipient well. That's trusting a lot of security, including their [the recipient of the password] Outlook Express and virus scanner. Odds are, that email will be saved. Some viruses have forwarded out old emails for fun.

      Are you still a sysadmin?

      --
      -30-
    5. Re:Remeber who is paying by hummassa · · Score: 1

      1. who said anything about e-mail?
      2. who said anything about unencrypted?
      3. yes and no. I work as a developer and as a system administration (yes, security) consultant.

      HTH,

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    6. Re:Remeber who is paying by buysse · · Score: 1

      Sorry. Read the "send the password" as via email, when it does not specifically say, and I've never seen a sales droid who used encrytped or signed email of any kind. Wasn't awake and needed to rant. Please don't take it personally.

      -Josh

      --
      -30-
    7. Re:Remeber who is paying by Glonoinha · · Score: 2, Interesting

      According to Kevin Mitnick roughly (insert large number here)% of all 'computer hacking' is done via social engineering. Why spend weeks or months on a distributed network hacking 4096-bit encryption when you can hire a 36DD-24-36 from the local stripper shack to get one of the guys to just tell her his password simply by pretending she likes him?

      Old story - a sys/admin at company I was doing consulting for was bragging on his security at lunch with me one day, I told him I could hack my way onto his network in about 5 minutes. We get back, he takes that bet. With him standing there watching (I was dressed in a suit, everybody there knew I was the consultant - that helps) I called the department manager on the phone, said 'I need your username and password.' He told it to me, I walked to an empty machine, logged in as that user with that password. Took me 2 minutes.

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    8. Re:Remeber who is paying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At what point do you inform your customers about your "personal policies"?

      Because if these "polcies" aren't documented, they aren't policies at all -- it's typical BOFH computer janitor power play bullshit.

    9. Re:Remeber who is paying by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      It's not |don't make business|.

      Don't give business to someone who lies to you.

      There are still honest people in this world.

  5. IANAL by orthogonal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Does that company now have access to the email even though there is no written contract nor technology use policy?

    me look left
    me look right

    me still sees no lawyers.

    This is an ethical or moral or legal question (depending on your particular viewpoint).

    Slashdot, to the extent it's not a troll-fest and crap-flooder's convention, is a technical forum.

    That said, this techie's understanding of the relevant law is that an employee's email, as any other work-product, belongs to the company that paid for the email account and paid the employee for the time the employee spent producing the email.

    On the other hand, at one time and place -- Feudal Europe -- "employers" thought they also had the right of droit du seigneur too, so we shouldn't fall into the trap of believing that something is right just because it's legal.

    Perhaps by asserting that privacy trumps payment you'll be striking a blow for freedom that will be remembered, centuries from now, as the beginning of our liberation from employers who today claim that they can lock employees in warehouses, denying them medical attention or can strip search workers accused of theft.

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

      me look left
      me look right
      me still sees no lawyers.

      Ok, JarJar.

    2. Re:IANAL by Otter · · Score: 1
      On the other hand, at one time and place -- Feudal Europe -- "employers" thought they also had the right of droit du seigneur...

      This is almost entirely, if not entirely, a myth.

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

      It would be nice if the link you gave didn't completely contradict your assertion.

  6. Policy, policy, policy by Jon+Peterson · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hi,

    As resident information officer for my little company, I've had both legal advice (in UK) and experience of similar situations.

    First off, the paperwork you need to worry about is the stuff between you (3rd party email services provider) and your customer (the company). What the company did or didn't say to the employee isn't really your problem - although it is their problem.

    Now, ideally, your contract, or your services schedule would contain something saying just what happens in this situation. If not - now's the time to add it!

    I would think that if the company phoned up and said 'sorry to be thick but I've forgotten the password for account xyz can you reset it?' then you'd do that, because handling lost or forgotten passwords is what you as service provider do.

    And that, basically is what has happened. Now, it _may be_ that the company actually promised the employee that it wouldn't read their old email once they'd left (a somewhat odd promise anyway). But, that's not your problem. You aren't helping the company break its promise, because you don't know about it's promise.

    More importantly it's NOT YOUR PLACE to determine your customer's privacy policies. That's actually quite important because your customers are (under UK law) liable for YOUR decisions regarding privacy. In order to deal with that liability your customers need to know what you will do in a given situation, and simply turning round and saying 'sorry dude I'm not going to tell you that' isn't good enough. A privacy policy that's too strict is just as bad as one that's too loose.

    That last sentence may seem odd, but consider this. Your customer is liable under the UK Data Protection Act for any personal information it holds. Now, just before Employee left the company, someone sent a copy of their CV to Employee on the off chance of getting a job. Now, that CV is sensitive personal information, and Company MUST be able to access it and/or remove it if the author of the CV so requests.

    So, it's no good them saying 'sorry, we can't delete your CV from our mail server because our ISP won't let us, so I guess it'll just hang around on the hard disk for ages until some guy somewhere with a root password takes a look at it'.

    No good at all, you see?

    So, my advice is:

    1) Don't play 'privacy hero' and decide what your customers can and can't do.
    2) Get some data protection rules into your contracts asap.
    3) Meanwhile act assuming that the customer is honest and decent - if they aren't it won't be your fault, but if you pre-judge them as evil spying people then it will be your fault

    --
    ----- .sig: file not found
  7. Where's the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Okay, if it was a personal account it would be different. But come on! Personal email addressses are a dime a dozen - who would use their work email address for personal things if they didn't want their employer to be able to read them?

  8. depends on the country you are in by martin · · Score: 1

    and any data protection/human rights/RIPE style laws in place.

    In the UK, I think the answer would be know with a policy document that the 'user' has agreed to. This of course is still open to question as the UK human rights law and RIPE laws currently contradict each other on this. So until a court decides which has precident it's unclear.

  9. How about ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How about you make a (verified) copy of the mailbox in question and (secretly) keep a copy on CD. Send a copy to the employee. Delete the mailbox.

    Contact the company and say that as the employee was termintated you (following standard procedure) removed the mailbox and sent a copy to the 'mailbox owner', the employee.

    Say you may be able to recover some data if they have a legal case for it.

    You should then act on what they say, but you have something in writing to prevent you being sued by the employee for releasing personal data as you can counter sue the company for misleading you.

    No IANAL

    1. Re:How about ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      the employee is not the legal owner anymore the company is .

  10. Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slightly off-topic this, the company I work for hosts the website and e-mail for its parent company. Now before we got them a domain name and standardised their email accounts, they used various personal accounts, most of them been Hotmail or AOL.

    Since they started using our server, management (including the CEO) insisted they keep the Hotmail accounts going in case we start to read confidential mails, never mind the unknown script kiddies who (attempt to) break into Hotmail 24/7 :-)

    As far as security within technology goes, some people in management really have no idea... It makes me wonder what goes on in their heads!

  11. check with local lawyer. by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    no other way to check it out.

    geez, why do people have to ask these things from slashdot?? ALL YOU GET IS OPINIONS ON HOW IT SHOULD BE, NOT THE CURRENT STATE OF THE LAWS IN THE COUNTRY YOU'RE IN.

    for example there are countries in which you CAN NOT read employees email legally unless you have explicitly said&informed that you will read it when you gave that account to him/her(or along those lines anyways, and it must have been very clearly said/informed to the person in question that the mail isn't private despite being protected by a password and seeming to be for his/her eyes only, otherwise it's the same as receiving a letter with the employees name at the office, falling under 'letter secrecy'.). same goes for other 'private' material like tracking calls against the will of the employee(even if the business is paying for the line)..

    one of the very good reasons for laws to exist is to make limits on what rights of yours you can give away... businesses don't come before people!

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  12. In Order of Importance... by fuzzybunny · · Score: 2, Insightful

    -The law. You should have a lawyer, as a company. Use "it". Law _always_ _always_ _always_ supersedes business arrangements, policies, whatever.
    -Your contractual obligations and anything you've committed yourself to. See #1.

    And you could argue about the following:

    -Your customer's needs, your conscience, your reputation, etc etc etc.

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  13. Laws aside, here's a solution.... by shyster · · Score: 1
    Since you're the admin of the server, and the account in question is that of a relative, I propose you filter the email. Look thru the account, remove anything potentially embarassing (perhaps with the knowledge and cooperation of your relative) and turn over any work-related emails to the company.

    There's no reason to divulge personal or private correspondence, but there's also no reason not to turn over work related information. Keep whatever you do quiet, and I suspect you'd be perfectly fine legally as well. And, if the company in question knows the relation between you and the former employee, I dare say they're going to practically expect you to filter the email beforehand anyways.

    1. Re:Laws aside, here's a solution.... by buysse · · Score: 1

      That suggestion does violate the laws of several countries, and is less ethical than allowing the company access, assuming the company supplied the email account. It sounds good on the surface, and it does help prevent the company from receiving personal information, but it does not protect the confidential information of the company.

      --
      -30-
    2. Re:Laws aside, here's a solution.... by shyster · · Score: 1

      Email is, as we all know, technically insecure. Any company that sends confidential information via email on a server they do not own or admin is asking for trouble. I don't believe it's unethical to know the confidential information, but only to use it. So, in this case, the former employee would presumably already know the confidential information, and the admin can choose to disregard it. In most cases, however, it's quite simple for an admin to filter the email simply by subject and sender name without having to look at the actual text. A quick glance thru the text would also give an indication of it's purpose, but would only result in a very rudimentary comprehension of the contents. Allowing the former employee to filter his own inbox would also be the same as what any marginally tech-savvy employee would've done either before leaving the company or before the password on the mail server was changed. I see no ethical problem there. I realize, of course, that the company has a right to the emails in the inbox. But, they really don't have any right to personal correspondence anymore than they do if you were to write loveletters on office stationery. A trusted third party (which the admin has to be, by design) to intervene and balance the competing interests seems quite fair and ethical to me. As for violating laws in several countries...whoop-de-do. We all know that most laws are inane and mainly benefit corporations... especially anything to do with technology.

  14. Simply... by slittle · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Whoever pays the bills gets access to whatever accounts they're paying for. Your deal is with them, not their employees. The fact they even have employees is irrelevant as far as you're concerned.

    --
    Opportunity knocks. Karma hunts you down.
    1. Re:Simply... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seconded. He who pays for it, gets to play with it. Period.

      If this company is paying for, say, five email accounts with you, and called up to say 'what is the password for account j.foobar?' then your response should have been 'Oh, of course! The password is: gorblat.'

      Period. It's their accounts, you don't know what they do with them, you don't want to know what they do with them, you don't need to know what they do with them, and so on.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  15. Dot some Is, cross some Ts by eclectro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you were in your relative's shoes, and he was the admin for the company, what would you want him to do for you?

    I think you could think of this another way. Do you think phone conversations should be private?? Would you want the company you worked for taping all your conversations??

    The company could be on a fishing expidition for all you know, looking for a way to get back at your relative.

    Corporate morality is nonexistant in today's world.

    If they owned the computer hardware, then they would have a powerful arguement for owning the emails. But according to your question, _you_ own the hardware.

    If I were an ISP for that company, I would tell them to get a court order. I would do the same if I were playing admin for them.

    I would respond to them in writing/certified mail that you need to protect yourself legally, and request politely that they do things "officially" and get a court order.

    If they decide to no longer use your services and let you go, then you never needed their business in the first place. I would send a letter to them acknowledging the cessation of a business relationship. Then _with out reading the emails_ I would delete them, as there is no longer a business relationship with the company, and you no longer need them for any reason. Don't tell them that in the letter BTW, just do it.

    They could threaten to sue you, in which case you no longer need their business. Call a lawyer. Have him send a certified letter to them explaining that you are immediately severing your business relationship and ask the lawyer how long you should hold on to the emails (I would guess thirty days, if not seven)and then delete them.

    If they deliver a court order, obey it, and hope that you have an honest relative. Have him get a lawyer in any event.

    Above all, keep yourself clean, honest, and do nothing that you will not be afraid to tell about in a court of law later without perjurying yourself.

    I Am Not A Lawyer, and this is not meant as legal advice. Get a lawyer before doing any of this It's just one pal chatting with another about opinions on how to keep your nose clean.

    If the bottom falls out, and everything goes to pot, sue slashdot for letting you ask the question in the first place before telling you to get a lawyer.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  16. There are possible good reasons for this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most significantly, if the account was used for external business contacts, they'l like to continue the contacts, handle any incoming e-mail, etc.

    Really, it bouls down to how you see your "customers". Is it primarily the company, or primarily the individuals?

    I might forward any unread mail and set up a permanent future forwarding, but not provide the password to the mail account itself, so the company can't pretend that Mr.X is stll working there, but others can see that Ms.Y is taking over.

    Alternatively, bounce all of Mr.X's e-mail with a message to contact Ms.Y instead.

    If I felt there was something funny about the request and didn't think Mr.X was going to go on a vandalism rampage, I might have a quiet word with Mr.X before forwarding the e-mails. It's not like he couldn't have done anything he was going to do between the firing and the company telling you about it, after all...

  17. Only in America? by E_elven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Looks like the courts in Finland just upheld a legislation barring an employer from reading employee e-mails. Couldn't find an announcement in English, nor are the translation tools too good, so you'll have to take my word for it. So they're faring well.

    --
    Marxist evolution is just N generations away!
    1. Re:Only in America? by michael_cain · · Score: 1
      Looks like the courts in Finland just upheld a legislation barring an employer from reading employee e-mails. Couldn't find an announcement in English, nor are the translation tools too good, so you'll have to take my word for it.

      Interesting. Wonder if this law is consistent with the treatment of e-mail in other parts of their legal system? For example, in the US, e-mails have the status of written communication and are "discoverable" during lawsuits. Testimony that you said "Cheat them out of $100M" on the phone is hearsay and not evidence; put the same statement in an e-mail and it's admissible. Microsoft and other large corporations have found this out the hard way in the past several years. Given that status, forbidding a company from reading an employee's e-mail (in a company-provided mailbox) would make as much sense as forbidding the company from reading papers written and circulated by the employee.

      Applying this logic to the original question, it is possible (though not probable) that emptying a mailbox could put the e-mail provider in the position of having "destroyed evidence." The provider simply can't know all of the circumstances that might be in play. Is the client company under a court order to retain written records? In the US, and I suspect in other countries, those e-mails are company documents and must be handled in accordance with company policies and any legal obligations.

    2. Re:Only in America? by mr3038 · · Score: 1
      In Finland the basic rule is that if the mail is sent to john.smith@company.com, then only John Smith is allowed to read it and it's considered strictly personal unless a previously written contract says otherwise. However, if the mail address is support@company.com or something else that doesn't specify a single person but a function instead, then the employer is allowed to read the mail by default. If you, as a sender, are trying to contact customer support and send mail to somebody's personal address and that person has left the company, then it's your fault. I know that some companies even provide mail forwarding for ex-employees so that their personal addresses stay functional by the time they leave the company.

      Of course, such a vague rule cannot be the written law, but that seems to be the logic behind court rulings.

      --
      _________________________
      Spelling and grammar mistakes left as an exercise for the reader.
  18. Think of Future Implications... by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1) Whatever you do will set a precedent, so keep that in mind. Saying "No" seems to your benefit, since saying "Yes" could set a pattern and they could expect more in the future.

    2) Have you actually told them you still have the data? If so, this may not have been wise. As long as they don't know if the data still exists, they can push for it. If they don't know, they're reaching in the dark. This may be a good reason to start a policy of deleting accounts whenever you've received notice an employee is fired or whenever a client stops taking your services.

    3) Get a lawyer. Why? This WILL be a precedent, if not for others, for this company. If they get what they want now, they may start asking to check everyone's email account and, eventually, they might go so far as to expect you to provide them with access to all accounts. You need to find out if you have a right to refuse the request. The best news that you could get would be a lawyer telling you that you either a) don't have to provide the data, or b) are not allowed to provide the data.

    4) As said above (2 times), this will set a precedent, no matter what. In my experience, whenever someone asks for a special service, that isn't the end. It's not long before they ask for a repeat, and, once they've broken down that boundary, they ask for more and more. If you do decide to provide them access, or you find out you have to give them access, if possible you SHOULD charge for the service. Otherwise, they won't see this as as an item with value. By charging, you are setting a limit and taking steps to make sure they don't just keep asking for and expecting you to do more and more for them.

    1. Re:Think of Future Implications... by dubious9 · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that the employer intends to infringe on their privacy. As post above states, you don't know their privacy policy, and it is standard today for companies to let their employees know that their e-mail can be monitored. Furthermore, if they are the ones paying for it, then it is their property, and if they abuse it then it is their fault.

      As a postmaster you have no right to withhold the information. It doens't matter that they may ask for complete control over e-mail in the future. It's their e-mail which they effectively lease to their employees, and they can demand that you do anything they want with it. The legal consequences of them looking at e-mail, are squarely not on your sholders.

      Even from a moral standpoint, there is no ground to refuse them access. What if they lost a document whose content was contained in an email by that person and they are just trying to recover it?

      Bottom line, they provided the account, through you, to their employee, and you don't have any right to control access to what they paid for. If it is illegal, then it's the employers fault.

      --
      Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
    2. Re:Think of Future Implications... by TheWanderingHermit · · Score: 1

      If it is illegal, then it's the employers fault.

      When I was a teenager, I rode my bike everywhere (I still do, quite often, I prefer it to a car). My Mother kept telling me (since I was so cocky) that I could be "dead right." In other words, it didn't matter if I had a right of way, if a car didn't stop, I could still be dead.

      The employer may, as you say, have the right to access the info. And, if it is illegal, it may very well be their fault. But that doesn't mean the person who's e-mail is being examaned can't try to sue the hosting service. It may be a suit without merit, or it may be dismissed.

      Or it may cost thousands just to defend the company long enough to get the case dismissed. I agree that the burden would or should fall on the employer, but that doesn't mean the hosting service won't be, as I referenced earlier, "dead right."

      In these days when a company can be sued by a customer who is too stupid to know their coffee is hot, I know I wouldn't dare take the risk to my company without consulting one of my lawyers.

      As you say in your sig, even if the street is one-way, it is wise to look in both directions. Even if it seems clear where the responsibility lies, look in both directions and CYA.

      In my experience, I've found that whenever you don't CYA, the incident doesn't go away, it just gets worse and worse. I'd rather start with caution and not need it than do what I think is right, without verification, and find some pissed off twerp suing me just to be a pain.

    3. Re:Think of Future Implications... by dubious9 · · Score: 1

      Good point, chalk up another reason to get a lawyer and have the employer indemnify him against any suit that may be brought up. If he doesn't give the e-mail, the employer may well sue because it's more their data than his. I think the chance of this is much greater than a 3rd party suing him for release private information.

      Thus: get a lawyer, they may suck sometimes, but they are good to cover your ass.

      --
      Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
    4. Re:Think of Future Implications... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm just waiting for someone to rehash the stupid McDonald's coffee lawsuit arguments.

  19. Legal issue by secolactico · · Score: 1

    Where does the independent hoster look for guidance on something such as this?

    Not Slashdot, hopefully. *My* advice to you is, talk to your lawyer before proceeding.

    You probably have a contract with the company that your are providing hosting for, not the employee. But you (and your lawyer) will probably need to go over your TOS before granting or refusing access.

    When you are a small provider, word of mouth counts for a lot. And getting on your customer's bad side will probably cost you.

    Once again, talk to a lawyer before taking action.

    Sidenote: Do you think anything in your relative's mailbox might harm him? Have you talked to him? Could they forge emails so it looks like he's the one sending them?

    Always keep your personal and business email accounts separate. If you can have them on different domains, better. Even if you own the business, that might not be the case tomorrow.

    --
    No sig
  20. Re:in Holland by tigersha · · Score: 1

    IANAL and I am not familiar with US Law but in Europe and in Germany there is something called the Datenshutzgesetz (Data Protection Law) which prevents a business from accessing any such info without permission. It is also illegal to check the URL's that staff browsed and so on.

    Basically digging through mail is considered the same as placing a wiretap on his phone: A definite no-no.

    What we here do is to ask our new employees to sign a document that we make a copy of all mail that comes in to their account and treat it as normal business correspondence. Never had any problem with it and it is quite clear that we need to have access to old business mail.

    That one particular mailbox is getting pretty damn large though :)

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
  21. Conflicting answers by redelm · · Score: 3, Informative
    You will get conflicting answers because the expectations and understanding in this area is still evolving.

    Traditional UNIX sysadmin ethics prohibit snooping in email for any reason. Snooping files and traffic is similarly verboten, except debateably (ulimit) in the case of excessive resource usage. This was done to increase user confidence and frank discussions in electronic media.

    Current capitalist thinking is whoever pays, owns. This is pushed because email has proven to be very popular, frank and valuable. A victim of it's own success.

    Personally, I did snoop in my wife's email. That's why she's now my ex. Neither qualms nor regrets.

    1. Re:Conflicting answers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Traditional UNIX sysadmin ethics prohibit snooping in email for any reason

      Sure, and the main reason for this is that in Ye Olden Days, email accounts were hard to get. So, it was common and expected that people would use their work email address for personal reasons, and the sysadmins respected that.

      Now, when anyone can get a hotmail account (or purchase an SSL encrypted webmail account from numerous providers), there's very little reason not to treat business accounts as the employer's property. If people are really stupid enough to mail anything they wouldn't want their boss to see, that's their problem.

      Back when I did Mail Admin, I absolutely drew the line on poking through people's accounts (even when tempted by certain girls I had a crush on). However, I never had a qualm about granting access when an employee departed or looking in an account if there was a technical problem.

    2. Re:Conflicting answers by yuri+benjamin · · Score: 1

      Personally, I did snoop in my wife's email. That's why she's now my ex. Neither qualms nor regrets.

      There's a story waiting to be told.
      In my case, my wife and I sometimes read email over eachothers' shoulders.
      We know each other's passwords and nothing is hidden.
      I'm guessing that whatever you read while snooping her email would have lead to a split eventually anyway - snooping just made you discover sooner rather than later.
      Sorry dude - I hope you find someone better.

      --
      You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
  22. Lesson learned, hopefully. by DuckDuckBOOM! · · Score: 1
    Does that company now have access to the email even though there is no written contract nor technology use policy?
    That was your first mistake. Your second was in not running to a lawyer the instant you got the request. Without something on paper, you're now at risk of legal action no matter what you do or don't do. Get off Slashdot and go talk to someone who knows business law!

    And hopefully, your third mistake will NOT be hosting another company's mail or whatever without a written agreement and AUP.

    That being said: If the person using the mailbox was an employee of the co. paying for it, easy call: the contents belong to the employer. If the mailbox user was a contractor or, worse still, an unconnected third party, privacy and/or copyright and/or trade secret laws could apply and things could get very sticky. In which case you may be best off doing as some earlier posters suggested, causing the server to "forget" it ever had mail in that box, then forgetting about it yourself. IANAL, blah blah blah.

    --
    Life is like surrealism: if you have to have it explained to you, you can't afford it.
  23. Chances are good that... by stienman · · Score: 2, Informative

    I imagine the only reason you know about this is because you haven't given them direct access to set up and delete email accounts, or to change the passwords on them. Here is my advice:

    If the email is addressed to their registered domain, then they own the email.

    If the email is addressed to your registered domain, then who owns the email depends on the agreement you had with them. If you did not have a written agreement which discloses ownership of email sent to the addresses the agreement is written for then run don't walk, directly to your lawyer. At this point it becomes a you said/they said type of issue.

    You could simply tell them what your policy is after the fact, and follow through with your new 'policy' but if you favor your relative they may sue you, if you favor them your relative may sue you, so at this point it's best to stop and get advice from someone who can represent you if their advice goes awry.

    Lastly, send out a new terms of service to all current 'customers' explicitly stating your terms of service. Tell them that if after 30 days they are still hosting with you then that act shows they agree to the new terms of service.

    In the company I work for I regularily forward email accounts to the employee who is either taking over the old position or the employee who is handling most of the added workload. The simple fact is that a lot of work-related (and contract work at that) email is always in the pipeline, and a customer is not going to take, "We fired the employee and deleted their email for privacy" as an excuse for why we didn't respond to their request in a timely manner. Our employees understand this when they come and when they go. This forwarding is only active for a month or so, and we prevent any outgoing emails from being created in that person's name from our mailserver.

    -Adam

  24. Re:in Holland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, for that matter, forcing them to work overtime without paying them for it and giving the fruits of his labour to the shareholders.

  25. Who paid? by jmlyle · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's really what it comes down to, I think. Whoever arranged for the service to be provoided to the employee and paid for it (or managed the relationship, if the service was free), is the owner of the data.

    I really don't like it either, but a couple of times I have been required to provide people's email to my boss, including a Vice-President. I had to do a little bit of soul searcing on that, but not a whole lot.

    Then I was, at another point, asked if I could archive all incoming and outgoing mail. I made a half-hearted effort, and eventually reported back that it wasn't possible. It was an ugly time all around in those days. At least I kept my job after 90% of the employees were layed off.

    But then again, none of these people were my relatives. I hated them all.

    --
    I have misplaced my pants.
    1. Re:Who paid? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1
      Then I was, at another point, asked if I could archive all incoming and outgoing mail. I made a half-hearted effort, and eventually reported back that it wasn't possible. It was an ugly time all around in those days. At least I kept my job after 90% of the employees were layed off.

      Note that in certain industries, this is federal law. Financial houses, for example, must archive all communications.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  26. Wait... by pbrammer · · Score: 3, Informative

    You simply wait for a court order. That's how things work. Don't hand anything over without a court order. Simple.

    If they don't have a contract with you stating that their e-mails on your system are their property, then you don't have to give them anything -- unless some court feels you need to.

    Phil

  27. Too late by RMH101 · · Score: 2, Informative
    "there is no written contract nor technology use policy?"

    That's you screwed then. Don't do *anything* without your line management putting it in writing. You'd be opening yourself up to all sorts of legal nasties. In the EU, it's very thorny: despite AUPs to the contrary, people have still been charged for infringing the HRI by reading others email. Even if the AUP covers it mind: and also bear in mind any email that account's recieved from other people. They didn't sign any policy and so could argue that you've infringed their privacy.
    All this is closing the door after the horse has bolted: get a formal ToS written now by a lawyer, get everyone to sign it, and tread carefully.

  28. You have a conflict of interest by JohnQPublic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fourth, it's my relative's account.

    Even if for no other reason, you need to stand back and look at what you've done in the past. As a business providing a service for a fee, your company must treat this user's email the same as every other's. You're opening the company up for a justifiable lawsuit from the employer if you don't. Not only that, but you're establishing a precedent you'll have to follow in all future encounters with this employer and probably all others.

    If you have no policies or past precedents to follow, you need to forget that this person is your relative and ask what you'd do with any other user. Then do the same. Your company may still get sued for making the wrong choice, but you'll eliminate the conflict of interest problem. Just make sure you immediate document this new policy, at least internally, and follow it in the future.

    Even better, if you're not just a one-person company, recuse yourself. Give the employer's request to someone else to handle, and make it clear to that person that you have a conflict of interest and that they have the full authority to make whatever decision is consistent with past practice (and failing that, company philosophy and goals) without fear of reprisals. In writing, if possible.

  29. Pass the buck on business by x00101010x · · Score: 1

    My small gamedev co. used to serve up our own email, but when we downgraded from a T1 to DSL (we were sharing the T1 with a neighbor who moved) we switched to hosting.

    Since we were used to full control, we went with something that provided administration features via the webmail system. With this we can set up lists, and more relevantly to this issue, set users passwords (among other things).

    If ever somebody left the company (good terms or not) and we needed access to their email (for evidence, or just not wanting to miss an RFP sent to a no longer employed producer), we would simply set said ex-employee's password and take what we want. The hoster never gets involved.

    Here one of the Sr. producers holds the keys to the email, in other situations a network admin would be ideal (we have no admin, just whatever random code monkey has time to love and nuture our network).

    The software our hoster uses is iMail from Ipswitch. Here's a link.
    (I have no connection to ipswitch except that our email hoster uses their software.)
    I'm sure there's probably open source solutions that can provide similar features (or be adapted to do so).

    --
    DONT PANIC
    1. Re:Pass the buck on business by x00101010x · · Score: 1

      I know, it doesn't help with the current situation of allowing access or not, but it would help to keep it from happening in the future.
      Also, our CEO also has the password to the admin account, so if the Sr. producer left, the CEO would still be able to access it.

      --
      DONT PANIC
  30. Talk to lawyer by JGski · · Score: 1
    Since e-mail server isn't company property the standard justification for violating/having no employee privacy isn't there!

    Further if there was no specific provision in the "lease/service contract" there is probably no extension of it to the server. This might even hold for "IP" rights of what on the server.

    IANAL. Talk to lawyer about this.

  31. ACM Code of Ethics by drivers · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As an ACM member I will ...
    1.1 Contribute to society and human well-being.
    1.2 Avoid harm to others.
    1.3 Be honest and trustworthy.
    1.4 Be fair and take action not to discriminate.
    1.5 Honor property rights including copyrights and patents.
    1.6 Give proper credit for intellectual property.
    1.7 Respect the privacy of others.
    1.8 Honor confidentiality.


    Sounds like you should not turn over the email. I wouldn't.

  32. Doesn't sound like he wants legal advice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't sound like he wants legal advice to me.

    Here's the way I read the question:

    "Dear /., I run a mail server for a company who fired one of my relatives. They now want access to his email, which I guess I'm required (ehtically and probably legally) to give to them. However, I'm torn between loyalty to my customer and loyalty to my relative (I think they're looking for proof of some misdeed) - can anyone here give me an excuse to forego my sense of ethics?"

    Seriously, I don't think he's asking for legal advice, it sounds like he's asking for an excuse to ignore his conscience.

    While asking a lawyer is the best advice you can give, it's probably not what he wants to hear (because he already knows what the lawyer will tell him.)

  33. I bet you're not an Experienced SysAdmin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    If you were, then what to do would be obvious:

    1) Open your relative's email account, scan through his email.

    2) Save off all the stuff you can embarrass him with at family get-togethers. Make special note of such terms as "snookums" and "little homer" or whatnot.

    3) Find anything illegal and make an encrypted copy. Accidently lose those backup tapes. Not that you are going to blackmail your relative, but you might be able to get some moral compensation for your time and effort by spoofing email from your relative to the sender/recipient, and recommending the purp pony up some money to your favorite charity or else you'll go 'public' with it. If your relative winds up with some broken limbs, so much the better - he should have never been dealing with such people in the first place.

    4) Then, flat out delete anything that makes _you_ look bad.

    5) THEN send the batch of email to the company. Replace CRLF with \0, then tar, uuencode, compress, and bzip with a password. Make sure you remove the filename extensions at each step, and tell them it's 'zipped', and you did the work on a 'Mac' (.hqx the thing for good measure). Then, sign it with a pgp key that's registered to a third-party public key server that no-one can validate to unless they live in Tunisia.

    If the company wants the information so bad, they'll get it, eventually.

    6) Finally, to lighten the mood, spoof an email to your relative's wife pretending to be his 'office girlfriend', telling him how much she misses their little 'get togethers' in the copy room. Hillarity ensues.

    There, now you know what it takes to be an accomplished Systems Administrator.

  34. Your country? by PeteQC · · Score: 1

    Are you American? Canadian? European? Russian? It matters so much for this type of question.

    --
    Montreal - Best city to live in!
  35. Conflict of interest? by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 1

    I have a question for the story poster. The whole scenario seems sketchy to me to begin with. The odds of this exact mailbox meeting this exact series of events is very unlikely. Did you get the hosting contract based on the relative's connection to the company? If you did, welcome to conflict of interest! You have entered a convoluted world of nepotism and insider backroom deals. Anything you write down can and will be used against you since its only a matter of time until you do something illegal.

    Well, thats really worst case scenario. But expect extra scrutiny if this actually does go sour and it looks like you guys are scratching each others back.

    The moral of the story? Conflict of interest rules protect both the employer and employee.

  36. Easy way out: AVOID IT ALTOGETHER by sudog · · Score: 1

    So there's an easier way out of this. Tell whoever's asking that the mailbox is empty. Read the email yourself for curiosity's sake, delete it with a secure over-write, and be done with it.

    Why wrestle with the morality of the situation when you aren't even qualified to do so, and might put yourself in legal trouble by cooperating in case this employee sues your ass off in court?

    Better not to get involved. Don't waste your time.

  37. Re:E-Mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And this is the first time access has been asked for. As recently as the first of the year the order was 'dump everything'. Yes, there is a personal conflict on my part- why not ask for the others' recently closed accounts?

  38. Here is what we did by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What we did as a company when we had a similar situation (posting anonymously because of this) is delete the account and have all email to it fowarded to the person replacing the job. We felt this was ethical as we needed those emails anyway, and the account was most likly empty anyway.

    We did not have the account anymore and did not falsify our udentity as said person. But emails that we were receiving would be subject as to weather we would press charges against the former partner. And had ramifications in the 10's of thousands of dollors of business that was being stolen by a partner of the company.

  39. How was this handled in previous technologies? by no+longer+myself · · Score: 2, Interesting
    OK, today we get so bogged down in the technological aspect that the obvious can get away from us. Here's my point:

    Mr. Former Employee
    C/O Old Employer Co.
    123 Industrial Way
    Anytown, NJ 12345-6789

    IANAL so I don't know the answer to this question: Who is legally allowed to open this envelope? I know I've seen bosses open the mail of departed former employees, look at it and say, "OK, I know what to do with this," and walk off, but the legality of such actions never crossed my mind. Find out the answer to this, and you've probably got your answer to the ethical dilemma around the e-mail question.

  40. Many smart replies- here is a dumb one by leehwtsohg · · Score: 1

    You could tell them that there is no way to get at the data without the password.
    It they want the data they have to get the password from the employee. It they want to go to court, they should go to court to get the employee to give them the password.
    You could even change the e-mail system so that it indeed encrypts the accounts with the password, and avoid problems in the future.

  41. It's obvious what to do by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    The company and the ex-employee both want something from you. The company want information, the ex-employee want you not to pass on that information. You, therefore, hold the balance of power.

    Proper etiquette in this situation is to back up the data onto a CD-R, make a second copy, and place each in a separate safe deposit box in the same city. You should then e-mail each party independently, telling them that you have the information stored on a CD-R, and it is in a safe deposit box at ..... [different address in each e-mail], it is the only copy since your recent server upgrade, and how much would they be prepared to offer you to lay their hands on it? You must fake the headers so it looks as though the same message was sent cc: to both parties, even though the SDB location is different.

    In your next e-mail to each side, you "carelessly" let slip how much the other side was prepared to offer you for the disputed data, and ask if they would like to raise their bids. You do this several times and it proceeds like a poker game when it's down to just two players: they keep calling and raising the stakes, and if neither side folds then it will come to a showdown.

    Once each side has reached their maximum bid for how much they are prepared to offer, and you have booked a flight to the West Indies, then you let each side have their own copy of the data!

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  42. Whose mail is it? by FuroTheRed · · Score: 1
    I'd say it's his mail.

    A lot of people, I noticed, are saying that the box belongs to the company, but the box is not the same as the mail. If I agreed to put my diamond in your safe, does that mean the diamond belongs to you? I certainly hope not!

    If there were a contract stating that all mail stored in the box belonged to the company, that would be different. But there is no contract!

    --
    "Sometimes it takes more than an axe and a busload of strangers to work through your anger." -Rikk Estoban
  43. Read the ECPA - this is covered by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    Read the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. This may raise some questions, but sending a copy of this section of the ECPA back to the company is likely to result in some serious thinking about the issue. The ECPA only allows disclosure to the "addressee or intended recipient", or the "subscriber, in the case of remote computing service". Who's the subscriber here?

    Clearly, though, you can obtain consent from the original addressee and then disclose.

  44. Newsflash: by hummassa · · Score: 1

    Every single business with whom you have *any* association in this precise moment is lying to you.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    1. Re:Newsflash: by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      > Every single business with whom you have *any* association in this precise moment is lying to you.

      Well, then name three such businesses I have just given my custom to - tell me how they are currently lying to me.

  45. my company owns it all by jbeamon · · Score: 1

    My employee handbook is explicitly clear that anything I post or transmit through any company-managed infrastructure is the company's property. I have no rights of privacy to any of it. This simplifies things greatly, as anything I send or read through the company mail server, whether we host it or not, is already explicitly company property.

    Before anybody reacts that this seems awfully fascist or intrusive, I want to say that it provides me a real sense of security to know exactly where my boundaries are and that they are not flexible or partisan in their enforcement. That said, I'm the sysadmin whom others would call when they need so-and-so's email, and I've done exactly that on more than a few occasions already. "Company mail" is company mail.

    --
    -j