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."

Comments

Would you want to work for this guy?

[BWJones]

"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!

Re:Would you want to work for this guy?

[Halikar]

There is a world of difference between being of the public and commenting, and commenting publicly about a professional decision. What one person says about another is simply that, one persons opinion. When a boss or ex-boss says it publicly about a persons professional life, it is flat out wrong unless you are intentionally trying to get someone black listed and ensure they will never be hired again.

Re:Would you want to work for this guy?

[Fortissimo]

I agree that immediate termination seems harsh on the surface, but none of us know the back story on any of this. I've seen many times where an employee is perpetually abusive to the power they have and/or insubordinate or whatever, and management has been trying to nail them for a long time. Then, a dumb incident like this comes up and gives them the green light they'd been hoping for. Based on the situation and the harsh comments by Hayes, I think this smells suspiciously like one of those times. Seems highly doubtful that this was Smith's first offense.

Re:Would you want to work for this guy?

[genixia]

Why? The guy is 63.

Of course, one really has to wonder why he wasn't given a warning first. The offense for which he was fired sounds like an excuse to get rid of someone. Age discrimination anyone?

This is a lawsuit waiting to happen. And against The Department of Job and Family Services too. That's going to make the primetime local news reports and leave the department with a lot of egg on their face.

Re:Would you want to work for this guy?

[phreakmonkey]

hat has a negative impact on the machine performance, as the requests come regardless of its load. SETI@home uses the computer only when it doesn't work otherwise.

I'll address this. I'm a senior security engineer for a major corporation. We, too, have a policy against running any unapproved software on workstations owned by the company.

There are many, many reasons for this beyond just "negative impact." For instance:

What if a security vulnerability was discovered in Seti@Home (or any other unauthorized software) and it resulted in a compromise of (in this case) private citizens' data?

Who is liable if the software causes an outage on the workstation or the network?

Who is liable if the software causes a breach of security or corrupts the integrity of the data being handled by the state?

You see, in the case of corporate (or government) resources there is more at stake than just whether the software has a measurable impact on the performance of the machine. If the state wanted to run Seti@home on the machines, it would do the approriate dilligance to do so- including a risk evaluation and mitigation plans (like upgrades / patching / &etc) to do so. By running any unauthorized software, especially network software, without the knowledge of the owning party you are putting their property (and in this case the public's property) at an unneccessary risk.

I'm sure this is stated in their computer use policy, as it is in ours. Firing the employee was probably the correct action.

-pm

SETI@Home: The next big threat

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:SETI@Home: The next big threat

[aceh0]

there's a difference between installing crap on a desktop system and installing crap on a production server

Re:Unauthorized software is unauthorized software

[elmegil]

And if you're stupid enough to make publically humiliating statements about your (ex) employees, you deserve what you get too. I mean come on; how hard is it to behave like an adult professional and just say he violated policy and was terminated?