Slashdot Mirror
Worker Fired For Running SETI On State-Owned PCs
Formica writes "A programmer working for the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services was fired for running SETI software on a state server. As quoted in this article,
department head Tom Hayes says, 'I think that people can be comfortable that security has beamed this man out of our building.' More articles from Google."
"I understand his desire to search for intelligent life in outer space, because obviously he doesn't find it in the mirror in the morning," Hayes said. "I think that people can be comfortable that security has beamed this man out of our building."
What an ass Tom Hayes is! Come on now, there is no need for personal attacks, especially because this statement was publicly released in a news interview and they have already fired this guy. I am half tempted to find Tom's email address and tell him just that.
So the issue is: Was there a policy that prohibited use of those systems for that purpose? Granted, since the machines were taxpayer funded, this should have raised some red-flags for Charles Smith (the fired employee), however...... immediate termination rather than a warning seems a bit harsh. Any time you are using publicly funded resources for personal use, there should be extreme caution, and my bias is to never, ever go there in the first place unless there is a prior agreement for reimbursement.
Of course we do not know all the circumstances, but Tom Hayes is still an ass for publicly attempting to humiliate this guy. Tom, whats wrong with you? I suspect you are a former high school football player turned college frat boy who has to put people down to make yourself feel better. Ass!
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I have to agree with Hayes' decision (though not his commentary).
Wasting cycles looking for ET = wasting tax dollars.
BLING BLING. Meet the architecture that's changing everything.
Because SETI@Home is such a security risk.
My mother works for the County Gov't, and I've seen some of the spyware infested cesspools that they call computers, and they fire this guy for doing what? Wasting clock cycles?
"Unauthorized software" means just that. Just because he was in the IT department doesn't give him free reign to do what he wants to with a production server.
Remember: Those servers, routers, switches, and workstations aren't yours, they belong to your employer. You're paid to do what your employer wants to them, and not do what said employer doesn't want. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you're stupid (yes, STUPID) enough to flaunt the rules because you think they don't apply to you, you deserve what you get.
It's stupid to fire someone for running this on company/institutional computers (whatever happened to warnings?), but it's also stupid to just decide to run it on the assumption that your boss isn't stupid.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The chick in HR who's downloaded the "kitty-cat screen saver" spam zombie is doing just fine.
It's pretty clear you've never worked in a corporate IT department. So the issue is: Was there a policy that prohibited use of those systems for that purpose?
Any employer worth his or her salt has an item in the employee handbook that prohibits employees from installing stuff on systems without permission.
Furthermore, and I have to point this out to users ALL the time- the computer they use is not theirs. It belongs to the company, as does the telephone, the power that PC uses, and its internet connection.
Granted, since the machines were taxpayer funded, this should have raised some red-flags for Charles Smith (the fired employee)
That would be an understatement.
, however...... immediate termination rather than a warning seems a bit harsh.
Not if the employee handbook says that's the consequence. Not if Smith was doing other things deserving of termination. Not if his actions endangered adherence to security protocols, placed sensitive data at risk of disclosure, or caused a department to loose certification. As a professional system admin, the mere fact that he considered it appropriate to install stuff like that on government systems shows his judgment is impaired.
Any time you are using publicly funded resources for personal use, there should be extreme caution
I've been a sysadmin for years, and it's pretty much common sense, as in the "don't walk off building tops" kind of common sense, that you do not use your employer's systems for anything you haven't specifically sought authorization for. Reasons, off the top of my head:
I can hear the kids yelling "but commercial software could be insecure too!" Well, that's right- but the difference is that if you're running something the IT department said was OK and the company gets h@x0r3d, they're the ones who take the heat. If it's because you were running some clownish search-for-ET thing or a program that puts a dancing ape on your desktop, well, then you get your ass canned so fast your head spins, and possibly get slapped with a lawsuit for damages as well.
Maybe the IT department has picked that official program because it's more secure, or has been certified by another government agency. Or they've actually tested/explored its security, or an outside consultant says it's more secure, or the maker of the software has signed agreements that their application meets security requirements of the government agency using the software.
Please help metamoderate.
We fired someone over the summer for running Folding@Home on multiple computers. It wasn't because of what he was doing, but because he had installed and run software that was not approved by the university, and therefore considered a security breach.
I don't necessarily agree with the firing, but if the rules state explicitly that you can't do it, then don't.
There are, in fact, lots of different kinds of "unauthorized sofware".
There is the kind that introduces viruses, the kind that is used for trading porn, the kind used for trading Windows source code, the kind for sharing MP3's with a million of your closest friends, and the kind that people use for running a side business.
And then there is the kind that people use to contribute to a not-for-profit scientific effort at a public university for no financial gain, software that only uses idle cycles and is known not to interfere with anybody's applications.
Unauthorized use of sofware of those different kinds demands different kinds of responses. The use of the latter kind of software use warrants at most a warning.
Firing this guy is severe and unwarranted. A simple warning should have been enough.
Since he's a state employee, I hope his union takes up the case and files a grievance.
Most state government employees can easily file a grievance to challenge any termination. No lawyers or representation is usually necessary, but just to be safe he might want some.
If this firing were challenged in my state, especially considering the derogatory and defamatory comments issued by this employees boss, a grievance committee would almost certainly give his job back.
I suspect this employee was given no warnings about the conduct for which he was fired. In addition, he probably wasn't violating any direct orders or specific policies. Sure, he was in violation of general policies regarding personal use of computers. But when his boss publically accused him of being crazy, he almost certainly overrode any minor policy violations by the employee.
In my state, the comments made by his boss would have violated any number of state regulations and policies regarding correct termination procedures. And considering that this employee could sue for defamation, I wouldn't be surprised to see his boss actually fired over this.
One might ask why he would want his job back? Certainly he wouldn't want to work for this jerk again. Because state governments are large, and he could immediately apply for a transfer to another agency. One where he would no longer have to work for the ignorant fool that is Tom Hayes.
Once upon a time, somebody put the seti@home screensaver on a box that was being used as a server to host a little web app. The client started getting customer complaints about timeouts, so I made a trip to their site because nothing funky showed up on pc-anywhere.
It turned out that when the seti screen server kicked in it starved out IIS. Maybe there are settings to say "run in nice mode" and so forth, but I was less than amused at the time.
Personal hardware, fine - knock yourself out. Server hardware, not such a good idea (unless it is _your_ server hardware).
Dear Mr. Dachannein,
Regardless of how respected the SETI@Home project may be, those servers were purchased for a reason and running SETI@Home was not it. We find that the employee was vioating policy and his termination was appropriate.
Dear Governor Taft,
I am a taxpayer in your state and, therefore, partially responsible for the funding of this computer. I would rather this computer be used to its fullest potential, and I feel that whenever it sits unused, it is wasting tax-bought resources.
It is common knowledge that computers typically become obsolete before they actually stop working. Therefore, getting as much use out of them as possible before they become obsolete is important. It is the same principle as using any product to its fullest potential before its life cycle is ended. I would assume that, for example, your state cars are not retired while they are still in good shape.
SETI@Home, and other distributed applications, are a good method of using computers when they would otherwise sit unused. The applications are designed to benefit the public (ie, taxpayers), and is therefore a method where the taxpayer dollars are directly beneficial to the taxpayer. In my opinion, running such applications on tax-bought machines should be required.
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
If installing SETI@Home is all he did wrong, I wouldn't have fired him either. I would most certainly have disciplined him and reviewed his permissions/other boxes he's touched. However, I would not have fired him for just that. He made a mistake; point it out to him, admonish him for it, and move on. If he did it again, then I'd send him packing.
Treat those who work for you with respect, especially when you're disciplining them, and yes - even when you're firing them. They're people, goddamn it - treat them like you'd like to be treated.