Slashdot Mirror
Keystroke Logger Faces Federal Wiretap Charges
securitas writes "In what prosecutors say is the first case of its kind, a former insurance claims manager was indicted on federal wiretapping charges for allegedly installing a keystroke logger on another employee's computer. The device was secretly installed 'on a PC used by a secretary to senior executives at Bristol West Insurance Group.' Reuters reports that the man, who had been fired, was gathering information for a class action lawsuit against his former employer. SecurityFocus interviews would-be keystroke logger user Larry Lee Ropp who reportedly installed the KEYKatcher device on the PC."
According to this politech posting by bernieS, it appears that the feds are going to be doing a little bit of double backing.
It raises an important question, I think: are keyloggers wiretapping devices? They don't involve telecommunications lines directly, so can they be considered in the same class?
Some food for thought.
While his heart may have been in the right place, it sounds like he went to far. Once the class action suits started, once the state of Calif. started investigating, there was very little need for his cloak and dagger actions. The courts could have done the work. If he felt that they were tampering with evidence, destroying evidence, or not providing everything the courts demanded he could have come forward. In my view, he put his own neck on the line in a wreckless way.
He was collecting the names of all the insurance company's clients... So uh... so he could notify them of their ability to join the class action lawsuit!
He was... he was helping the government investigate a corrupt company, yeah! He was James Bond! Saving the innocent from themselves!
Yeah... he had no intention whatsoever of joining a competing company and stealing the client list.
Good to hear that Big Brother is alive and well in our schools. This kind of thing just makes me sick. Is it appropriate to have computers monitor the phone line in a school for keywords or phrases, and then listen in when they're detected?
AccountKiller
I mean, is there any useful use for this device at all?
No. Not unless you think like this:
Dear god, think of the children. WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?
The correct solution is called parenting. There is no substitute for parental supervision and being involved with your children's activities. You wouldn't let a child watch whatever TV station they want, completely unsupervised - so why would you do the same with an internet-enabled computer? Call me old fashioned, but I don't even think a child should be allowed access to a net-connected computer unless it's in a shared, plainly visible family room environment.
Using tricks to snoop on your kids like this will breed an attitude of distrust and paranoia. You'll also only find out what they're up to after the event. Instead of working against them, you should actively work with them.
Plus, with a software solution - you actually have to check the logs from time to time. If you care so little that you'd rather a piece of software babysat your child, eventually you'll stop reading the logs because that involves effort.
....He got busted when he call the company to get the device back!
Not the smartest thing to do. He deservse whatever he gets.
I think I think, therefore I think I am.
Actually, kids in schools can not prevent the search of their lockers, as the school owns the lockers. I imagine it is this same logic that is extended to computers owned by the school.
The same unfortunately is applicable to many places of employment. Owning the equipment gives employers the right to monitor it. I believe that this was decided in the supreme court.
You should never assume that you have privacy on equipment you do not own.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
They were to apply federal wiretapping laws to spyware? If an unauthorized piece of software transmits information about my activities to a third party without my knowledge... that sounds like wiretapping to me.
You are receiving this message because your browser supports Slashdot Sigs and you have Slashdot Sigs enabled.
Just pray that you haven't done anything with your mouse, moved around the cursor, formatted the text, used any weird keyboard shortcuts, or ducked out to send an IM to your girlfriend. The data on the keylogger could be a little bit munged with that bit of randomness added. :D
Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
So if the school owns a phone they can listen in on all calls? It may be legal for the school to do the monitoring, but that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. I find it frightening that a generation can grow up with the expectation of being monitored constantly.
AccountKiller
I have to agree that this sort of behaviour is absolutely inevitable in nowadays everyday life. In the past it was called "social control" where small communities monitored each other's behaviour to see if somebody wasn't stepping out of line. If they would, due psychological force could be executed to get them in line again ("gossip"). Now this practice has mainly gone away simply because there are less and less small communities, and thus we need to monitor other people by different means. Ofcourse, in due time virtual communities will take over the "social control" thing in a comparable way, but it's not there yet.
In the meantime, we shall have to rely on the usual methods of camera's, microphones, keyloggers and traitors. I think we can learn a lot from former Soviet-Russia and sortlike countries that have executed this behaviour in great practical ways...
I take it you're not a parent. Find one who wouldn't be concerned that we offered filter free, non-monitored use of the internet.
I'm a parent, and I wouldn't send my kids to a school with a policy like yours. That policy is not, by the way, the same as offering "filter-free, non-monitored use of the internet". There are ways of achieving a safe and humane environment without logging every keystroke, and it's disingenuous to imply that there aren't.
Just because you sign a policy agreeing to slavery doesn't make it legal or ethical.
Every single person who uses the excuse "I can play God because you signed the policy agreement" should be bludgeoned to a pulp with wet noodles.
Why wet noodles? It'll take longer to achieve the pulp stage and sting more.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
No.
If you're talking to a trusted friend/family member about something personal (traumatic event in your life for instance) and someone walks in the room, do you modify your behavior? Of course. Does that mean you shouldn't have been talking about it? Of course not. People do have legitimate reasons to keep secrets. Doing so isn't evidence that what you were talking about or doing is wrong.
AccountKiller
As adults, they may be presented with similar policies. Only this time, they have the "choice" of consenting or losing their job.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I did not imply that I am fine with anything.
I am just stating fact. It's true that it would be wrong for companies to place video equipment in changing rooms and bathrooms, and in fact there are laws specifically preventing this.
You can be sure that you are covered by five different cameras as you enter and leave changing rooms. Also, most stores have spies close to these areas.
So much as ISPs and computer privacy is concerned, I wouldn't say they have the right to do anything. but that does not mean they don't have some capability and can use it covertly. One example might be is if you are a spammer.
Also as you know, the FBI can intercept much of your email traffic with carnivore if they wanted to, and because of the patriot act they do not need to get a court order to do so anymore.
Privacy is not a constitutional right. Modern electronics means that we as citizens are going to monitored and watched more than ever before.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Why does everyone use Columbine as an excuse to increase Big Brotherism?
Anyone with an ounce of honest thought realizes that watchful Big Brother wouldn't have prevented Columbine. Watchful Big Brother always sides with the majority popular clique. If anything watchful Big Brother would've helped the priveleged students antagonize their scapegoat prey and would've brought the whole situation to a head much earlier.
Which isn't a bad thing. Armchair parents and water-cooler gossips needed a wakeup call. I don't condone the end result of those actions but, in all honesty, the clique nature of our social system is just begging for it.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
I'm sure it works well for you, but don't put all your trust in it. It's ridiculously easy to fool something like that - ridiculously easy.
Wouldn't it be better to use policies and actually restrict their actions, as opposed to trying to half-ass guess when they're doing something wrong so you can send out the heavies? It's kinda like an automated CCTV system that looks for people in black/white striped tops, wearing masks and carrying black bags with dollar signs on... The sort of students who know how to get round stuff like that are the ones you want to be watching. Ironic, really... By using that approach to security, you've made yourself less secure.
Should keylogging a co-worked be illegal? Yes (though if it is done by your employer and you signed consent then no, just like phone monitoring ... free will works both ways).
... VNC not included :).
... idiots), their credit card # (amazon), or their root password. Keylogging is far more invasive.
Should keylogging be considered wiretapping? NO. It is a distinctly different technology and all lumping things together does is make it easier to confuse the issue the next time someone wants a warrant to do something -similar-.
Keylogging, network interception and a whole host of other things are still quite different from basic phone taps. They should be given a distinct category that can be properly defined.
If anything, the expectation of privacy on the line between your computer and your keyboard is MUCH higher than any expectation people have today for phones (when was the last time you started typing and realized someone else was typing on your computer as well
Plus, you can't expect that by listening in on a phone you are going to regularly hear someone's social security # (my bank uses it for my login id
In the end I think the guy should be penalized more than wiretapping, but not -as- a wiretapper.
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
-----
You've never had to deal with rule breakers, have you?
-----
This sums up my whole issue with Big Brother techniques such as keyloggers.
Even former university sysadmins play favorites. Teachers play favorites, parents play favorites, PEOPLE IN GENERAL play favorites. While playing favorites is a natural part of human existence there's no good to come of installing more and more systems to further antagonize those who aren't the favorite.
In our society the people writing the rules are far too priveleged and too well protected. A natural usefulness of rulebreakers is to identify which rules need to be revised or reconsidered. With all of these Big Brother techniques to catch rule breakers the moment they move a finger the wrong direction we'll never refine our system of rules. We continue adding rules and more rules and more rules. It's only logical that, in a system that never repeals or revises rules but onoy adds them, it will be possible to selectively enforce the rules not for the sake of order but to advance personal agendas.
Let's face it. Until we constructively figure out a way to get out of our descending spiral of zero tolerance and moral elitism (often defined and enforced by those who are the biggest hypocrites) then our society is and will continue to be _broken_. Keyloggers aren't going to fix it. Keyloggers are only going to help make it more broken.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
And since most people own damn little, they effectively have no privacy. Should your landlord have the same right to monitor their tenants? Suppose someone is sneaking in an overnight visitor in violation of the lease? Should the landlord be able to monitor your communications to find this out? They own the building, you don't.
Privacy rights that extend only as far as you own the computer equipment are effectively useless, as they would cease to exist once your networked data travels outside your property boundary. After all, the phone/cable company owns the wires, and you are using their equipment.
"dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"
Sorry, but you missed the boat. In that case, the key logger was designed so that it would be DISABLED when it detected an internet connection. A keylogger that doesn't disable itself will capture keystrokes being sent over the internet, which then becomes a wire-tap.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant