Slashdot Mirror


Keystroke Logging Declared Illegal in Alberta

Meshach writes "The Globe and Mail has a story about how keystroke logging has been declared illegal in Alberta Canada. The ruling applies to companies using logging as a means to track employees." From the article: " The employee, who was not named, worked as a computer technician for six months in 2004. Ms. Silver said it was a job where productivity was hard to measure. 'We thought that using an objective check through the computer would be the most fair and objective way to do that,' she said Wednesday."

310 comments

  1. Could be ok by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 2, Funny

    There are times when keystroke logging could be appropriate, like if you are in data entry- and they need to see how many wpms you are at.
    I for one expect no privacy at work, because I am being paid and am using their equipment. Then again, the toilet belongs to my company, and I don't want them watching me pinch a loaf....

    --
    And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    1. Re:Could be ok by Asgard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Logging > counting, if you want wpm just count the # of clicks, not record the content.

    2. Re:Could be ok by charlieo88 · · Score: 1

      Oh man! The poor security tech that has to review THAT tape.

    3. Re:Could be ok by Strange_Attractor · · Score: 3, Funny

      the toilet belongs to my company, and I don't want them watching me pinch a loaf

      So, you ARE against monitoring vis a vis logging!

      --

      ----
      WWJD...For a Klondike Bar?
    4. Re:Could be ok by PacketScan · · Score: 1

      That is my thought exactly.. I do not own this hardware the company that employees me owns the equipment. Therefor i have no privary nor do i expect any.

    5. Re:Could be ok by myheroBobHope · · Score: 1

      That punishes whoever is watching much, much more than it punishes you... i promise.

      --
      http://www.pterrys.com
    6. Re:Could be ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAR HAR HR ;.)

      Drop'n logs.

    7. Re:Could be ok by Cromac · · Score: 1

      If they're doing data entry why would they need a key logger to see how productive they are? Just check to see how much data they entered. Any data that gets entered should be tagged for who entered it and when so it it should (unless the company is stupid) be easy to track how much a given employee has added without keyloggers.

    8. Re:Could be ok by l2718 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There are times when keystroke logging could be appropriate, like if you are in data entry- and they need to see how many wpms you are at.

      Keystroke logging means recording your keystrokes, not simply counting them. I would say that if company policy was "your computer use may be monitored", they should be able to do so -- if you won't like this clause, you don't have to work there. Persumably this will lead to a compromise, especially if workers negotiate their contracts jointly.

      As a brother post says, this is more-or-less the situation in the US, but not in Canada. There, privacy is a constitutional right which even private businesses have to respect. However, note that the ruling doesn't say that all logging is wrong -- just that in this case, there were less intrusive ways to evaluate the performance of that employee. Government regulation is another way to balance the competing concerns of the company and the individual.

    9. Re:Could be ok by jimbolauski · · Score: 1, Funny

      Since the company is storing the keystrokes in the form of data aren't they logging it all ready. I would love to be a lawyer in Canada right now I would be filthy rich.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    10. Re:Could be ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the current conversion rate, this would be "flat broke" in American Dollars. /daily troll

    11. Re:Could be ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I agree, a company has no right to be logging my Logs, even if they own the toilet...

    12. Re:Could be ok by mikael · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, when I stopped using the copy, cut and paste macro keys on my keyboard, and started retyping everything instead, my wpm sht up and I become the most productive employee in the office.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    13. Re:Could be ok by Surr3al · · Score: 1

      I for one expect no privacy at work, because I am being paid and am using their equipment.

      Ok, so in order to protect my privacy I would gladly bring my own computer or purchase the computer I work with at work so that way it's my property and therefore my actions cannot be logged. I don't mind emails, files, etc... being monitored as they go over the network as that is proper and important to upkeep information security.

      However, there is no choice for the employee in these cases but to accept the fact that their every action will be logged. Bringing your home computer to work would be considered a breach in security, and buying your work computer is laughable. These employees must hope therefore, that their boss/audit personel will be responsible and will not abuse this information. (I.E. Bank logins, etc...)

    14. Re:Could be ok by freakmn · · Score: 1

      Come on, you missed a perfectly good pun. You say "pinching a loaf" instead of "dropping a log"? How can you pass that up? I guess that prevents confusion with keystroke logging, but really, how dumb are people on this site?

      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
    15. Re:Could be ok by axonal · · Score: 1

      Even if word counts were used, it still wouldn't measure "productivity." Doing something faster, could require fewer key clicks. Perhaps, the tech wound up creating a quick script to automate a bunch of tasks? So then he just clicks a button, and pounds out 100 jobs.

    16. Re:Could be ok by Panaphonix · · Score: 1

      Then again, the toilet belongs to my company, and I don't want them watching me pinch a loaf....

      Kinda gives new meaning to the term "logging"

    17. Re:Could be ok by Strolls · · Score: 1
      Then again, the toilet belongs to my company, and I don't want them watching me pinch a loaf...
      If your employers use the toilet as a secure storage area for their bakery products then they deserve whatever they get.
    18. Re:Could be ok by James+A.+D.+Joyce · · Score: 1

      Dilbert already did it. You guys are about five or six years behind.

      --

      Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
    19. Re:Could be ok by BlueCup · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is modded funny, but this really happened to me. I wrote macros that were able to automate the work, and go 8 times the second fastest... my employer however would say I wasn't working hard enough (ignoring the actual output) I tried explaining how the macros increased my productivity... but she didn't get it, and eventually told me I had to start typing everything again... so I quit. And now I wait tables.

      --
      WANNAWIKI Wannawiki WannaWiki WANNAWIKI!
    20. Re:Could be ok by idonthack · · Score: 1

      So, was quitting a good choice or a bad choice?
      ---
      The only thing I hate more than a hypocrite is a person who hates hypocrites.
      Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    21. Re:Could be ok by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      No choice but to accept? You don't live in the US, do you... If my company tried to do this, I'd _quit._

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    22. Re:Could be ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Productivity keystroke logging (and related pay).

      Before:
      If x > 20

      After:
      If TempVariableKeyedInFromScratch_ThatIsNoUseOfCutAnd PasteWhoseScopeIsLocalAndWillBeAutomaticallyGarbag eCollectedOnCompletionOfThisFunction > 20

    23. Re:Could be ok by Fjornir · · Score: 1

      Uhm. But if I can't record the content then why do I have a data entry tech in the first place, fucktard?

      --
      I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
    24. Re:Could be ok by BlueCup · · Score: 1

      Good. Though, I wish I'd had the time to find a place with a good manager in the same field, but, haven't yet had the time due to bills.

      --
      WANNAWIKI Wannawiki WannaWiki WANNAWIKI!
  2. We thought that using an objective check through t by AEton · · Score: 2, Funny

    "We thought that using an objective check through the computer would be the most fair and objective way to do that,' she said Wednesday."

    That's all very well, but did she say it objectively? I have to know.

    --
    We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
  3. Performance by turtled · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    "...The ruling applies to companies using logging as a means to track employees."

    Was there a performance issue for this coworker? You are on company machines, I don't see a problem with it.

    --
    "I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
    1. Re:Performance by Trigun · · Score: 1

      if it is a performance issue, then simply counting the keystrokes per minute would be enough, without actually catching the keys. But, by the same token, just checking daily output would be easier.

    2. Re:Performance by SirSlud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I own an ATM, should I be able to keylog your ATM password?

      Ownership doesn't have a fucking single thing to do with it. I assume that where you work, the land is privately owned. Is the owner of that property allowed to do things to you that are against the law? No.

      This ownership bullshit is such a weak argument, especially since it appears that the extention of the argument is that the government apparently shouldn't be able to create laws that dictate the way people treat folks who use their private property. The law supercededs ownership rights, and thank for that, otherwise we'd have a tough time going after child pornographers, drug labs, etc on private property.

      But hey, if you support the notion that the laws should be set around the singular wants of private owners, you're invited to my house for a beati - er, tea party.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:Performance by turtled · · Score: 1

      If I own an ATM, should I be able to keylog your ATM password?

      Not the same argument. Owning an ATM or keylogging customers' PINs has nothing to do with this.

      Ownership doesn't have a fucking single thing to do with it. I assume that where you work, the land is privately owned. Is the owner of that property allowed to do things to you that are against the law? No.

      Show up to work, do your fucking job.

      --
      "I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
    4. Re:Performance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will, just as soon as my company starts obeying the law. And yes, his first sentence *was* the same thing. If you can't see that, you are the source of the problem.

    5. Re:Performance by redelm · · Score: 1
      A good point. There is no indication this employee was engaged for "a work for hire", so his IP remains his IP even if he gives some of it to the company. When I write a memo for my company, I'm giving them a licence to use/copy it. They do not have any rights to the rest of it unless he has specifically contracted away his right to inventions & copyrights.

      There's the rub. Did he consent to the monitoring as a condition of employment? Or subsequntly? Did the Court rule that this was overreaching?

    6. Re:Performance by stanleypane · · Score: 1

      Performance issue? If you are going to measure performance, it would be tough to gauage performance based on stats gathered from only one person. This guys beef had to do with the fact that nobody else was being monitored. It's a bit of an issue when equal level employees aren't being monitored in the same fashion.

    7. Re:Performance by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Actually, ownership has everything to do with it, or at least it should. Your ATM analogy is about as feeble as it gets, but looking at it: when you use an ATM, you know that the ATM is designed to protect your money while still allowing you easy access to it. ATM's do log your passwords (otherwise they wouldn't work), but you have a reasonable expectation that your password won't be compromised because either 1.) your bank owns it or 2.) a 3rd party with a reputation on the line owns it. It is in both parties' interests to maintain trust with you so they can continue to profit from you.

      When you accept a job at a private business, you are accepting the terms of the job. If you don't like any of those terms you are free to refuse the job. I don't think there is anything wrong with key logging as long as the employer explains that they will be used before you accept the job. I was hired to upgrade a posh restaurant about 6 years ago and I installed a POS system and some cameras in the kitchen and the bar...guess what? Revenue mysteriously rose and theft mysteriously waned. Surveillance (either cameras or keyloggers or computer inventory systems) works. It should be an employers right to deploy any technology they see fit so long as they inform their employees of the practices before hiring them or renewing their contract. People don't have a "right" to a job. if you want complete control, start your own damn business and work for yourself.

      And by the way, I think the law should have a tough time coming onto my private property or telling me what I can or can't do on it. It has no right to pass laws about how I use my private property. So long as I'm not hurting anyone, I'll do whatever the hell I want (it's a shame I had to move to the caribbean to enjoy the rights laid out in the US Constitution).

      PS...you should be allowed to beat as many people as you want on your property so long as you tell them beforehand that that's what you're going to do when they trespass. Your property, your law.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    8. Re:Performance by nasor · · Score: 1

      "If I own an ATM, should I be able to keylog your ATM password?"

      No - because ATM users have a right to keep their personal financial information secret (or at least keep it between themselves and the bank). In this case, however, it appears that the government is asserting a right for employees to keep their actions secret from their employers while at work. That seems like a rather strange assertion. I despise analyzing situations with analogies, but this seems almost exactly akin to telling UPS that they can't put GPS trackers in their delivery trucks to ensure that their employees aren't stopping over at their friend's house for a few hours while on the clock.

      "Ownership doesn't have a fucking single thing to do with it. I assume that where you work, the land is privately owned. Is the owner of that property allowed to do things to you that are against the law? No.

      This ownership bullshit is such a weak argument, especially since it appears that the extension of the argument is that the government apparently shouldn't be able to create laws that dictate the way people treat folks who use their private property. The law supercededs ownership rights, and thank for that, otherwise we'd have a tough time going after child pornographers, drug labs, etc on private property."


      In general, you should be able to do whatever you want with your own property UNLESS it collides with someone else's rights. Although you have a general right to do whatever you want with your baseball bat, you don't have a right to beat someone senseless with it because it would violate the rights of the other guy. It is difficult, however, to figure out what rights are being violated if you use a key logger to monitor what employees are doing with their work computers. Most people would agree that an employer has the right to monitor what their employees are doing while on the clock. That could include something as simple as a supervisor walking around to make sure no one is loafing or something more sophisticated like a casino using a network of surveillance cameras to ensure that their employees aren't stealing money or helping people cheat. I think the only counter-example that someone might be able to come up with would be that employers probably shouldn't be able to install surveillance cameras in bathrooms, but that's something of a special case; everyone has to go to the bathroom from time to time, but it's seldom necessary for someone to use their work computer for personal purposes. Also, it's universally accepted that you have a right to privacy while in the bathroom - I'm not sure why someone would expect to have a right to privacy regarding what they do with a computer at work.

    9. Re:Performance by lgw · · Score: 1

      I don't think there is anything wrong with key logging as long as the employer explains that they will be used before you accept the job.

      That makes it *less* evil to be sure.

      ou should be allowed to beat as many people as you want on your property so long as you tell them beforehand that that's what you're going to do when they trespass. Your property, your law.

      No, some things should just be illegal, period. Slavery is illegal, even for trespassers. Child prostitution is illegal, even for trespassers. Property rights are important, but they don't trump everything.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    10. Re:Performance by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Property rights are important, but they don't trump everything.

      Tell that to the miserab--I mean sweet--children that were reportedly last seen climbing my fence to retrieve frisbees from my yard...

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    11. Re:Performance by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      > Show up to work, do your fucking job.

      I take it you're keylogged at work?

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    12. Re:Performance by kaladorn · · Score: 1

      I think the only counter-example that someone might be able to come up with would be that employers probably shouldn't be able to install surveillance cameras in bathrooms, but that's something of a special case; everyone has to go to the bathroom from time to time, but it's seldom necessary for someone to use their work computer for personal purposes. Also, it's universally accepted that you have a right to privacy while in the bathroom

      Maybe it isn't unreasonable to attach a universal right to not have your every moment watched and logged. Maybe the fundamental right to privacy should, assuming you aren't breaking a law, be the right that trumps the ownership issue.

      Let me put it to you another way: They can't log phones at their whim, even though it is a corporate owned system. Why should email or even web browsing be any different?

      Taken from a further standpoint, I do a lot of things for my company on my own time and outside of normal hours. In exchange, as long as the work gets done, they pretty much let me do things at my own pace or schedule, assuming their is no pressing need for me to be around for a meeting or something. And they don't monitor what I do, unless and until something suspicious were to come up. That, to me, is about the most sane approach.

      And most importantly, though few have mentioned this, if you think keylogging = productivity, you've got a big problem. This remind's me of Dilbert's Wally character, when they put a $10 bounty on each bug they found and fixed, and he was writing the code and said "I'm gonna code me an RV!". Heck, if this was the case, I'd install my own keyboard buffer stuffing app! (Or just quit and go somewhere that treated me with some human dignity...)

      The truth is, productivity can't be easily measured by such crass metrics. Is the customer service rep who deals with 8 customers an hour instead of 10 less productive? Well, if the faster rep leaves customers wanting to sue or not willing to do repeat business, then probably the 8 customer-per-hour rep is more productive *in the larger picture*. This is why many such metrics such - many aspects of doing business, and I do mean almost any sort of business, cannot be easily broken down to some hard numbers easily calculated. SLOC production measurement for coders isn't necessarily a great metric, for another instance. An elegant, bug free design may take some time. Or, you could bang out 5000 lines of code that sort of works and has all sorts of defects-in-waiting.

      For all of you that want the company to have all the rights and the employees to have none, I'm guessing most of you have never been on the recieving end of being screwed by someone using corporate power in an unscrupulous way. I'm also guessing some of you have a bit of a naive faith in the profit motive as some sort of wonderful control on corporations. A little bit of observation shows us that corporations, left unchecked, will pretty much do whatever they want (a lot like governments). This is ther reason why corporations have checks (by the legal and executive branches of governments). Governments have checks in the legal system and in the electoral systems. Neither are lily-white paladins out for the good of every employee or taxpayer. Neither are inherently the source of all evil. Both are simply potentially beneficial or potentially harmful components of the modern economic engines that power our countries. We aren't doing away with them, so we'd better learn to live with them and the Courts serve a big part in keeping the powers of either relatively limited and in enforcing basic rights and freedom for the little guy (the employee or citizen). Or at least, that's the way it is supposed to work.

      --
      -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
    13. Re:Performance by nasor · · Score: 1

      "Maybe it isn't unreasonable to attach a universal right to not have your every moment watched and logged. Maybe the fundamental right to privacy should, assuming you aren't breaking a law, be the right that trumps the ownership issue."

      An employer monitoring what an employee does with a company-owned computer does not equal "having your every moment watched and logged". You still have plenty of privacy when using YOUR computer.

    14. Re:Performance by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      If you're on my property you have two options: follow my rules or leave. The choice is entirely up to you. The fact that there isn't a third option more to your liking is just too fucking bad - for you.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    15. Re:Performance by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      Actually, the fact that there isn't a third option more to my liking isn't a fact at all, its a false dichotomy, and a complete logistical flaw to your point.

      Please try again.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    16. Re:Performance by kaladorn · · Score: 1

      This still more or less presumes that if you work for someone, by virtue of them paying you a fee, they own you for a time period. This is not necessarily the only possible model of employee-employer relationships. Even saying 'well, they own the computer' is fine, but not really germaine. The question really should be 'what do I do for my employer' and in return 'what do they do for me' - the answer in my case is I write worthwhile code and solve the problems of their customers in such a manner as to hopefully generate repeat business. The answer from their side is 'pay me a decent salary, not be particular about the hours I keep or whether I surf the net once and while on the company computer, etc'. This relationship exists and works because both sides treat the other side with respect - I respect the deadlines they have to meet and their requirements for quality work and good customer interface perceptions, and they in return let me work at my own schedule most of the time and don't worry too much about a few minutes spent checking my gmail account or whatever.

      Essentially, we treat each other with some sense of respect and understanding. When keylogging and other such technologies appear, it is a sign that this respect has gone the way of the mythical Dodo and that's a very bad step in the employee-employer relationship. I'd call it bad enough to think about working somewhere else. I mean, I've seen people fight to keep a job when their employer wants them out - that strikes me as silly too because the relationship is already poisoned.

      An employer that would keylog or think this is a useful way to analyze employees is both shortsighted and one who is destructive to the significant aspects (trust and respect) of any relationship, including the employee-employer one. Once the perception of trust and good faith is gone, even if there wasn't bad faith and attempts to cheat the system beforehand, you'll pretty much gaurantee you get them afterwards. So it is just a bad management approach.

      --
      -- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
    17. Re:Performance by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      > ATM's do log your passwords (otherwise they wouldn't work), but you have a reasonable expectation that your password won't be compromised because either 1.) your bank owns it or 2.) a 3rd party with a reputation on the line owns it. It is in both parties' interests to maintain trust with you so they can continue to profit from you.

      Who cares about the bank? I took them up on the offer for an ATM, but I own the land, so I keylogged passwords, and then they moved on when they discovered I did so.

      Still, you're okay that I'm not in the legal wrong for logging your ATM password?

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
  4. Fox news... by chill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The first thing that popped into my head when I read this line "...the most fair and objective way..." was Fox News and their "fair and balanced" reporting.

    What crackhead honestly thinks keystroke logging is "fair and objective"?

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  5. monitoring by Quasar1999 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't much mind if an employer of mine monitors what I'm doing at work while being paid. In my specific line of work, sometimes I'm asked to stay late to finish a project or meet a deadline. In exchange for doing this, I expect (and receive) a reasonable tolerance of doing personal things (like surfing to slashdot) during normal working hours. But if I started doing no work, and the employer didn't have to wait until my project got screwed, and the deadline missed by months before realising that I'm not working, then I say it's well worth it. Even more so if they get one of my coworkers, since that saves me work in the long term... Privacy be damned, as long as it's not abused, I welcome it.

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    1. Re:monitoring by Digital_Quartz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Monitoring your employees productivity is one thing. Keystroke logging is quite another. My employer does not need to know every key I press in order to decide whether or not I am productive.

      If I write an email to my wife that says "I love you snugglywugglykins!", my employer definately doesn't need to see that. You can say "It's the employer's equipment, they have a right to do what they want," but that isn't true. Your employer, for example, can't tap your phone without your knowledge. They CAN record your phone conversations, but they have to let both parties of the phone call know it is being recorded ahead of time ("This call may be recorded for quality purposes."). I don't see how secretly recording my keystrokes, which effectively taps all my email, is any different.

      Perhaps if the library here had told their employee "We're going to start recording your keystrokes to measure your productivity," and the employee had agreed, that would be a different matter.

    2. Re:monitoring by snakecoder · · Score: 1

      >>In exchange for doing this, I expect (and receive) a reasonable tolerance of doing personal things (like surfing to slashdot)

      >>Privacy be damned, as long as it's not abused, I welcome it.

      Keep in mind that they will be collecting your passwords, credit card information, etc ...

      The two points that you have brought up seem to conflict.

      --
      -Nuke the moon
    3. Re:monitoring by zornorph · · Score: 1

      "But beyond our case, it raises the question of how do you look at people's productivity and the quality of their work in certain occupations where it's hard to tell, given the technology nowadays?"

      Why not just sit beside them for a couple of days and see just what they do? Talk to people with whom they interact at work, get their opinions on this person.

      --
      http://bike.stu.ph/rides - free GPS routes available for Garmin, Magellan, GPX and Google Earth
    4. Re:monitoring by stam66 · · Score: 1
      Agreed - it is no different than tapping your phone etc.

      And the mod who rated this "flamebait" needs deep anal probing.

    5. Re:monitoring by OmegaGeek · · Score: 1

      Privacy be damned, as long as it's not abused, I welcome it.

      And I, for one, welcome our keystroke logging overlords!

      --
      Even heroes have the right to dream
    6. Re:monitoring by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      Why not just sit beside them for a couple of days and see just what they do?

      Having "the boss" sitting beside you while you work isn't going to change your behaviour? Especially if you're a slacker?

      Talk to people with whom they interact at work, get their opinions on this person.

      That may very well be what brought the rest of this scene on. However, when J. Random Employee's opinion isn't enough to let another employee go (think Union) then what do you do as a next step?

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    7. Re:monitoring by zulux · · Score: 3, Interesting


      My company is works the other way:

      My employees work for 6 hours per day - they're paid for 8.
      In exchange for having 2 hours of time to spend with family, avoid rush hour, and walk in the park, I expect no screwing around. Period.

      It works! They're productive and happy at the same time. I think I'm actually getting a bargain, because they work *hard* during those six hours. They get to go home and have a life.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    8. Re:monitoring by sinrtb · · Score: 1

      It will sure as hell give you an idea how to monitor the work though. Most slackers do their job when being watched by the boss, once you know what the employee ius supposed to do you can get a better idea of how to measure productivity. A position like IT tech is pretty vague so its reasonable that the boss may not know exactly what the employee is supposed to be doing. So yea the boss shadowing the employee is an excellent idea. But just saying key logging is an objective tool to measure productivity is bull shit. Work completed is a much more accurate measure but even then not objective or precise. If a comp needs a fresh install of the os and another needs to be replaced and another just needs to have an update well those are three jobs that require different amounts of time and attention. With the IT tech title as long the ops were running smooth and the sys admins and other employees were stisfied with theyre comps and servers then the guy was running at the maximum productivity... nuff said!

    9. Re:monitoring by DM9290 · · Score: 1

      In exchange for doing this, I expect (and receive) a reasonable tolerance of doing personal things (like surfing to slashdot) during normal working hours.

      Hey.. I get the same thing and I DONT get logged.
      Who works at a better company?

      and the employer didn't have to wait until my project got screwed, and the deadline missed by months before realising that I'm not working,

      Right.. and when exactly did looking at your keystroke log determine if the project was on schedule?

      I mean.. any faster than simply asking you?

      Or are you likely to lie about something like that?

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    10. Re:monitoring by maxpublic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I write an email to my wife that says "I love you snugglywugglykins!", my employer definately doesn't need to see that.

      If you're wasting company time and company resources writing personal emails, you deserve to be shit-canned. You don't have a 'right' to do anything with company property other than what the company decides you can do with it.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    11. Re:monitoring by greenrd · · Score: 1
      If you're wasting company time and company resources writing personal emails, you deserve to be shit-canned.

      Many companies have these things called "lunch breaks". Some jurisdictions even (gasp!) legally require them! I know you'll be shocked, just shocked, to hear about that anti-libertarian restriction on private contracting rights, but it's true.

    12. Re:monitoring by nahdude812 · · Score: 1

      Looking for a php/asp/coldfusion developer to join your ranks? :-)

      I work 10 hours per day - get paid for 8. In exchange for having 2 hours less time to spend with family, I am expected to do no screwing around. Period.

      Ok, that's not exactly true, they don't really care if I screw around so long as I get my 12 hours worth of work done each day :-). It's only through total focus that I can get it done in 10.

    13. Re:monitoring by zulux · · Score: 1

      Ugh!

      If you have any options - get out while you can, unless you have a goal that your reaching. I know several people who did this for a few years - but were working to semi-retirement. Hopefully you have some lite at the end of the tunnel.

      All that I've seen, is that 12 hour days makes for a dull, grayed out, life and a bunch of health problems down the road.

      Yuk! Good luck in getting some breathing room!

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    14. Re:monitoring by maxpublic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A lunch break doesn't give you carte blanche to do whatever you want with company property. How hard is that to grasp?

      Only the owner gets to decide what you can and cannot do with his property. If that bothers you then perhaps you should consider moving to a country that doesn't recognize the concept of 'personal property' - like China, or in this case, apparently Canada.

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    15. Re:monitoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet you're a joy to work with. I wouldn't be surprised if your co-workers moved to those "commie-sounding" nations just to avoid you.

      You seriously need to relax, asshole.

  6. Darn it. by brainus · · Score: 1, Funny

    They should apologize to all of the people who have to disengage their keylogging operations in Alberta.

  7. w00t by RancidLM · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Nice!

    (5 keys Strokes detected..)

    1. Re:w00t by Prophet+of+Nixon · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that require 7?

    2. Re:w00t by arootbeer · · Score: 1

      No, with the title, it'd be 9. keystroke logging records characters, not metadata.

  8. Odd. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So what else can you not do in Alberta with computers you, you know, technically own?

    Can you track what programs your employees run? Can you track what websites they visit?

    And does this apply to anyone who owns a computer, or just businesses with employees? Like what if you own a web kiosk in a public place, or you lend your personal computer to a friend? Can you log keystrokes from that?

    1. Re:Odd. by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      I like the analogy of what employers can and cannot do with toilets they own. Webcams and logging software would be a bad thing.

    2. Re:Odd. by AuMatar · · Score: 0, Troll

      Damn government telling me what to do. I mean I own this gun, and I own this bullet. Why shouldn't I be able to fire it an Anonymous Cowards? I mean I own the things, I should be able to do what I want with them!

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    3. Re:Odd. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're using a key logger on your friend you aren't a very good friend, at least not the way I see it...

    4. Re:Odd. by nasor · · Score: 1

      For that matter, would it be illegal for you to simply walk up behind someone who was using your computer and watch what they do?

  9. Discrimination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    In this productivity assement, fatties would have an advantage, what with all the mashing of the hands against the keyboard.

    1. Re:Discrimination by jpetts · · Score: 1
      --
      Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  10. In response, companies have switched to... by Enigma_Man · · Score: 4, Funny

    taking screen captures every 5 seconds on any employee computer under surveilance.

    -Jesse

    --
    Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    1. Re:In response, companies have switched to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is actually not all that funny.

      My previous employer, a division of a giant German company who shall remain nameless, was in the process of doing proof of concept of pretty much the same solution (ie: screen scraping at periodic intervals) to monitor employees in the months before I left.

    2. Re:In response, companies have switched to... by __aamcgs2220 · · Score: 1

      That's still a lot better than capturing passwords, isn't it? Screen scraping at least won't give away the keys to the castle, whereas keylogging gives away everything. Not that I agree with either one, but it's a lesser evil anyway.

    3. Re:In response, companies have switched to... by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not funny when all the PCs in your department have NiceSoft installed. I call it KGB software. http://www.nice-soft.com/product/nicespy/index.htm

      Note: Our network will be upgraded to gigabit due to the bandwidth saturation that this program causes. Also, the central capture server will be upgraded too.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:In response, companies have switched to... by aneroid · · Score: 1
      any employee computer under surveilance
      which is ALL employees in companies providing value added...
      umm. call centres.

      (ps: "claimed" fact)
    5. Re:In response, companies have switched to... by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Which at least causes them to see nice stars at password prompts, compared to somebody within "the system" being able to perfectly copy the online identity of any employee of the company.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
  11. Aboot time. by QuantumPion · · Score: 1, Funny

    I guess we will be seeing a lot more of daytime comments from Albertia now, eh? ;)

    1. Re:Aboot time. by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      What is this 'daytime' of which you speak? I know it not, in this, our Frozen Land of the North. Perchance is it related to the dreaded 'Daystar,' of which some speak in hushed tones, a scorching ball of fire hell-sent to roast our pale nerd flesh?

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

    2. Re:Aboot time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least we don't say "duh" in Canada, and it's spelled Alberta, you Imerikin cretin.

  12. Six Years Ago by DanielMarkham · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Six years ago, I was contacted by a stock brokerage company in New York. They were looking for ways to track the computer use (of their developers, I believe. I think they were concerned about Internet Surfing) Like a dummy, I rambled off some ideas that could help them track usage without the employees noticing it. At the time, I thought it was a very strange call! Why would anybody secretly want to know what their employees were doing? Didn't they trust them? I never heard back from the people, and I always thought that I had "given away too much" by specifiying the programming during the interview.
    Now that weird scenario has become all too commonplace, and it's just as secret as I feared. FTA, "When the employee discovered that he had been monitored, he lodged a complaint with Alberta's information and privacy commissioner."
    The guy didn't even know the software was there. Now it's one thing to tell people "We're watching you. This will go on your evaluation" It's another thing entirely to do it secretly.
    In the present day, clients are modeling their business practices more and more, and would like a way to track metrics. I'm all for it: if I were a businessperson or employee, I wouldn't have a problem with my boss measuring how long it took to do my work. Where I surfed during my lunch hour? Forget it. But my productivity? Sure.


    Welcome To My World

    1. Re:Six Years Ago by MoonFog · · Score: 1

      But can it always be measured like this? If we put aside busphrases such as "Work smarter, not harder", there's still a point there that your WPM may not show just how much work you've put into something. I often sit back and think and take some notes on paper when about to write an algorithm.

      I may have misunderstood this whole issue, but I really don't see productivity being measured simply be registering keystrokes.

    2. Re:Six Years Ago by MrShaggy · · Score: 1

      As long as you were being made aware of what the steps were that they were taking. If you work at a coffee shop, they have to tell you that there are cameras above the counters. Not only to protect you against employe theft, but also to ensure there protection as well, if soemone else is stealing, or there is a problem with someone coming in and causing issues. IANAL but if someone can sue over that, cant you sue over privacy when someone stoles VISAs card info ? Shagz

      --
      I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
    3. Re:Six Years Ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it keeps disgruntled waitresses from putting boogers in your pie.

    4. Re:Six Years Ago by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Many employers have the mistaken belief that if your nose is not kept to the grind stone every minute you are not doing all you could for the company.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    5. Re:Six Years Ago by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      Why would anybody secretly want to know what their employees were doing? Didn't they trust them?

      Perhaps because their employees were fucking off on company time? Like, by posting to Slashdot or surfing porn on the company dime?

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
  13. heartless bastards by 0110011001110101 · · Score: 4, Funny
    And I thought clearcutting and logging of our national forests was bad....

    Take up arms! Our nations keyboards are in jeopardy due to these evil logging tactics, soon our keystroke supply will exist only in preserved forests and small wildlife areas.

    --
    Don't anthropomorphize computers: they hate that.
    1. Re:heartless bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, we don't get to be graced by you copying and pasting the entire article text this time?

      Pitty.

      However, maybe you should just stick to copying and pasting articles since all of your other posts lack any content whatsoever.

    2. Re:heartless bastards by stienman · · Score: 2, Funny


      Amen brother! I, for one, will start keyboard sitting to protect this ancient keyboard from the loggers!

      alsjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj

    3. Re:heartless bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      awwww.. another /.er who doesn't like me...

      guess tonight will go just like every other night... crying myself to sleep on my giant karma whoring pillow.

    4. Re:heartless bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey I'm damn good at that... I mean do you realize I have to manually put in an HTML paragraph break between each paragraph before submitting?

      I'm not sure you've thought over what a valuable service I provide...

      In the end, don't blame me, blame the moderators for spooning out karma for my regurgitation. I mean I don't end up any better for it, lord knows my "content lacking" post karma makes up for any karma whored in the end....

    5. Re:heartless bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm already chained to my keyboard. My boss did it for me. OMG they've started up their chain saws!! Rrrruuuunnn niggerniggerniggernigger

    6. Re:heartless bastards by wgaryhas · · Score: 1

      why not view source, and then copy.

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H.L. Mencken
    7. Re:heartless bastards by easyfrag · · Score: 1

      man that's one small ass, didn't even hit Caps Lock

  14. Questionable results... by hesiod · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If keylogging is declared illegal, how much of a stretch would it be to declare that scanning EMails or even net traffic for inappropriate material is illegal?

    1. Re:Questionable results... by mellon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Remember, kids, if keylogging is declared illegal, soon only criminals will have keyloggers....

    2. Re:Questionable results... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, kids, if lockpicking is declared illegal, soon only criminals will have lockpicks....

    3. Re:Questionable results... by Doctor+Crumb · · Score: 2, Informative

      you're confusing scanning vs logging, as well as data entry vs communication. For the first, there is usually no permanent store of incoming/outgoing messages, they are scanned in passing rather than stored and redirected. For the second, no one needs to know that I took six tries to spell 'nuclear payload', while at the same time they have reasonable cause to wonder why I am discussing such things with the outside world using company resources.

    4. Re:Questionable results... by Intron · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nowhere in the article does it say that keystroke logging was "declared illegal". That's just the usual /. hyperbole. The case was about logging on one employee without telling him which raised privacy issues. That's why in the US, they always have announcements like "your call may be monitored" on hotlines. They make it clear not only to you, but also to their own employees that someone may be listening in. Also, most companies tell their employees that email and web surfing may be monitored.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  15. Illegal? How about some form of discrimination? by concept10 · · Score: 1


    Not only should this be illegal but I believe it should be a form of discrimination.

    Why was the employee in question the only person to be monitored? This a a clear case of bad leadership and they need to find another method of evaluating performance.

    Maybe they could have asked the guy to keep logs of his perforemed work.

  16. Gotta rethink things by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There goes my idea of logging all keystrokes, mouse movement, and monochrome screenshots every minute from every system on the network thru VNC. I calculated that I could get it all down to only 200mb per day for 25 systems. A 250gb hard drive could hold many years of this data.

    1. Re:Gotta rethink things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about 3.5 years? That's not "many years" to me.

    2. Re:Gotta rethink things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What about 3.5 years? That's not "many years" to me."

      Maybe not for you personally but it's long enough for a business. $100-200 every 3.5 years for a new harddrive is not a lot of money for a business (and that's assuming HDs do not drop in cost).

  17. My work day keystrock log... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 3, Funny

    http://slashdot.org/
    (refresh clicked)
    (refresh clicked)
    (refresh clicked)
    (refresh clicked)
    (refresh clicked)
    (refresh clicked) ...
    (refresh clicked)
    (refresh clicked)

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    1. Re:My work day keystrock log... by FrontalLobe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey... You're logging my keystrokes, arent you? That's it... I'm moving to Alberta

      --
      -FL
    2. Re:My work day keystrock log... by musikit · · Score: 1

      the way this should have been written....

      CTRL
      ESC
      UP ARROW
      UP ARROW
      opera (or mozzilla or iexplore)
      TAB
      TAB
      http://www.slashdot.org/
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5
      F5

    3. Re:My work day keystrock log... by Rixel · · Score: 0

      F
      I
      R
      S
      T

      P
      O
      S
      T

      --
      Never play chicken with a passive aggressive.
    4. Re:My work day keystrock log... by rsadelle · · Score: 1

      Mozilla is already open for work-related use so it's more like this:

      Ctrl+T
      s
      Down arrow
      Enter
      Ctrl+R
      Ctrl+R
      Ctrl+R
      Ctrl+R
      Ctrl +R
      Ctrl+R
      Ctrl+R
      Ctrl+R (For some reason, I find this more natural than F5. Probably because I don't use the F keys very often.)

  18. This is important by krell · · Score: 1, Funny
    ' The ruling applies to companies using logging as a means to track employees. '


    This is especially important in the north woods, where bosses of some tech firms commonly threaten to discipline employees by putting them on lumberjack duty. It can really keep them on track.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  19. There in lies the rub.. by Chris_Stankowitz · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Privacy be damned, as long as it's not abused, I welcome it.

    It *will* be abused and there is no ifs, ands or buts about it. CS-

    1. Re:There in lies the rub.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Who do you work for, a literal pointy-haired boss? I have no problem with work monitoring either because, as the parent post said--it saves me work in the long run.

      I know I work hard and work efficently and I am good at my job. But I'm also an introvert who doesn't drawn too much attention. Let an impartial work monitoring system demonstrate who's pulling the slack.

    2. Re:There in lies the rub.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stankowitz? AHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

      Congratulations, I didn't realize such a stupid fucking last name even existed. Good work, Stanky.

    3. Re:There in lies the rub.. by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Let an impartial work monitoring system demonstrate who's pulling the slack.

      Because that impartial monitoring system is going to remain impartial when the reports that it generates are being read by a PHB who is pissed at you because you made small talk at the water cooler with the female co-worker he is attracted to but can't ask out because she works under him. And that's just one example of corporate politics.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:There in lies the rub.. by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      I work in an information security department.

      If a manager has reason to suspect an employee is doing something bad, they come to us to get them web browsing logs. And if it is something really bad, we may even bug that person's machine. I have no ethical problem in doiong this. It is not abused.

      However, when we are looking for hacks internally, we sometimes find that a manager has going over our heads and abused his power by installing monitoring software on one of his subordinate's machines. In such cases we get the MANAGER FIRED.

      So your comment that it *will* be abused may not be so informed. At my company, the people who do the monitoring are also the people who actively protect employees' privacy from being abused.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  20. Time to drag out this old chestnut by This+Old+Chestnut · · Score: 1, Funny

    If keystroke logging is outlawed only outlog strokers will have keys.

  21. They claimed to not look at the content... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...which is bullshit.

    If you try to determine productivity by simply counting keystrokes, someone who's chatting with a bunch of friends all day on AIM looks significantly more productive than someone, say, doing work-related data entry. You almost HAVE to look at the keystrokes to see what's going on, or failing that, monitor some other aspect of the computer use in conjunction with keystrokes to best determine what apps are being used and how frequently.

    1. Re:They claimed to not look at the content... by MattyDK23 · · Score: 1

      You could monitor which applications the keystrokes are being recorded in.

      Someone with 120,000 keystrokes in Trillian and only 10,000 in Emacs will look a lot more guilty than one with the opposite, regardless of what those keystrokes were.

  22. Hard to measure productivity? by wfberg · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "We thought that using an objective check through the computer would be the most fair and objective way to do that,' she said Wednesday."


    Sounds reasonable. Except for one thing. Why did they hire some one for this job? What problem needed to be solved? Did that problem get solved?


    Presumably the problem was that not enough people were typing. So they hired some one to type, and measured the typing, right?


    They should've hired some guys off of IRC. They type a lot.

    --
    SCO employee? Check out the bounty
  23. No keystroke logging where I work by back@slash · · Score: 4, Funny

    This doesn't affect me one bit. I know that there is no keystroke logging where I work. The sys admins here are complete idiots and have their heads so far up their ass they wouldn't know how to implement key logg&*%$^

    !NO CARRIER

    --
    This comment was generated by a Squadron of Ultra Ninjas
    1. Re:No keystroke logging where I work by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      Keystroke logging doesn't affect me either.

      I was smart enough a while ago to pop the letters off my keyboard and move them to random places. So if anyone logs keystrokes on my machine, they'll get nothing but nonsense.
      --
      "Wp HJAWVU ISHHWK, tjsi ljczsuvi njbh wpuj TJS!!!"

  24. As Ratbert says.... by buckthorn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "How did people ever look busy before computers?"

    But to make this acutally substantive, I have a hard time imagining a job where keystroke logging, even just for counting purposes, is the ONLY way to track productivity. Productivity implies you are producing something, making progress somewhere. That has to be trackable somehow. If nothing else, make the guy account for his time in certain increments. I know that's not a great thing to do and not foolproof either, but what I'm saying is there have to be better, more objective, more thorough solutions that counting keystrokes. If not, I'll just jam down my Enter key and take a 3 hour lunch.

    1. Re:As Ratbert says.... by TobyWong · · Score: 1

      "How did people ever look busy before computers?"

      1. Carry a clipboard.

      2. Walk fast. Everywhere you go.

      You could be daydreaming about boning that cute blonde from accounting as you go to queue up a few more movies in your BT client but as long as you keep those legs moving all your boss thinks is "Wow there's Smith busting ass again, I wish more of my employees showed that kind of hustle!".

      --
      - Toby
  25. US centric thinking? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 4, Interesting
    In the USA this type of activity is permitted in most situations. Canada has privacy protections for individuals which seem to limit this type of monitoring.

    [sarcasm]Why not let the employer and police monitor everything you do? You only have something to hide if you are a criminal.[/sarcasm]

    1. Re:US centric thinking? by mc6809e · · Score: 1

      [sarcasm]Why not let the employer and police monitor everything you do? You only have something to hide if you are a criminal.[/sarcasm]

      [sarcasm]And why not simply let the government control the conduct of every business and every economic relationship?

      They know what's best for all of us, afterall.[/sarcasm]

    2. Re:US centric thinking? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, when deciding between a business and the government, i'll trust the government long before i trust a business. And I never trust the government.

    3. Re:US centric thinking? by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And you'd trust the corporation? Moron.

      A government, despite having many power hungry individuals, do have at least a few people who genuinely want to help people.

      A corporation's only interest is money. There is noone there who's looking out for your interests.

      Of the two, the government is the far elsser evil. Of course, I'd like checks and balances on both. WHich is basicly the governemnts job- to provide checks and balances on the powerful to protect the weak.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    4. Re:US centric thinking? by Stoutlimb · · Score: 0, Redundant

      So what happens when business runs the government, like in the USA? :-o

    5. Re:US centric thinking? by danheskett · · Score: 2, Insightful


      A corporation's only interest is money. There is noone there who's looking out for your interests.


      Luckily though, the corporate pursuit of money is also the pursuit of what I want, since often I want to give my money to corporation for something in return.

      The government, on the other hand, has as you put it, a few people who want to help. Great. That's not say they are equipped to help, just that they want to help. Good intentions with a lack of skill or precision often lead to bad stuff happening - unintended consequences.

      At least with a corporation you know what thier goal is: money. Get money. Make money. Keep money. MONEY MONEY MONEY.

      With the government, you never know. You deal with some government employee what's their motive? Revenge, hate, laziness, greed.. what?

    6. Re:US centric thinking? by mc6809e · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A government, despite having many power hungry individuals, do have at least a few people who genuinely want to help people.

      A corporation's only interest is money. There is noone there who's looking out for your interests.


      The idea is the get the business to serve your interests. For example, they'll make you a car or build you a house or cook you a meal if you give them some money. They're actually helping you. And they do it because that money you gave them will come back to you when you do something for them. It's reciprocity. It's people helping people, although they rarely realize it.

      Governments don't do that. They simply make demands on you or you go to jail.


      Of the two, the government is the far elsser evil.


      I suppose you think it's the lesser evil as long as it's doing your bidding. Most dictators agree with you.

      Personally, I'm more afraid of a government that can drop a 500 lb bomb on me from 10,000 miles away. Most businesses can't do that.

    7. Re:US centric thinking? by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      Let's get this straight... Business is the greater evil, and government is the lesser evil...

      So what happens when business runs the government, like in the USA? :-o

    8. Re:US centric thinking? by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The government, on the other hand, has as you put it, a few people who want to help. Great. That's not say they are equipped to help, just that they want to help. Good intentions with a lack of skill or precision often lead to bad stuff happening - unintended consequences.


      And there's no unintended consequences to going off after only money as a goal? Of course there are. But I'll trust someone who tries to do good over someone who doesn't care one way or the other any day of the week- they'll sometimes get it right.

      At least with a corporation you know what thier goal is: money. Get money. Make money. Keep money. MONEY MONEY MONEY.


      Exactly. Money at all costs. Morality not an issue. No checks or balances on their pursuit of money. No way to vote them out of office, unless you're one of the richest people in the world yourself and can afford 51% of the stock. That scares me a hell of a lot more than an organization built aroun checks and balances with the ultimate check of the people being able to vote them out.

      With the government, you never know. You deal with some government employee what's their motive? Revenge, hate, laziness, greed.. what?


      And when you deal with corporate drone X this differs how?
      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    9. Re:US centric thinking? by ericspinder · · Score: 1
      So what happens when business runs the government, like in the USA? :-o
      That would be double plus good evil...

      JK, in the US, businesses don't own the government, they just lease it.

      --
      The grass is only greener, if you don't take care of your own lawn.
    10. Re:US centric thinking? by ShibaInu · · Score: 1

      Let's see, last I checked Government, at least in the US, provided a vast infrastructure of roads, waterways, airports, etc. I also know my water is clean and safe. I know what the weather will be like. All because of the evil government.

    11. Re:US centric thinking? by mc6809e · · Score: 1

      Let's see, last I checked Government, at least in the US, provided a vast infrastructure of roads, waterways, airports, etc. I also know my water is clean and safe. I know what the weather will be like. All because of the evil government.

      Most likely, the government gave tax money to evil (sic) corporations to build all this.

    12. Re:US centric thinking? by AuMatar · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The idea is the get the business to serve your interests. For example, they'll make you a car or build you a house or cook you a meal if you give them some money. They're actually helping you. And they do it because that money you gave them will come back to you when you do something for them. It's reciprocity. It's people helping people, although they rarely realize it.

      Governments don't do that. They simply make demands on you or you go to jail.


      They're helping me because it serves their short term interests. If screwing me over did so instead, they'd do it in a heart beat. There is no control on buisnesses. You'll take your money elsewhere? They don't give a fuck- there's a million more like you. At least with politicians, you can vote them out of office. And in local elections, your vote *does* matter.

      Corporations are the dictators of the 20th century. They have almost unlimited power when compared to the ordinary human being. They legally can't be touched (the corporate veil) and made accountable for their actions. There are no checks and balances over them. The only reason they aren't dictators in fact is that they have no army. And the only reason they don't is because the government wouldn't allow it. If they could march an army into some third world country and force them to work instead of hiring them as workers, they would in a second.

      Given a choice between vesting power in an organization with checks and balances and with citizen control (government) and one without either (corporations, which are owned by a small plutocracy), I'll give it to the one I have some control over.

      And no, neither is not an option. In many cases I wish it was. But welcome to the real world- money IS power. If they have power, they will use it. And they will not use it to benefit you- they will use it to benefit themselves. Look at the laws they buy (DCMA, broadcast flag, pork barrel projects, etc). None of these benefit you, they benefit themselves. The only thing we can use is the one power we have left- the government. Decide what we will and won't allow a corporation to do, a set of ethics they must follow to be allowed to incorporate and sell their goods in America. Punish those who break it harshly- pierce the corporate veil.

      Does that solution have issues? Of coruse it does, it causes even more power to be placed in the government's hands. But better there than where no checks and balances exist. The main risk is from religious fanatics who will try and use it to limit products in violation of the first amendment "for the children". Of course thats a general problem with any form of government, and the solution to it needs to be dealt with separately

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    13. Re:US centric thinking? by sp0rk173 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Personally, I'm more afraid of a government that can drop a 500 lb bomb on me from 10,000 miles away. Most businesses can't do that.

      Rather than a corporation poison your groundwater, then conveniently go out of business before taking responsibility to clean it up (ie, the Acid pits of Glen Avon, in Riverside county california)? Or a thousand corporations collectively spewing particulates and precursors to ozone into the air that then lead to increased rates of childhood asthma (the plight of the south coast air basin in southern california right now)?

      The point is, if you have a large society, you can not have either government or business, you need both. Personally I would rather have a government with a contract to provide me with certain liberties it swears to protect, even if it does not protect all of them all of the time. If the government is set up to be accountable to it's populace, the will of the people will prevail. Don't get me wrong, government sucks, but complex societies require it, especially when the main means to success in that society is to screw your neighbor for more money.

      The problem with businesses is that they lack social forsight, which leads to muck, bullshit, and economic externalities in the future. Government at least attempts to have some social forsight to mitigate those that are lacking in a market that doesn't react completely in real time.

      The idea is the get the business to serve your interests. For example, they'll make you a car or build you a house or cook you a meal if you give them some money. They're actually helping you. And they do it because that money you gave them will come back to you when you do something for them. It's reciprocity. It's people helping people, although they rarely realize it.

      While the reality you're positing on is nice and dreamy with little flowers and frogs jumping from one lilly pad to another, that's not the actual reality of the situation. Most major governments are now slaves to their domestic corporate interests, which demand security in their foreign projects and opportunities in places their governments have no business entering. You want to see the reality of Corporate Globalism, go to south east asian gold mines run by US corporations, or go to oil works in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan run by Exxon, Shell, and United Oil. The pursuit of money is not people helping people. It's government helping businesses expand their profit margins while marginalizing the individual. The trees in the forest no longer matter, my friend. All that matters is that their growth is maximized that harvest comes more frequently each year.

    14. Re:US centric thinking? by Panaphonix · · Score: 1

      And let's not forget that there are four ways to spend money:

      1) You spend your own money on yourself. Try to get the best value for your money.
      2) You spend your own money on someone else. Spend as little as possible, but hey, it's the thought that counts.
      3) You spend someone else's money on yourself. Woo-hoo! It's Christmas all over again!
      4) You spend someone else's moeny on someone else. Who gives a shit?

      Guess which category government spending falls into.

    15. Re:US centric thinking? by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 0, Troll

      Well said. Wish I had mod points today.

    16. Re:US centric thinking? by cluckshot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I appreciate your impression that a Corporations only interest is money. This is often true if the company is actually trying to work. When they sink into Keylogging etc they have shifted from money to "power" and the frame of reference has shifted from the company to some individual within the company.

      Actually there is a common misconception that money is the objective. It works pretty well in defining the interests of simple and mid to low range economic strata function. Higher than that the whole issue shifts to power and there even money will not buy the issue. The powerful will forego money to keep power. The sad reality is that the powerful rarely consider the "common good" or other values

      I wish companies operated reliably looking for money. That way we could control them quite effectively. (Mods get a life if you disagree we are discussing here)

      --
      Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
    17. Re:US centric thinking? by Gallowglass · · Score: 1

      You really didn't read the parent's post very carefully, did you?

      You wrote, "And you'd trust the corporation? Moron."

      I think that he was saying that he didn't trust corporations. I quote, "i'll trust the government long before i trust a business. And I never trust the government." Perhaps rewording it will help.

      If I say that I will do A before I do B, and I never do A, then I will never do B. Because B is conditional upon A occurring first.

      Substitute "will trust gummint" for A and "will trust corporations" for B.

      (Actually, what I think is a hoot is how long a thread got engendered by your remark without anyone noticing that you were arguing with a person that agreed with you!

      Ah jes' luuuves SlashDot readers, Ah do, Ah truly do!)

    18. Re:US centric thinking? by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      I think you need to reread the thread. The post I was replying to read:

      "Well, when deciding between a business and the government, i'll trust the government long before i trust a business...

      Idiot."

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    19. Re:US centric thinking? by BillPosters · · Score: 1
      You don't read slashdot very carefully, do you?

      When reading at a threshold above -1, breaks in logic may occur as low scoring posts are filtered from view.

      In this case you've obviously missed the post that was in fact being replied to.

      Actually, what I think is a hoot is how long a thread got engendered from the GP's remark without you taking the hint that it was logically correct and you should probably look deeper before posting a critical remark!

      Ah jes' luuuves irony, ah do , ah truly do!

    20. Re:US centric thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That scares me a hell of a lot more than an organization built aroun checks and balances with the ultimate check of the people being able to vote them out. ... and instead vote in another group of people with exactly the same ends. Yeah, right. Let me know how that works out for you.

    21. Re:US centric thinking? by MoriaOrc · · Score: 1

      That post you replied to has been modded down to Score 0, so he probabbly couldn't see it anymore. I couldn't at first either, then I looked at your posts parent rather then just the thread as displayed by slashdot.

    22. Re:US centric thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not that important.

    23. Re:US centric thinking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you RTFA, you'd know that the _public_ library was told to stop the behaviour by the government privacy commissioner. This might have clued you in that this protection is only intended for those dealing with the government, not private industry.

    24. Re:US centric thinking? by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      They're helping me because it serves their short term interests.

      And I'm helping them because it serves MY short term interests. That's called 'capitalism'. Deal with it.

      There is no control on buisnesses

      Riiiight. As all the businesses that have, well, GONE OUT OF BUSINESS because they couldn't get the job done to the satisfaction of their customers can attest to.

      Where the fuck do you think the megacorporations of the 21st century get their non-economic power? They get it from GOVERNMENT. Buy enough politicians and the corporation can even get armies deployed to far-off shitholes to do their bidding. The corporations themselves have no such power; they have to purchase it, and they can only do so from strong, centralized governments - whose rulers are more than eager to sell, often for not much more than a weekend in the Carribean with a couple of teen hookers.

      If government were WEAK, corporations would also be weak. This isn't fucking rocket science.

      And in local elections, your vote *does* matter.

      Ah, yes. I get to choose between the shithead sellout that calls himself a 'Democrat', and the shithead sellout that calls himself a 'Republican'. Both are for sale - just not to me. My vote might determine which team wins the playoffs, but the game is still football at the end of the day.

      Corporations are the dictators of the 20th century. They have almost unlimited power when compared to the ordinary human being.

      The only reason corporations have this power is because the government has this power, and it's for sale to anyone who has enough money. Pull the teeth of government and you pull the teeth of the corporations.

      The only reason they aren't dictators in fact is that they have no army. And the only reason they don't is because the government wouldn't allow it.

      Jesus H., just how naive can you be? They don't need an army because they can rent the one the government fields. If you think otherwise, there are quite a few countries around the world that would disagree with you. Here's a hint: think "oil" and "polynesia", "bananas" and "central America", "coffee" and "south America", etc.

      Look at the laws they buy (DCMA, broadcast flag, pork barrel projects, etc). None of these benefit you, they benefit themselves. The only thing we can use is the one power we have left- the government.

      You just admitted they can buy any laws or application of force they wish from the government, then proposed we use that same government to limit the abuse of power. Are you on crack?

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    25. Re:US centric thinking? by Gallowglass · · Score: 1

      Wups! My Bad!

      (I appreciate the irony to, reely I do!)

    26. Re:US centric thinking? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I trust corporations! They give me exactly what I pay for 99% of the time. I ask nothing from the government, but they steal half of my money and make my life more difficult 100% of the time.

      It's entirely foolish to think that governments are more deserving of trust than businesses are. Governments are legal monopolies that don't have to earn your trust. A government can (and does) fail completely, yet will still take 40% or more of your money every year and lock you up if you don't like it. If a business fails, it collapses. If you don't trust a business, you don't have to pay it any money. If you don't trust the government, you still have to pay! "Hi, Mr. IRS, I'm not going to be paying you any taxes this year because frankly, I don't trust the government." See how far that gets you (say hi to Brutus, your cell mate). If anyone is a moron, it's you who would give power to a monopoly that can use deadly force against you if you disagree (the government).

      The entire "corporations are evil" creed is just getting out of control. Do you have a job? Why? Because you need money? Well so do the thousands of people that work at corporations. What is so bad about wanting money? Would you prefer that all of us just lay around on our couches all day and do no work? Well, thanks to freedom...you can. Be my guest...but don't bag people that work hard to earn a good living so they can improve their lives and the lives of their family. There is nothing wrong with wealth. Wealth is a reward for hard work or smart thinking. It may not be the most important thing in life, but for some it is...so what? If you don't like money...what's the problem? Let them have it. Oh I see, you don't get paid enough but you think that corporate executives get paid too much? Well, why don't you start your own corporation? Then you can pay yourself as much as you want. Oh, what's that? Don't have the funds or the brilliant ideas that these big "greedy" corporations have? Then you're out of luck buddy, because good ideas aren't free. If you don't like the idea of other people being smarter than you, or being more successful, then don't buy their products. Tell the world that they are "greedy" because they want to profit from their work or their creativity. Encourage people to boycott their products and services because they are more clever than you...but don't dare tell me that a government is the lesser of two evils. The government has NEVER provided me with a product or service that I couldn't have gotten cheaper, faster, or better from a private company that competes in the free market.

      A corporation's only interest is money. There is noone there who's looking out for your interests.

      Do you want me to hold your hand? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you responsible for your own interests? Aren't you capable of choosing whether to support a business or not? Even if you're a complete moron that can't make his or her own choices, why shoul I have to pay for your inadequecies?

      Of course a corporation's primary interest is money. They have to pay their employees, their research teams, and their costs! People that work at corps. also have to be motivated to work at all (profit) so they can buy the things that they want to buy. Corporations also have to convince people to invest in their company so that it can expand and provide even more jobs to the community and services for the world. Who's going to invest in an unprofitable, inefficient business? By making profits a primary goal, the corporation ensures that only efficient ideas survive and that successful, hardworking, and highly motivated people are rewarded.

      Corporations have helped me keep my house clean (by inventing the vacuum), have helped me cook meals quickly (by selling me the microwave), they have enabled me to buy pretty much any food item in the whole world from one store (the supermarket), they have provided me with an extremely powerful computer for hundreds le

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    27. Re:US centric thinking? by doubledoh · · Score: 1

      It is so refreshing to read an intelligent response on slashdot. Thanks.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    28. Re:US centric thinking? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Exactly. Amazingly, the above 4 lines pretty much sums everything up.

      The best way to take care of society is to take care of yourself, your family, and your friends (in that order). If everyone did that, we wouldn't have any problems. But because so many people seem so adamant about forcing others to take care of everyone but themselves, we are ironically screwed.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    29. Re:US centric thinking? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Let's see, last I checked Government, at least in the US, provided a vast infrastructure of roads, waterways, airports, etc. I also know my water is clean and safe. I know what the weather will be like. All because of the evil government.

      Most of the roads that you drive on are paid for by your local governments (at a pretty cheap rate by the way). And the national highways are still a tiny tiny fraction of what the federal government spends, say on the military, welfare, etc). I've got no problems paying 1 or 2 percent of my money to my local government for roads, streetlights, police and a justice system. I already pay a private company for my water (and it's damn cheap). Airports should be built and paid for by businesses that will profit from the airport. I shouldn't have to subsidize the airline or tourism industry.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    30. Re:US centric thinking? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      They're helping me because it serves their short term interests. If screwing me over did so instead, they'd do it in a heart beat. There is no control on buisnesses. You'll take your money elsewhere? They don't give a fuck- there's a million more like you. At least with politicians, you can vote them out of office. And in local elections, your vote *does* matter.

      You're talking in absolutes again. I don't know where you get this idea that all humans are intrinsically evil and will backstab you every chance they get so long as they can get away with it. Your cynical and truly unrealistic worldview is just not helpful here. The reality is that most people want to expand their business and they know the best way to do that is to impress their customers so they keep coming back and tell their friends about it. A business that "screws" over their customers may get away with it in the short term, but eventually, everyone that wises up will never buy from that corrupt business again and it will eventually go out of business. Look at McDonalds. One guy with a video camera and 30 days, completely changed McDonands approach (Super-Size Me) by exposing their relentless cholesteral carnival upselling techniques to the world. Even so, even if a business "rips" you off, that's not my responsibility and it shouldn't be the governments. It is your responsibility to research the companies you do business with before handing money over to them. It is your responsibility to create and sign a contract concerning transactions you make. It is you who chooses to make a transaction or not! Intelligent people can't hand-hold you through your entire life. If you have questions about the trustworthyness of a corporation, ask your friends about them, research it on the internet, talk to consumer-advocacy groups or read consumer reports...but DON'T force me to pay the government MY money so that it can regulate a business because you're too much of an idiot to make your own decisions!

      Corporations are the dictators of the 20th century. They have almost unlimited power when compared to the ordinary human being. They legally can't be touched (the corporate veil) and made accountable for their actions. There are no checks and balances over them. The only reason they aren't dictators in fact is that they have no army. And the only reason they don't is because the government wouldn't allow it. If they could march an army into some third world country and force them to work instead of hiring them as workers, they would in a second.

      Where do you come up with stuff like this? People that deal in absolutes are absolutely idiotic. People like you that actually believe this bullshit make me want to give up. What is the point in working hard and providing a wonderful service if I'm going to be called a greedy backstabbing son of a bitch no matter what I do? Your thinking is so sophmoric and lazy that I actually considered crying, because it really is sad that a human being with a brain actually "thinks" like you do. Seriously...where did you "learn" this garbage? I trust you live in a forest in the woods and you grow all your own food and hunt animals for clothing, and use the surrounding trees for shelter...

      Wait...you mean you gave money to those corporate scum that would totally, like, backstab you and turn you into, like, a slave...just so you could have a computer and the internet? You give those corporate slave-drivers money every month to access the internet? And wait...are those clothes that you are wearing (god I hope so)? You mean you give those corporate child abusers money just so you can look fashionable and protect yourself from the elements? Oh wait, is that a roof over your head? You mean you give those business bastards dosh to tear down forests and raid mountainsides and make people with saws and pick-axes sweat just so you could hide from the wind and the rain? Wuss.

      For someone that thinks corporations would turn you into a slave

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    31. Re:US centric thinking? by gymell · · Score: 1
      Corporations are made up of greedy, power-hungry people. Governments are made up of greedy, power-hungry people. The goal of both is to achieve, maintain, and increase their power ... generally by taking your money. The difference is, that a politician can hold a gun to your head take your money, whereas a corporate employee can't.

      If you think that anyone in goverment is there to "help" people, then you are the true moron here. Any politician that says he's trying to help you, is only telling you what you want to hear in order to further his one and only goal: power. And tomorrow, if he needs to screw you over to "help" someone else, he'll do it in a heartbeat.

  26. Right... by xstonedogx · · Score: 2, Interesting

    'We thought that using an objective check through the computer would be the most fair and objective way to do that,' she said Wednesday."

    Because the amount of typing is a sure indicator of productivity. /sarcasm

    Sorry, but about the only thing it will tell you is whether someone is spending time using email, message boards, and instant messages for personal use.

    And it's poor at that, because unless they're doing A LOT of non-work related typing, you don't really know how much time they're spending doing non-work related stuff. We all type at different speeds. Maybe it's all on their lunch hour.

    Besides, you can check all that stuff in other, less intrusive ways.

    Objective? Please. Except in obvious cases (like data entry as another poster mentioned) this requires subjective review by its very nature.

    1. Re:Right... by JahToasted · · Score: 1
      Yeah IBM at one time paid developers by the number of lines of code they wrote. This was right before they started taking huge losses. They don't do that anymore.

      The problem is management's production IS measured by the number of spreadsheets, word documents, and power point presentations they produce. And so they think that more code == better product.

  27. Child labour in Alberta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it is legal to make kids as young as 12 work in menial jobs that companies in Alberta are having trouble finding adults for, so long as they don't log their keyboards!

    Hurray!

    1. Re:Child labour in Alberta by agraupe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, you can't *make* them work. But you can hire them, provided that they want the job. I don't see why this should be against the law. I know a lot of kids my age (~16) that break the labour laws of their own free will so they can make more money. It works out well for everyone involved.

    2. Re:Child labour in Alberta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Under the new laws, all that is needed is a parent's "permission", so kids as young as 12 can indeed be FORCED into labour. In Alberta today there is now nothing to stop an immoral parent from forcing his or her kids to take jobs (and telling them to fake "wanting" it, or risk being beaten) and then taking their money.


      It works out well for everyone involved.


      Yeah, unless you are one of the 12 years olds forced to work for $5 and hour serving oil field workers to support your lazy and alcoholic father.

    3. Re:Child labour in Alberta by agraupe · · Score: 1

      Well, if you look at everything in life as something that will somwhow be used against someone, you will be an unhappy person. Child abuse is child abuse, and nothing is going to stop that. The fact is that more people will benefit from this policy than will be hurt by it, and those who are hurt by it no doubt have some legal recourse (threatening people isn't legal).

    4. Re:Child labour in Alberta by Medevo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Alberta is a strange place to live. We arguably have one of the most conservative (both C and c) provincial governments in the entire province, but the rulings on parts of social policy always seem to swing in every which direction.

      The "as young as 12" thing doesn't surprise me, for years kids that age having been working through a loophole in the system where the "parent" is hired to do a job like being a paperboy or fast food but the kid does all the work and gets the money. What happened was the parents name and age would go down on the application, but the kids SIN (Canadian Social Security #) would be put down, so the kid even got the tax forms.

      What I want to know personally is how this ruling applies to students (currently a university student in Alberta). I know that my High school had some hacked up version of tightVNC installed on each computer that at times would saturate the network, and made compiling when drawing on libraries on the network drive slow as death. While I would love to see the CBE get sued or similar over some keystroke logging issue, I doubt the privacy commission is going to listen to a bunch of whiney 17ish geeks. Eventually I just used a SSH tunnel to a Terminal Server at home for all the stuff I did at school, no screwing around with disks or network drives.

      Medevo

    5. Re:Child labour in Alberta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Alberta today there is now nothing to stop an immoral parent from forcing his or her kids to take jobs (and telling them to fake "wanting" it, or risk being beaten) and then taking their money.

      Alberta has no Family Child Services offices?

      Funny, I wonder who made this webpage then?

      Steps:

      Children's Help Phone -> Police at door of child's home -> Child in foster care (safer than the parents you are talking about) -> Parents in jail.

      Not too complicated really.

    6. Re:Child labour in Alberta by lgw · · Score: 1

      My parents forced me to work at 12 or risk being beaten! Of course it was yard work, house work, and other chores, but from the kid's point of view, what's the difference?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  28. Don't believe it. by ShaniaTwain · · Score: 3, Funny

    clearly the 'productivity' excuse is just a smoke screen, and their real goal is finding good free porn.

    I want the job where they have no measure of your days work other than the number of times a key was pressed:

    1.turn on key repeat
    2.leave heavy book laying on keyboard
    3.take rest of the week off and PROFIT!

    1. Re:Don't believe it. by vspazv · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the alladvantage.com advertising toolbar a few years ago. Everyone just got programs to move the mouse and collect money.

      I actually got two checks from them before they shut down.

    2. Re:Don't believe it. by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      I got cheques for about 4 months....... little programs that move the mouse and surf for you while you're not home are your friend. :)

    3. Re:Don't believe it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      back a few years, there was a company named xs4all (i think) that gave you 18 cents per clicks on banners. no ratio. they had 7 or 8 banners to click on. i got about 800$ from them iirc, and someone i know, 4000$

      joys of clueless companies

    4. Re:Don't believe it. by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      a guy i knew in highschool used an old turntable to beat the software that scanned for mouse spoofing programs

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    5. Re:Don't believe it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think that was XS4all, they are the best ISP in The Netherlands, known for their sensibility.

  29. Keylogging, but they didn't look at the logs? by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

    managers never looked at any of the computer files that were logged.

    So if they were keylogging, but weren't looking at the logs what were they looking at? Number of keystrokes? Counting keystokes isn't a great way to measure performance, because it penalizes people who are more proficient at the keyboard.

    We don't know the details of the case, but it seems like the employeers said that they were using a keylogger to measure performance. This is doubtful, because there are many better ways to measure performance (Did the job get done?).

    It's more likely that they were trying to monitor the actual activites of the employee.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    1. Re:Keylogging, but they didn't look at the logs? by digidave · · Score: 1

      They should have measured SLOCs.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  30. Re:Poop recording declared illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We thought that using an objective check through the computer would be the most fair and objective way to do that

    It sure is.

    asdfghjklasdfghjkl
    asdfghjklasdfghjkl

  31. From An Administrator by SenFo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In addition to writing software for the company I work for, I am also the system administrator. And I have been working in the IT world for about 6 years now. In that time, I have never read another persons email. I have never gone through their personal files. This is, of course, unless asked to do so by the owner of said objects. And to this day, I still find it completely ridiculous that anybody would find it necessary to spy on their users/employees by means of logging all keystrokes.

    I believe that if a person cannot be trusted to perform the operations (s)he was assigned to, that they have no business working in the same company as me, in the first place. Maybe I'm too trusting. I don't know. But what I do know is that I am respected by my coworkers for being fair and not letting my power go to my head.

    Having said that, I wish key logging were illegal in all states. IMHO, certain people need to lighten up.

    1. Re:From An Administrator by Iriel · · Score: 1

      I think that people should be able to trust their employees also. Despite another post I've made on this topic, I'm not a fan of keystoke logging. On the other hand, in large companies, it can be difficult for a small group of managers or admins to oversee the productivity of a great number of workers. The name of the game in competetive american business is still 'productivity'. If you're not pulling more weight than your cubicle partner, then your partner will have more desk space next month. This is not true in all cases, but some companies feel they have to enforce this kind of ethic to counteract the rapidly depleting work ethic in the younger generations. I personally graduated from college with a large number of people who lost their entry level jobs within months because they felt like the world owed them just for having a degree and acted accordingly.

      I'm not really a fan of using the logs, but the illusion of it can go a long way to keep otherwise counterproductive people in line.

      --
      Perfecting Discordia
      www.stevenvansickle.com
    2. Re:From An Administrator by JahToasted · · Score: 1
      What you're describing is poor management. Too many employees per manager? well then promote some of those developers to "team lead" or whatever. What do they teach in these MBA classes, anyway? A person can manage 10 people optimally. More than 10 then they don't know what the hell is going on.

      No work ethic? why should someone work hard for a company that's going to fire you as soon as the project is done? And now that the company is going to be spying on you, you're going to work harder? People will be loyal to a company if and only if the company is loyal to them. You set up a points system to measure production, all you're doing is making work into a game. Employees will spend all day gaming the system instead of actually working.

      If your managers don't know what their employees are doing when they're at work, you've got poor management. There is no technological solution for poor management.

    3. Re:From An Administrator by bitflip · · Score: 1

      Then what do you use for blackmail? /BOFH

  32. Shades of grey areas by Iriel · · Score: 1

    This is an interesting issue because, as far as America is concerned, keystroke logging could be warped and molested into an argument about privacy in the workplace in most courts. But where I don't really think it should be illegal is the fact that almost every company I've ever seen details the fact that company computers are to be used only for company work. Conducting personal business is to reprimanded in most cases.

    But with cubicle farms being so prevalent in even small offices, you really have no other way to monitor your employees. There really isn't an effective way to block all non-work related websites without letting a few through and blocking some related to clients per se. If keystroke logging is to be illegal, then so should cameras, and network traffic loggers. If employees feel like they're being watched somehow, they're less likely to spend the day playing Yahoo! Games and checking their email. Besides, how can you confront an unproductive employee without proof that they've been breaking the company policy because your logging was banned? It's not so easy then.

    --
    Perfecting Discordia
    www.stevenvansickle.com
    1. Re:Shades of grey areas by The+Warlock · · Score: 1

      If employees feel like they're being watched somehow, they're less likely to spend the day playing Yahoo! Games and checking their email.

      Or posting on Slashdot?

      On a semi-related note, who do you work for right now?

      --
      I've upped my standards, so up yours.
  33. Just as odd as wiretapping laws by Digital_Quartz · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can't tap a phone you "technically own" either, not even in the US. If you want to record a phone conversation, you have to let both parties know. Nothing odd about that.

    1. Re:Just as odd as wiretapping laws by jumpingfred · · Score: 2, Informative

      The laws vary from state to state as to wheather both parties have to know about the recording.

    2. Re:Just as odd as wiretapping laws by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      Mod up, parent is totally correct. Or if it's not, I'd be very interested in seeing the applicable federal law.

    3. Re:Just as odd as wiretapping laws by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Depends on the state, some only require one party to know.

      But a better example might be a car. You can't just drive a car you own, at least on a public road. You have to have licence, registration, insurance. Many states require a minimal level maintanence.

      Guns would be another. depending on location, you might need a licence or permit, and then if you do not carry it openly, you need a concealed weapons permit.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    4. Re:Just as odd as wiretapping laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only odd if you tell exactly one party. If you tell both orneither, it's even.

    5. Re:Just as odd as wiretapping laws by lacoste · · Score: 1
      Wrong

      Lac

      --
      Vidi Vici Veni
      Thanks for the sig
  34. Not precisely illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The privacy commissioner ruled that the library had been collecting personal information. That's not the same as saying that keystroke logging is illegal. Presumably keystroke logging would be legal if no personal information were collected. The library denied that they actually looked at or used the files other than to confirm activity. The commissioner obviously didn't believe them.

    The commissioner didn't say you couldn't monitor employees. He also didn't say that you have to tell employees when you are monitoring them.

    This is a pretty narrow ruiling.

  35. The Issue is Trust by agent+dero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The idea of needing to secretly log keystokes on an employee is ludicrous.

    If you, as an employer, manager, etc, cannot trust the people below you to do the work you put before them, then why are they your employees?

    When it comes to computers at work, I might need to fetch files from home, they'd log my personal passwords, and all other data; that's not only unnecessary, but unfair. I trust them to not snoop my personal data that may be transmitted through a work computer, and they trust me to get my work done.

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
    1. Re:The Issue is Trust by noidentity · · Score: 1

      If you, as an employer, manager, etc, cannot trust the people below you to do the work you put before them, then why are they your employees?

      There's this mentality shared by people in various power positions (companies, households, etc.) that they might as well monitor people just in case they are being deceitful. Trust be damned!

      As others have commented in the past, I'll welcome total surveillance when everyone is monitored and everyone can view the logs of anyone. Of course that'll never happen because the watchers are doing the worst (like setting up secret surveillance).

    2. Re:The Issue is Trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you, as an employer, manager, etc, cannot trust the people below you to do the work you put before them, then why are they your employees?

      Because you, as the wage slave, work cheaper than the majority of the other fools from the endless pool of expendable labor in our jobless recovery. We know what we've got too: Pay peanuts, get monkeys. We know you're a slack bastard, so we are watching every move you make. That'll keep you on your toes. We aren't paying you to fuck off, so get to work. Don't like it? Take a hike. We can replace you in a day. Our equipment, our policy. Oh, and here's your new company mobile phone. It has GPS, so don't spend too long taking a shit or we'll know about that too. Don't spend more than two minutes, stay constipated, or hold it. Otherwise, the GPS will be helpful in directing you to where you can turn in your phone when You're Fired(TM) too.

      That kinda sums up the attitude... Usually encountered where they get back to you after a couple of weeks, have personality tests during interviews, and then put you through 2 weeks 'training' to make sure you are throughly desperate to pay the rent by the time you start working. That way, they have at least a few months to abuse you before you've collected enough slave wage to survive another job change.

      Moral of the story: If they have a personality test, walk out. You don't want that job.

  36. So that would make it illegal to... by MrFreshly · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So it would make it illegal to have video surveillance too? If you can SEE the keyboard and the keys being pressed...Other than key logging being cheaper and the obvious format differences, what's the difference?

  37. Sounds foolish to log keys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why didn't they just have the employee log the work they did in the day? If you're questioning how they're working why not just make them tell you what they've done in the day. That's MUCH more effective than keylogging, and then not looking at the logs. And for some reason thinking that you're getting an objective view of how much work they're getting done during the day.

    Hell, if all they were doing was looking at the size of the file, all the employee would have to do is mash the keyboard for an hour a day to make the log a few hundred kilobytes long. He'd probobly win an award for being so productive.

  38. It should not necessarily be illegal. by pg110404 · · Score: 1

    An employer should have the right to expect reasonable performace from their employees. No one puts a gun to an employer's head saying "employ that person", and no one is putting a gun to the employee saying "work for this person".

    The employer should have the right to approach their employees and tell them up front, their work is being monitored. As long as it's done in the open, the employee can't complain about invasion of privacy. If they feel their privacy is threatened, perhaps they are not doing their job. They are after all being paid to do their job. Why then should an employee feel they are being mistreated when the employer finds out through monitoring devices, they are surfing for porn or spending 50% of their time using IM with their friends or doing seriously poor work?

    OTOH, as someone else pointed out, I'd expect 100% privacy IN the bathroom or in areas of the building where work is not expected to occur. However, I wouldn't feel overly offended if the boss put up a camera pointing at the bathroom door to see how much time I spent doing my business.

    1. Re:It should not necessarily be illegal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the employer has the power if he's running a successful business, the worker HAS to work for an employer or he doesn't eat or pay his bills, big difference. This is the extreme imbalance in capitalism: It's an employers market with current state of the world (outsourcing, etc), everyone is replacable unless you're owner.

    2. Re:It should not necessarily be illegal. by covertbadger · · Score: 1

      What? You're kidding, right? I'm lucky enough to have a coding job I really enjoy with a company I respect and within a market sector I find interesting, and on top of that I get paid well, but the day my boss points CCTV at the door of the bathroom is the day I hand in my notice. I wouldn't work anywhere that judges my performance on whether my average dump time is two minutes more or less than the guys from the infrastructure team. As long as I don't slack off and cause my team to miss our monthly iteration targets, then it shouldn't matter if I decide to take an extra 10 minutes and tackle the cryptic crossword instead of the coffee-break crossword.

  39. High Schools... by faclonX · · Score: 1

    When I was in high school about 2.5 years ago, the Sysadmin there decided he wanted to install keyloggers on all the computers in
    a) The school library (they were also running NetOP to spy on students who were trying to work....)
    b) The Cisco Lab (thereby unknowingly to us breaking our signed contracts which stated we would not distribute the cisco networking academy curriculum)
    He then gave the password to access these keyloggers to his lackies, who were no more than stupid students, who blatently used these key loggers to steal people's passwords, and get others in trouble...
    We never did anything about it, we were going to complain to the board, but we figured no one would listen to us anyways... Now that I think about it, I regret getting that dumbass fired for revealing private information... It could have also contributed to the student records server getting hacked later in that year...
    For those wondering, I went to Denis Morris High School

    --
    It had to be done... It had to be said...
  40. You should mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with keystroke logging is how completely pervasive it is.

    It's one thing to say "We'll read all your e-mail, and any files you save." That's reasonably "what you're doing on the company network."

    On the other hand, suppose you get a phone call on your cell with fairly personal information. Your doctor's phoned you up to tell you the name of the clinic to get your AIDS treated at, for example.

    It's not reasonable to say "employees shouldn't take calls like that during work," because doctor's offices run the same work hours as everyone else. So you take the call, you have to write down the name of the clinic. Ok, so you pop open notepad.exe to do it. You're going to write it down after, but the doc's talking fast enough, you don't have the writing skill to do it on paper.

    You *know* it would be stupid to save this file on the company network, or e-mail it to yourself. But with a keystroke logger, even though you haven't saved it, it's recorded.

    There are a hundred things like this. Who hasn't gotten a phone call from his or her boss, some extraordinarily irritating interference, and typed into his or her code "I would strangle this man if he weren't in charge of my paycheck..." then deleted it?

    Finally, and most importantly, keystroke loggers intercept passwords. While it may be fine to check up on what your employees are doing at work, it is abhorrent to destroy their security on every single site they might visit.

    Moreover, that information is not magically placed in the hands of "The Company." The Company is not a person. The administrator is a person, and while you as an employer may trust that administrator with corporate records, your employees have a right to have their bank account passwords kept out of that administrator's hands.

    Computers are, at this point, far too much an extension of our minds to log every single keystroke. It's just too detailed, too internal. There are far too many easy ways to check employee productivity without resorting to this intimate spying.

    In almost all cases, you can check employee productivity by watching out for sol.exe, checking the weblogs for things like slashdot or porn, and seeing whether the employee's work actually gets done.

    The ends don't justify the means in this case. Keystroke logging is insane.

    1. Re:You should mind by Casca · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A lot of good points. It should also be noted that a keystroke logger will destroy completely the ability to have a valid audit trail. The guy reading the keystroke logger can become anyone because they capture passwords. That should terrify pretty much anyone, especially managers.

      --
      Casca
    2. Re:You should mind by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

      I mind. I can see a realativivly easy future solution to this problem however. with hand held divices becoming more previlant and wireless networking more accessible the day will come when it is reasonable for your employer to expect that anything personal you do while at work. ( including reading slash) be done on your own computer you bought witht the network access you paid for. There
      of coarse are other security nightmares in that, but it does solve the privacy issue.

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
    3. Re:You should mind by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Blah blah blah^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
      Insightful post!

    4. Re:You should mind by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      You're going to write it down after, but the doc's talking fast enough, you don't have the writing skill to do it on paper.

      Not to detract from the rest of your argument, which I agree with, but most people can't type faster than (or even close to as fast as) they can write - they'll write something down rather than type it into notepad.

    5. Re:You should mind by sinrtb · · Score: 1

      I type about 10 x more legibly and 2x as fast as i write.

    6. Re:You should mind by supersocialist · · Score: 1

      And on the other hand, many people type faster than they write by hand, so it's a valid example even if it doesn't apply to everybody. Not a whole lot of things apply to everybody, after all.

    7. Re:You should mind by nahdude812 · · Score: 1

      I don't know about "most people," but within IS where I work, this is decidedly not true. Basically all of us type faster than we write. Each letter in typing is a simple down-up motion, and many of the motions can be done partially in parallel (for example, when typing "test", you're beginning to push e before you've fully pushed t, etc).

      A good typer will always write words faster than a good handwriter unless that handwriter is one of the now rare folks who know a shorthand script based on syllables.

      Depending on your handwriting, it's also hugely more readable. I've typed everything important even since I was a kid, and as a result my handwriting is really terrible. At our IS meetings, it's the exception that people are taking notes on paper, most are taking them on a laptop. Usually you have a pad of paper next to you, but that's only for if you need to draw a diagram.

  41. Be Productive for your company by let1 · · Score: 1

    by giving your keyboards to monkeys. Maybe just maybe your company make more profits by selling novels created from the logging.

    --
    Felt Better! Big headache is gone.
  42. Make keylogging work for YOU! by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

    If you use Firefox, the command to open a URL is Alt-D...then to get to Slashdot (assuming you've loaded it once before), just hit "S" and the URL autofills.

    Coincidentally, the command to sort a field of data in an Excel spreadsheet is Alt-D,S.

  43. Only government employees, right? by SpaceAdmiral · · Score: 2, Informative

    I didn't look this up, but I'm pretty sure the Alberta Privacy Commissioner only has authority over government employees/employers.

    I think the submitter is wrong: I don't think this ruling has any effect on a private employer. So it's not really "illegal."

    1. Re:Only government employees, right? by Mystical+Presence · · Score: 1
      Taken from http://www.privcom.gc.ca/faq/faq_01_e.asp#002 (cut and paste as to not fill up my keystroke logs)
      Q. What is the role of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada?

      A. According to the Privacy Act and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada is responsible for ensuring that the federal government and companies in the private sector collect, use or disclose personal information in a manner that is responsible and transparent. These Acts governing personal information provide the Privacy Commissioner of Canada with the authority to ensure organizations and federal departments are held accountable for their information handling practices.

      Within the federal public sector, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada can initiate audits of information practices randomly. In conducting an audit, the Commissioner has the power to summon any person before her. She also has the authority to administer oaths, receive evidence and, enter the premises of an organization, after fulfilling security requirements. The Commissioner can also examine or obtain copies of any records found.

      The Commissioner is impartial and nonpartisan, which means she can act independently to investigate complaints from individuals. This mandate extends to both the federal public sector and the private sector. As such, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada can make recommendations to improve how personal information is handled. She can also publicize recommendations and reports. In some cases, the Commissioner can refer cases to the Federal Court. At this level, the Court can award damages to a complainant, including damages for humiliation.

      As ombudsman, the Commissioner doesn't issue orders or impose penalties, but rather arrives at her decisions through a process of inquiry and persuasion, a process which underlines her impartiality and dedication to problem resolution.

      However, it is a criminal offence to obstruct the Commissioner during an investigation or audit or to knowingly dispose of personal information that could be subject to a request. The legislation also makes it a criminal offence for employers to take retaliatory actions against employees.

      The Privacy Commissioner of Canada's mandate also includes research, education and promotion of privacy issues in Canada. As an Officer of Parliament, the Privacy Commissioner of Canada reports directly to the House of Commons and to the Senate.
      Seems they have some power over theprivate sector although it almost sounds like it's more of a recommendation and reporting structure and not a law making kind of power.

      Although in this case it was a public body (A library) and the Commissioner would have power.
  44. Productivity? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

    One thing I have not noticed mentioned yet is that no one is questioning the "productivity" angle. Are not most jobs quantifiable in some way? I mean, this worker was not conjuring spirits or some such? When you hire someone, you usually tell them you need to do such and such, in such amount of time, or something like that. Did they hire this person to perfect the fung shei of the library?

    Once again managers, bosses, supervisors not giving a whole lot of thought into what their people are supposed to do and how that work gets evaluated. If you can not figure out an employees productivity fairly easily, then you have problems.

    Ok, I see people just itching to reply about writing software, how it's so hard to define progress, how you can not do it just by lines of code per day or functions per week. This is true (mostly), but if you give at least rough timetables for when things should be done, who cares if only one line of code is done on Tuesday if the module is done on Thursday?

    My guess, the boss knew the employee had access to better porn and was just trolling to find it.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  45. definitely a propaganda. by Agent_OO7 · · Score: 1

    first no pst and now no keylogging law!! now i wanna move to alberta!!

  46. Obligatory Simpsons quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The fingers you have used to dial are too fat. To obtain a special dialing wand, please mash the keypad with the palm of your hand now."

  47. Mr. Work by jgbishop · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else find it ironic that the name of the commissioner involved in this case is named Mr. Work? Perhaps we should monitor his activity to see what his productivity is like...

    --
    Go, and never darken my towels again! -- Rufus
  48. Oh, Canada! by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

    They have a "Privacy Commissioner"! In the US, we've got secret police.

    "These days it's all secrecy, no privacy."
    - The Rolling Stones, Fingerprint File

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Oh, Canada! by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Troll

      Moderation -1
      100% Troll

      The secret police have TrollMods on the payroll, suppressing the fact that we're becoming Land of the AC, Home of the Slave.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  49. You're not thinking about what privacy means by AllenChristopher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could you reasonably be expected, as part of your job, to purchase something and then be reimbursed by the company? For example, might you have a business lunch?

    In order to pay for that business lunch, might you have to log into your bank account?

    In the perfomance of this work-related duty, is it fair that the network admin for your company now has your bank id and password, which would allow him, if he liked, to take your life savings and those of fellow employees who did the same, then run to Aruba?

    Keystroke logging records passwords. No matter how scrupulous you are about not discussing your sex life on work time, any non-work passwords must remain sacrosanct. Keystroke logging goes over the line.

    1. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keystroke logging goes over the line.

      Hey! We got terrorists and drug dealers to nail. Until they're all caught or dead, you will gladly give up your freedoms if you're a good patriot. To impede the authorities in any way is a criminal offense. Resistance is un-American...and futile

    2. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by drsquare · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you're going for a business lunch, then the company should pay for it. If not, then get the money from a cash machine. I don't see how logging onto a bank account at work gets you your money, unless your computer is connected to a note forger machine.

      If you don't want non-work passwords to be logged, then don't enter non-work passwords on work computers. Key-logging is perfectly acceptable. In my company we put loggers on all the computers to see what the employees are up to. I don't see how this is any worse than watching them on a camera or going round in person watching them. Is standing behind someone whilst they work an invasion of privacy?

    3. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by Xenoflargactian · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about the child pornographers!

    4. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by pthor1231 · · Score: 1

      This logic is flawed in two ways. One already pointed out about getting the company to pay for it first, via a corporate card or money from the petty cash fund, or simply withdraw the money from an ATM. Neither would require you to disclose your personal passwords on the company LAN. Second, its against an sane company's policy for the for the network admin to review the keylogging information and then use that information for illegal purpose, eg identity theft.

    5. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by lgw · · Score: 1

      Or the hackers!

      Terrorists, drug dealers, child pornographers, and hackers: the four horsemen of the internet apocalypse.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by lgw · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know when someone is standing behind me. I don't know when someone is using a keylogger, which makes it unacceptable. A man should be strung up for treating others that way.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    7. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by Senjutsu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Second, its against an sane company's policy for the for the network admin to review the keylogging information and then use that information for illegal purpose, eg identity theft.

      Oh, well that's a relief. I'm sure he'll think to himself "Well, I was going to take this credit card number, steal a bunch of money from him with it, break a number of laws, and bugger off to a tropical paradise, but darn it all, that would contravene my company's network policy"

    8. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If you're going for a business lunch, then the company should pay for it. If not, then get the money from a cash machine. I don't see how logging onto a bank account at work gets you your money, unless your computer is connected to a note forger machine."

      Perhaps things work differently in America. I know that you were quite backward in your adoption of Interac.

      Here, you've long been able to control your entire account from an internet connection. Money transferred to a VISA is immediately available, without a several day waiting period.

      Therefore, many people who want to keep their VISA from running a balance always transfer an amount to the VISA before making any significant purchases. Rather than worrying about taking care of your bill at the end of the month, you know that you have the money in there now.

      In many companies, company policy is that business lunches are reimbursed. You pay for it yourself, then the company pays you back when you show a receipt. This is beneficial for the employee because you don't have to fill out the paperwork ahead of time to requisition funds and the purchase goes on your VISA's points plan.

      VISA is the best way to do this because paying in cash doesn't give you documentary evidence of the gratuity.

      All this combines to make a very reasonable situation in which you might want to use your bank from work for *perfectly legitimate business reasons.* If your employer doesn't trust you to the extent that they're logging, it would be unwise. You *can* do things in such a way as to avoid this. But at that point, logging is interfering with employees doing their job in the simplest way.

      When did employment become a prison, in which dangerous employees constantly scheme against the warden employers? Last I checked, an employee did work to help the employer get ahead all day, every day. This kept the money flowing, which kept the employee from getting laid off.

      I wonder if your attitude comes from the positions you've held in companies. It seems like the kind of thing a former fry clerk expects, not someone who's actually had a position of trust within a company.

      As for the difference with cameras, cameras don't yield to GREP. It would take sufficient manpower to invade privacy in a serious way using cameras that it isn't worth it.

    9. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      I've bought books online (from amazon) on several occasions and claimed the money back from the company. I would not be prepared to do this if I knew that my credit card details were being logged.

      Also, we are required to use an online SAP system to access various HR functionality, including checking our payslips (which are no longer posted to us). This is not available outside of the corporate network. With keyloggers installed, anyone who had access to the logs would have access to these records for every affected employee.

    10. Re:You're not thinking about what privacy means by alexo · · Score: 1


      Flogging will continue until morale improves.

  50. Just as odd as wiretapping laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing odd about that.

    No, in fact it's extremely odd.

  51. Keylogging is not objective. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    By no means should anyone think that keylogging is an "objective" way of measuring performance. Because employee A takes care of all her work and has some free time so she gets online and chats on IRC and employee B spends all day working on the same issues (and still doesn't get them fixed), employee B is not more productive then employee A.

    We need to understand that a productive worker is one who makes sure the job is done, and it doesn't matter what he or she does in their downtime. Want to measure the productivity of the tech at the library? Are the computers he is responsible for functioning properly? If yes, he is a productive worker. If it seems like he has too much free time, give him more resposibility. If he struggles with it, can him or lighten his workload.

    --
    The Internet is generally stupid
    1. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by silverbax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would agree, and this is one of the biggest fallacies in management today. I am appalled at the library's response - "How on Earth do you measure productivity?" as if technology was some bewildering alchemy akin to warlocks and potions. I mean, give me a break, the library must have had a reason as to why they hired a technician prior to hiring him. Are we to believe that they simply hired one without any justification, then wondered why they were paying him?

      There are much more effective methods of monitoring productivity. I've run many technology teams and projects, and I've had no trouble determining who was working and who wasn't. I would never need to even stop by the person's cube or office, and I would know who was producing. This isn't that difficult, and I certainly wouldn't need to invade the employees' privacy, waste money on software and then more time checking the logs.

      1. This isn't a security issue.

      2. There are far more effective ways to determine productivity.

      3. This is an invasion of privacy. Most employers allow users to at least check bank accounts online once in a while, given that the employee is stuck at work during banking or office hours. What's the issue with checking a bank balance for 5 minutes instead of leaving work an hour early to do the same? Also, where is the logged information kept? Who looks at it?

      4. Hire good people. Leave them alone.

      5. If you happen to hire someone who isn't good. Fire them. It's good for the business and good for morale. Then go back to leaving your good employees alone to do their work. Who the hell cares if they browse or chat when all the work is done and delivered correctly, on time? Not me. That's how I get promoted and lunches with the CFO.

    2. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by SoylentG · · Score: 0, Troll

      Just because things are running well and the work is getting done doesn't mean the employee is productive. It might mean that the employee is indeed a slackass, and that there's just not enough for him to do.

      For example, this particular computer tech might be in charge of a computer area that experiences very little use. Therefore, there's less virii and garbage on the things for him to clean-off.

      As this guy's employer, they have every right to make sure that he is fully engaged in something at all prescribed times, and they should do everything and anything in their power to exercise that right. If he's got so much ass-time, he could be helping out a clerk putting away books. Hell - he could even be pushing a broom. Really, they can make him do anything that they want him to; when he's on the clock, his ass belongs to the company. All the company has to do is watch out for his health & safety, and not grab his junk. (Harrassment stuff I mean). When you're on the clock, you're a bitch.

      I disagree with the keylogging though. But not on the basis that it compromises his security, or that it's somehow an injustice. I disagree with the keylogging because it's just pussy-footing around. If they thought his work habits were slack, they should have just fired him. Or if they were feeling generous, march him outside, give him a spade, and make him dig holes to teach him a lesson. When he's done digging the holes, make him fill them back in, and dig 'em up again. When he's done that for a week or two, (and if they think he's learned his lesson, then consider bringing him back into white collar work). I'm sure his attitude would have been altered.

      Red Forman said it best...."Work isn't supposed to be fun...If it was, they wouldn't call it work....They'd call it "fiddle-dee-dee""

      IT "experts" need to stop resting on their laurels, and start busting their asses like the rest of us. You'd think that the dotcom crash would have taught them some humility...But no...All it did was weed some of them out. The remainder are still just as lazy and self-important as they were ten years ago.

      This is how it should work:

      "Johnson....You've got 1500 lines of assembly to finish before 10 am. When you're done that, go file your TPS reports. Then go down to the print stations, and sort through the recycle bin and try to recover any pieces of paper that were thrown in there by mistake. Then write me an e-mail explaining this, and be sure to justify how much time it took you to do it. This should take you until about 11 am. Then go see the building operator, sign out the power-buffer, and go polish the floor in the server room. Take your thirty minute lunch break, and report back to me for your next assignment. Do it and like it. Your reward is your paycheque. If not, I suggest you stop being so partial to food and shelter. Now get out of my office and get to work."

    3. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Red Forman said it best...."Work isn't supposed to be fun...If it was, they wouldn't call it work....They'd call it "fiddle-dee-dee""

      That kind of attitude will all but guarantee you lose any quality employees. IT workers, like anyone else are human beings. This is not 1915, and this is not a coal mine.

      I don't work in IT (anymore). But I do work on contracts for a number of organizations, many times hourly. Yes, I get downtime while I'm on the clock, and I'll use that downtime to talk with my friends on the Internet, look at webpages, or absent a computer play games on my cell phone. It usually turns out to be pretty good; being away from a particular issue for a period of time and goofing off often gives me a new perspective to approach it, and it usually pays off in the end.

      About 2 1/2 years ago, I dealt with somebody like you. Seeing me in front of a computer terminal looking at CNN.com, my immediate supervisor told me to do some menial filing work. I explained to her that this is not what I do, and not why I'm here. She said that essentially she was "ordering" me to do it. I hate confrontations, so I walked out the door, went directly to her boss and told her flat out that I am here to do a particular job, which I'm doing quite well, on time and on budget. I am not a file clerk.

      I didn't wait for her to try to rectify things. The job was only for a few days, and I saw no reason to get into a dispute. I left.

      I had a lot of crummy, menial jobs while I was in college and grad school. Among other things, I bussed tables in a coffee shop. I did mindless data entry in front of a terminal all day. I've filed thousands upon thousands of documents. I even spent a summer pushing rocks around in a quarry. The reason I continued my education was so I wouldn't have to do that anymore. And I won't.

      However, where I have seen your kind of management, where the "as long as you're on the clock you're our bitch" mentality rules supreme, was in the Army. For the most part, all this accomplishes is a "You're doing good as long as you look busy" mentality. One of the first things soldiers learn when it comes to doing drone labor is that you don't do it quickly. It doesn't matter if you do a bang-up job while buffing the floor. It can, however, get you in trouble if there's a sparkling floor you can eat off of and you've popped outside for a smoke. So, take forever to do it. Watch as your NCOs see you laboring over that floor buffer and say "He's such a hard worker!" despite the fact that you're purposely lagging.

      Incidentally, I learned from a friend at the company I talked about that the particular woman I had the altercation with was sacked. Her department kept going downhill and the company received so many complaints about her from the employees they replaced her about a year after I had that experience. He told me that the employees in her department are a lot more relaxed now, and efficiency has increased dramatically.

      Work should be fun. There's no law on the books that said it shouldn't. While the dot com companies failed miserably due to a lack of a solid business plan, I find it interesting that treating the employees like human beings and not worker drones compelled them to put in 80 hour work weeks without a fuss. A happy worker is a productive worker. A drone worker may be busy all the time, but he's hardly productive.

      If my boss seriously asked me to rummage through the recycle bin for reusable paper, then demanded I send him an email chronicling it, I would in all honesty and sincerity tell him to go fuck himself. Life's too short to waste your life away working under a tyrant.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    4. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy replay:

      I would _NEVER_ work with you.

      Tobad, cause Im good at what I do, but you got realy realy bad attitude problem.

    5. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by SoylentG · · Score: 0

      You didn't dispute it because you *knew* that you are a no-good slacker, and you deserved to lose your job. You're probably a jew. Or a nigger. Or a nigger-jew.

    6. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      And I suppose you're giving lessons on how to be a class act? I mean, for us NJs out there.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    7. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by SoylentG · · Score: 0

      Well poo poo to you, stupid head. Troll power!

    8. Re:Keylogging is not objective. by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      And a big giant poop on the top of the skull to you!

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
  52. EASY SOLUTION by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If only keystrokes are logged, try:

    abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 0123456789 http : // . com org (insert custom signs here)

    and save it into "test.txt". Then it's only matter of copying and pasting text. You can use the mouse if you want.
    results: Shift, right, ctrl-c, right right right right... etc.

    It's not that there aren't workarounds. It's just that they haven't been found yet.

    1. Re:EASY SOLUTION by Ruediger · · Score: 1

      You could just use a character map application, like the ones that come with Windows and KDE (KCharSelect).

      --
      "...personality goes a long way."
    2. Re:EASY SOLUTION by Feztaa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      character map might be easier to use.

  53. I see several by jd · · Score: 1
    And they have nothing to do with the privacy concerns. Every application you run is a potential source of system exploits, memory leaks and other serious IT issues. It's also of non-zero size, takes up at least one thread on the CPU, messes with IRQ vectors, consumes CPU cycles and kills keystroke injection systems when you need scripts to operate with applications that can't pipe I/O.


    Because keystroke loggers are often invisible on the process table, they can be a "safe haven" for viruses and other malware - non-priv software won't detect them, so can't inform you of them. A real concern, when you consider that buffer overflows are a major source of vulnerabilities and loggers are going to have to do buffered I/O.


    Now, onto the politics and privacy issues. Any company trading with Europe that also does keystroke logging COULD violate EU law on privacy, even if it is not in Europe. (EU law prohibits the transfer of personal data to countries that don't protect that data against copying and use that violates the originator's privacy. You don't know who has access to the keystroke logs and the originator certainly won't. That means, US companies can't guarantee compliance, which means those companies trade with the EU on a semi-legal to illegal basis.)


    Also, if the workplace is so politicized and so badly managed that it is actually necessary to know what is typed in order to do anything, the company has bigger problems than the user they are monitoring. Companies are like organisms - if an organism's brain tried to managed ALL the internal functions of EVERY cell in the organism, it would probably explode. Either that, or be very, very inefficient. And chronically codependent, but that's more a corporate mental illness than a political or privacy concern.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:I see several by hab136 · · Score: 1

      There are hardware keyloggers which have none of those vulnerability concerns (bonus: much easier to install and conceal).

  54. Big Brother by iamjoltman · · Score: 1

    Isn't the government already keylogging all of us anyway? (takes off tin foil hat) Oh wait, that's Canada. Never mind.

  55. other than keystroke logging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work in an university in Alberta. for every new machine arriving in the building, the "helpdesk" install VNC and Altris (some kind of deployment software). Altris then download some metering and scanning software to track activities and usage of applications (including games). Depending on how much they want to know you, it'll send back report as frequent as every 2 hours.

    i just want to make a point: if you are using this to evaluate performance, please let every employee know and please award those who work hard. also, please let me know how I can track the performance of those in the "helpdesk".

  56. Re:We thought that using an objective check throug by Winlin · · Score: 1

    I object!

  57. Keystroke Logging by Widowwolf · · Score: 1

    In Soviet Russia, Keystrokes log you?

    --
    ~~"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~~Dennis Miller
  58. Log IP address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people on computers waste time buy surfing the Internet.
    You can simply watch for this by watching the number site visited by one of your internal IP addresses.

    For security reasons we log outside Internet connections. Not the data that is transferred but just the IP addresses involved. Excessive outside intent connections might indicate they are wasting time surfing the Internet.

    I have looked at the IP logs and saw one individual accessed 203 different IP address in a single day. Possible, but not likely. It is not my job to enter those IP addresses and see what this guy was doing. But a preliminary check indicated it was I checking Slashdot articles.... so I never told anyone about it.

  59. Re:We thought that using an objective check throug by Stanistani · · Score: 1

    >Mr. Work said he didn't have the jurisdiction to
    >rule on whether or not the employee was
    >dismissed as a result of his complaint.
    >Ms. Silver confirmed the employee no longer
    >works at the library but said his departure had
    >nothing to do with the privacy complaint.

    Riiiiight... he just found out he was being keylogged, filed a complaint, and then randomly 'stopped working' there.

  60. Now How do I find... by VanWEric · · Score: 2, Funny

    All the porn and warez my employees have been so diligently finding for me?

    --
    www.olin.edu
  61. bathroom logs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Then again, the toilet belongs to my company, and I don't want them watching me pinch a loaf....

    i wouldn't want to work for a company that kept logs from the bathroom either!

  62. You laugh... by freeweed · · Score: 1

    Sounds insane, doesn't it?

    There's at least one vendor out there who sells software that contains essentially this functionality. It tracks what websites you visit, and how long you surf on them, by seeing whether or not IE is in the foreground, whether the mouse/keyboard are in use when it it in the foreground, etc. I imagine it would be pretty easy to monitor damn near any application this way.

    The argument in its favour, so I was given, was that the proxy server couldn't tell with enough precision how LONG people were spending looking at a given website. Management actually wanted to-the-minute counts of what employees were looking at.

    I suggested to my co-workers that we might as well throw away any facade of privacy, and install video cameras behind each employee's shoulder. This way we could not only know what they did on their computer during office hours (and every single minute of it!), but also whether or not they were wasting valuable minutes doing non-work related things like reading a magazine.

    As I see it, if you need to resort to these tools in the first place, you have far deeper problems with your management style. It's not *that* hard to know who's being productive and doing their work, if you have any clue what your employees are supposed to be doing.

    Anyway, as an Albertan I welcome rulings like this - I only wish they would be country-wide. Paranoid employees are far less productive in the end. But hey, if I don't have anything to hide, I shouldn't mind, right?

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  63. Webcams and logging software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't many department stores run hidden cameras in their changing rooms to catch or deter shoplifting?

  64. This Is Bulls**t. by ubuntu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How can it be the company's responsibility to police employee use in order to prevent kiddie porn, piracy, death threats, etc. on company computers if your hands are tied behind your back? Companies have been often charged for crimes their employees have committed...

    At a place I used to work, half the people were salesmen, who, because they went out on the road all the time, had laptops. They would change their Windows XP passwords and not tell management. They would change MANY passwords (to supplier e-commerce sites, etc.) and not tell management. They would use Hotmail to avoid corporate email (which was logged). Our IT guy would go onto their computer when they were out at lunch to run Ad-Aware and the antivirus (salesmen don't give a damn) and would find MOUNTAINS of porn, half-finished resumes, and a copy of our entire corporate network on the guy's hard drive! That's not acceptable, and the guy was warned, but all he did was a) change his password, b) set his screensaver to password protected and had a hotkey to launch it whenever he got up from his desk.

    The pendulum has swung too far against the OWNERS of the property in favour of the USERS of said property.

    This just makes corporate espionage, like stealing customer lists and selling them to the competition undetected all the easier.

    1. Re:This Is Bulls**t. by gte910h · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't that the company could see the data. The problem is that the company didn't tell the employee what data would be accessed. That would allow the employee to make an enformed choice about what he wanted to reveal

      --
      Want to see every step I took to start my company? http://www.rowdylabs.com/blogs/pitchtothegods
    2. Re:This Is Bulls**t. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give me a break, the whole concept of ownership in modern society is very fucked up, yes it was wrong for the employee to be fucking around on company time and keeping company data on his machine BUT that's a risk you take when you hire someone.

      There is no way in hell you could ever prevent espionage the best spies are home grown, you'd never know they were spies to begin with they would never give themselves away, they would have amazing reputations, and there would be many of them.

      Most people work to live, not live to work and with the current state of the world it's very easy to exploit people when you are in a position of power and authority, most people do not self-sustaining and must work for employers if they are going to eat. This leaves lots of power with most medium sized to big businesses.

    3. Re:This Is Bulls**t. by Jo_2521 · · Score: 1

      I find it quite disturbing how low apparently americans value their privacy when it comes to computers that belong to their employers.

      I don't know about other european countries, but at least in Germany it's strictly forbidden, as is video surveillance. It is possible to monitor e-mails and web usage though, as long as the staff association allows it and it is very clear that sending private emails is forbidden (you can get in REALLY deep trouble if you're monitoring your employees without them knowing).

      How come surveillance seeming that accepted in the US? It's obviously taking a lot of ressources to monitor (people that watch the people watching the people...) - and I would think that's not a good climate to work in, what with feeling untrusted.

    4. Re:This Is Bulls**t. by Filmwatcher888 · · Score: 1
      The law provides a simple and effective method for handling such employees.

      You fire them.

      Oddly enough, Microsoft also offers methods for securing laptops and other PCs. Use group and local policies to prevent users from effing up the laptops. Make it known that if a laptop ends up too far out of spec, it will be reformatted. If the salesperson then loses important records because they didn't place their work in a secure place, fire them for incompetence.

  65. Key stroke count = paycheck? by slapout · · Score: 0, Redundant

    using an objective check through the computer would be the most fair and objective way to do that

    So the people who bat away mindlessly at the keyboard get paid more?

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  66. Even better, GPS loggers on their fingertips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad GPS doesn't have millimeter resolution.

    Make that...

    Thank goodness GPS doesn't have mm resolution.

  67. When they fire someone using keylogging info... by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

    ... any chance of it staying secret will be gone.

    --
    Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  68. Revenue Canada by Rac3r5 · · Score: 1

    I worked for Revenue Canada last year while I was in school at a Data Entry Clerk.

    We used to have our wpm logged all the time and at the end of each week, our manager would tell us how productive how many wpm we had and how many errors we made on the tax forms(there were ppl who used to re-check the data entered). And based on how good ur keystrokes were, you would be elig.. for the next season. And depending on how many years you worked they increase the requirement.

    Seems like a pretty good system, however sometimes you can be slow and its not even your fault. I've had ppl who forget to enter their name, address, postal code, sin#, or ppl who can't add etc.. and then everytime they screw up, we have to go through the manual to figure out how to deal with it.

    I wonder how this ruling would affect the CCRA employees.

    1. Re:Revenue Canada by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      It probably doesn't affect them at all, unless this is done in secret and the computers are used for other general purpose, private functions.

      This ruling seems to state that installing a keylogger without the user's knowledge on a general purpose PC is a privacy violation.

      It doesn't mean it's illegal to ever log keystrokes for any reason.. only that doing so without the informed consent of the user is wrong.

      I'm sure you can log every keystroke if you make the employee aware that every keystroke is being logged.

  69. Re:We thought that using an objective check throug by EZLeeAmused · · Score: 1
    Don't be too sure. The article doesn't specify the dates of the complaint and the employee's termination. It could have gone like this:

    • Employer calls employee into office
    • Employer: "We found that you are only working 3 hours a day and spending the other 5 hours per day posting sarcastic remarks on SlashDot. Clean out your desk."
    • (ex)Employee: "How did you find out?"
    • Employer: "We had a key stroke logger on your PC."
    • (ex)Employee: "That's illegal - you'll hear from my lawyer!
    --
    Some see the vessel as half full; others see it as half-empty; We pour it out on the floor and laugh
  70. The Issue is NOT Trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am an employer and I feel that trust should not be an issue. That is what contracts are for. We both agree that instead of trusting each other, everything will be clearly explained and tracked. This increases efficiency and (dare I say) communication. If I'm paying you to come to my office, and work on my computer, then I have every right to track you while you are on the clock. If you are downloading porn or writing personal emails instead of doing your job, then why should I pay you? However, during "personal time" such as a lunch break, etc. I have no right to invade your privacy and track you. I found it unfair and stupid not to tell the employee he was being tracked. By telling the employee, the employee would most likely be more efficient (out of fear of getting caught doing what they are not supposed to be doing).

  71. Fair and objective? by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Set heavy object down on space bar and go to lunch; let auto-repeat do the rest! Seriously, anybody that is counting key-clicks to measure productivity is just asking employees to spend 8 hours hitting random keys, and not encouraging them to do useful work. They are rewarding the typists that make lots of mistakes, then need to go back and correct them, rather than the typists that enter everything correctly the first time!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  72. The Actual Report by whitehatlurker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Since no-one has appeared to gone off to find this yet, here is the report of the privacy commissioner.

    --
    .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
  73. Productivity or Non-productivity? by Niello · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that keystroke logging would be a way of measuring non-productivity. I mean, you'd think that a computer technician would be working potentially on OTHER terminals and not necessarily the employee's primary system (depending on the job role). Why not just utilize software to capture technical issues and resolutions -- most of which probably have some sort of time-stamp functionality.

    --
    I give men fish.
  74. Privacy by DarkSarin · · Score: 1

    IIRC, in the US courts have used the "reasonable expectation of privacy" as a litmus test to see if a monitoring activity is intrusive.

    Under this paradigm, NOTHING you do in the workplace other than going to the bathroom carries a reasonable expectation of privacy, unless someone with certain powers (such as the CEO) tells you (usually in writing) that a particular communication is private.

    Most courts have taken a pretty open view about what an empoloyer may do to monitor employee behavior while on the jobsite. Essentially if you have an office or cube, all your conversations that might reasonably be overheard on accident are fair game. Certainly any communication via email is fair game.

    This is simply because of the number of ways that a person might be publicly observed. The long and the short of it is that if you do it at work, you had better hope that your employer doesn't mind.

    --
    "We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
  75. There are times secrecy is required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I once worked for a company that had a "you have no privacy" policy but everyone knew they didn't routinely enforce it.

    However, once management figured out one particular employee was up to no good. I'm not sure if someone tipped them off or if they just noticed "unusual bandwidth" on a particular network segment.

    In either case, they started doing heavy monitoring and let the guy keep doing what he was doing for a few days. He was gone shortly thereafter.

    As an employer, you do have to trust your employees, but you also have to be able to quietly investigate if you have a reason to think that trust has been betrayed.

    Good thing that company put everyone on notice on the date of hire.

  76. alternatives by aneroid · · Score: 1

    if they're trying to log keystrokes along with internet activity, now the employer will have to go to their ISP to find out...since they are required to know what ppl are doing online. ;-)

    i wonder if they'll need a subpoena for records about themselves...

  77. Not entirely accurate? by wraezor · · Score: 2, Informative

    (Speaking as a NetAdmin in Alberta) Seems like it may have been simply because the library in question didn't have a computer use policy.

    From CBC.ca:
    "The library has changed its policy, informing employees that they have no expectation of privacy when using work computers."

  78. Solution .... by ta+ma+de · · Score: 1
    Just use your own computer at work. Save your work to the corporate net and be done with it.

    You save the company some money on office gear and you maintain your personal privacy.

  79. Trust by Renraku · · Score: 1

    Trust and accountability have no place in today's workplace apparently.

    But then again, technical solutions for social problems don't really work. You can track WPM/typing, but everyone has to take a break, and taht would drop the WPM substantially. Even if they type 100WPM when typing, they might average 10WPM with the logistical legwork added (paper shuffling, lunch, breaks, bathroom runs, etc).

    Why not just monitor internet usage normally and find some better way (like how many things you've done that day in the system?) rather than raw keylogging.

    I'd be pretty pissed if I found I was being keylogged at work. They didn't tell me, and have thus stolen my passwords and possibly my bank account information, since its in a file of theirs someplace. Isn't that opening up to be sued for privacy violations?

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
  80. Nothing to do with it? by Fr05t · · Score: 1

    FTA:"Ms. Silver confirmed the employee no longer works at the library but said his departure had nothing to do with the privacy complaint."

    Sure it didn't *wink* *wink*.. I hope he drags their asses to the labour board as well.

  81. Also illegal in Washington State by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Informative

    but I thought that was already on /. in a prior article - if not, it was one of the bills signed into law this session.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  82. Does this mean by intangible · · Score: 1
    Does this mean everyone in Alberta has to
    chmod 000 ~/.bash_history
    now?
  83. That and by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    What the hell would you gain from logging keystrokes?

    I'm also a sys admin, and I can't see anything useful I'd gain from that. If we wanted to know what an employee was spending time on, the most useful thing would probably be to track web access, as generally that's how people goof off (that's how I'm goofing off right now). Other than that, things can simply be removed from the computer (like solitare). If all they have access to is work apps, it's difficult for them ot waste time on the computer. Then they'll probably just waste time staring at the wall.

    I can think of nothing I'd gain from seeing their keystrokes. In fact, teh amount of time it would take me to look through a log and figure out what is what would negate any infromation we'd get. However it does seem like it'd be extremely useful if I had ill intentions and wanted to go and capture bank passwords or something like that.

    I'm anti-monitoring in genreal but in this case it's jsut stupid. It seems like it has no legit use, and many bad ones.

    1. Re:That and by idonthack · · Score: 1
      If we wanted to know what an employee was spending time on, the most useful thing would probably be to track web access, as generally that's how people goof off (that's how I'm goofing off right now).
      You're lucky you're the sysadmin.
      ---
      I'm actually just a script.
      Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    2. Re:That and by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      No, we are pretty lax here. Notice how I said "if we wanted to". We actually don't give a fuck. You get your job done, everyone is happy. Doesn't matter if you choose to play around during the day.

  84. Philosophical Difference by Bullfish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is indicative of a philosophical difference between Canada and the US. In the US, business is king. In Canada, business is a means to prosperity for the owners and employees. However, it is recognized that people have to work to eat etc and that business holds the advantage over their employees.

    As a result there is more legislation regarding workers rights than in the US. For example, in the US, your boss can come up to you and order you to pee in a bottle to see if you smoked a joint recently. In Canada, unless you are a pilot, railroad engineer etc where your performance could hurt others, this is forbidden. Also, I was surprised to find that in the US, paid vacation time is not a requirement. In Canada, you are entitled to two weeks per year minimum by law.

    There are other examples, but you get the idea.

  85. Does this remind anyone else of Snowcrash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As with any part of the procedure manual, new or old, it is your responsibility to be thoroughly familiar with this material. Estimated reading time for this document is 15.62 minutes (and don't think we won't check). ...

    Y.T's mom pulls up the new memo, checks the time, and starts reading it. The estimated reading time is 15.62 minutes. Later, when Marietta does her end-of-day statistical roundup, sitting in her private office at 9:00 P.M., she will see the name of each employee and next to it, the amount of time spent reading this memo, and her reaction, based on the time spent, will go something like this:
    Less than 10 mm. Time for an employee conference and possible attitude counseling.
    10-14 min. Keep an eye on this employee; may be developing slipshod attitude.
    14-15.61 mm. Employee is an efficient worker, may sometimes miss important details.
    Exactly 15.62 mm. Smartass. Needs attitude counseling.
    15.63-16 mm. Asswipe. Not to be trusted.
    16-18 mm. Employee is a methodical worker, may sometimes get hung up on minor details.
    More than 18 mm. Check the security videotape, see just what this employee was up to (e.g., possible unauthorized restroom break).

  86. Phew! by James+A.+D.+Joyce · · Score: 1

    Wow, it sure is lucky your buttcheek somehow managed to hit the Enter button! Otherwise you'd never have hit Submit and we would never have found out about your valiant aciton!

    --

    Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
  87. No, we don't. by James+A.+D.+Joyce · · Score: 1

    When we spam your channel with gigantic colourised ASCII penises and Harry Potter slashfic, that's not us typing it all in by hand, you know.

    --

    Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
  88. Measuring productivity by jonwil · · Score: 1

    All this stuff about keystroke logging, taking screen captures etc is stupid.

    The only things that should matter as far as empolyees go are:
    1.Is the employee doing things that are illegal or bad (e.g. accessing porn on company time, downloading illegal songs over the company network, running copies of Quake on the company PC etc etc)
    2.Is the employee doing things that are bad for the company (e.g. stealing company scerets, using company equipment to moonlight or to work for someone else)
    3.Is the employee doing their job (e.g. for programmers, are they writing the code they need to write in the time they have been told they have to write it in)
    and 4.Is the work satisfactory (e.g. for code, is the code good enough)

    As long as they do what they need to in the time they have been given to do it and as long as the work is good enough then the only things employers should be concerned about is things that are illegal or innappropriate and things that violate employee contracts (like stealing company scerets)

    Monitoring of internet access and email and group policies to lock machines down so they cant be messed with and good physical security measures (e.g. locked down USB ports, restrictions on taking devices into the office, security cards to keep unwanted visitors out etc) should be able to stop or detect illegal or inappropriate things.

    And detecting if they have done their jobs by monitoring things like how much code they contributed and how good it is is far better than trying to monitor via keystroke logs and screen capturing.

    Can anyone think of any situation where keystroke logging, screen captures etc would catch something that other methods (i.e. email/internet monitoring, physical security) wouldnt?

  89. From reading this by mindstrm · · Score: 1

    they didn't declare that keystroke logging was illegal, they declared that hidden keystroke logging (where the user isn't aware of it) is a privacy violation.

    Yes, it's the company's computer, but as with the phone, they can't just record your phone calls without telling you; you do have a certain right to privacy.

    If you want to run a high security environment where you tell employees that no personal work is permitted from the computer, and that every keystroke is logged, that's probably just fine, just as you can run a call center and tell your employees that every phone call is recorded.

  90. Sandra Bullock... by Citizen+Gold · · Score: 1

    ...is going have to upskill her cracking skills for any future movies I guess.

  91. Oh no! by deadtroll · · Score: 1

    So now I can't secretly spy on my employer anymore? Crap! I had some pretty sexy chat captures from our CEO! I can't believe Alberta made Slashdot! Go local legal skirmishes!

    --
    "Immature artists borrow. Mature artists steal."
    Wes Borg
  92. Is this for Microsoft? by mindaktiviti · · Score: 1

    Because that's what contoso.com goes to. Hmmm...

    1. Re:Is this for Microsoft? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Heh, actually that domain name is part of an inside joke. If you have ever taken an MCP or MCSE exam, you will notice that Contoso is a made up name use a lot. I decided to see if there really was a company called "Contoso". Turns out it leads right to Microsoft. =)

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  93. Freelance baby! by deadtroll · · Score: 1

    Work for yourself, you can spy on your employees and your employers without violating anyone's privacy. Be your own CEO! Or maybe that's stupid.

    --
    "Immature artists borrow. Mature artists steal."
    Wes Borg
  94. Metrics are evil by Urusai · · Score: 1

    The judgement of an employee's effectiveness should be: is the work done (well)? Micromonitoring, much like Dubya's NCLB school testing, does little more than replace the real goal with a stupid measurement that causes the organization to focus on manipulating the metric outcomes instead of getting the job done. Yes, Mr. Deming, a well-designed metric measures actual success. In real life, however, metrics are made up by incompetent management monkeys, who fail to measure the metric's effectiveness in judging success. Continual process improvement means continual metric improvement, too. The problem is that you have to be able to judge success outside of the metric to improve it, and an inability to do this is what causes many people to fall back on metrics.

    In conclusion, the inch is bigger than the centimeter, so as Americans we must avoid the metric system at all costs.

  95. What a stupid way to measure performances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the company measure a person performance by monitoring the number of time he/she press the keyboard, then I must be the most unproductive worker :)

    I reuse most of my source codes for new programs and most of time, I just copy and paste using my mouse :)

    But if the employees are aware of the company's policy. They can create a macro/program that continuously sent key stroke to the monitoring program even when they are not at their terminal :)

  96. Re:Keylogging is not objective. -- My 2c by iamcf13 · · Score: 1

    If it seems like he has too much free time, give him more resposibility. If he struggles with it, can him or lighten his workload.

    It is this manegerial attitude (the 'can him' part) that gave birth to the deadly phenomenon of 'going postal' in the first place!

    When people become 'tools with pulses' and 'a persistent drag on the corporate bottom line' what else can you expect?

    If 'bosses' and 'workers' TRULY treated each other with respect and understanding, there would be no need for things like:

    Minimum wage laws, occupational safety laws, laws against all forms of harassment and discrimination, unions, etc.

    Thanks to 'the love of money', the worldwide workplace is a convoluted imbroglio of rules, regulations, and the resulting lawsuits that occur when they aren't followed.

    What a mess....

  97. Oops, I just bought one by shameless_sellout · · Score: 1

    And I just ordered a KeySpyer from keyspyer.com

    Any word on if it is legal for private use, outside of a company?

    1. Re:Oops, I just bought one by shameless_sellout · · Score: 1

      Their web site was slashdotted... is anyone able to access it now?

  98. Hell no! by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Privacy slide into militarystate. They pay you to do "this" - as long as you do "this" they should shut up and stay out.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  99. Why most measures suck by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    As a youngster, I took a job where work was assigned via a computerized Work Planning and Control system. The WP&C graded each task according to difficulty and then determined how long it would take a successful employee to get it done. Similar work was bundled together and printed tags went on each batch. Each batch took an hour. This was paperwork processing, so a batch of difficult work might be a tenth of an inch thick. A batch of simple work might be two feet tall.

    You came in each morning, accepted 8 batches (hours) of work from the assignment clerk, took them to your desk, and went to work. There were always a few people, maybe 10%, who couldn't get finished during the day. About half of the workers could finish in 6 or 7 hours; they tended to take long lunches and breaks and actually finish up right at quitting time.

    A few of us, though, had a different situation. I'd grab my 8 hours worth of work, get it done in about 90 minutes, and spend the rest of the day hanging out, wandering the building, and shooting the shit with anyone who wanted to listen. Often, I'd get bored enough to go grab another 8 hours work and blow through that in the last couple of hours of the day. Whenever there was a crunch, management could count on me to check out 20 or 30 hours of work and get it done in a day, putting us back on schedule. Because the WP&C showed I generally did the work of two people, minimum, management thought I was the best employee they had. I, on the other hand, was bored silly.

    Here's my point - No matter how management chooses to measure productivity, that measure will not apply to some people. Some people will show up as extra-capable when they really aren't. Some people will show up as poor quality workers when they really aren't. Outside assembly-line (and conceptually similar) work, the only accurate measure of my worth as an employee I've ever been subjected to was a situation where I was evaluated by my coworkers. Generally, they guy who sits next to you knows better than anyone whether you're actually working or not.

    Effectively measuring worker productivity in any complex job is a very tough nut to crack. A crutch like a keystroke logger (or the WP&C system I outlined above) is strong evidence that the management was too lazy, stupid, or both to put in the thought and effort required to do a good job of measuring their employees.

  100. Privacy shmivacy by part_of_you · · Score: 0

    This is only a problem in the computer industry. We don't want our "keystrokes" to be monitored. Waaa Waaa Waaa! What about all workers in the construction field? They have all of their work monitored, and the results of everything they do, on the job, on break, all result in either a pat-on-the-back, or a good ass-chewing. I can sit here at work and type all this meaningless shit on slashdot, and my boss will not ever care. But if I tried this shit out on a job somewhere, forget it. If your boss wants to log your keystrokes, let'm. What's the big deal?

  101. on a side note by MrCopilot · · Score: 1
    I was employed at a PC repair shop a few years back.

    We had this customer who was irate that his new computer was acting up and it was new I built it myself. No reason for it to be acting so strange. He brought it in we checked it out seemed fine.

    He comes back complaining again. We replace the entire PC. He leaves happy for 2 days. Then he comes back demanding a refund.

    We tell him if there is something wrong with the PC we will make it right. Leave it with us and we'll throw everything we got at it. He does. His wife comes in an hr later. "Can I see my husbands computer for a minute, I just need to check one thing.?" Sure come on back. She presses Shift Ctrl ScrollLock or something similar & up pops this EVIL unnoticable Screengrabber. She quickly scans through the last 3 days worth of pics. Instant message from her teen daughter, Web surfing of her hubby 3 pics a second. Gobbling up space & cycles. If she doesn't check it daily & dump it fills the harddrive with 1280x1024x32 Pics. I explain to her it is unnecessary to grab so many, 1 every couple of minutes is more than sufficient. She asks me to promise I won't tell her husband. I promise she tips me 50 bucks and promises to bring me a bottle of wine (her Idea).

    Later that same day.

    The owner (who has dealt with the husband only on more than one occassion since the sale.) checks in with me to see if I found the problem. I calmly explain the situation, and the promise. He asked me "Did she make you promise not to tell me?"
    Obviously I can not and did not make that promise.
    "Well then, I never promised her shit. But I did promise her husband I would find out what was up & fix it." Cue Dialing.

    Later that same day, Hubby comes in pays us for all our service (3 hrs on site. 3 trips to the shop) and tips me 50 bucks.

    Still Later

    She comes in like a rocket right passed the counter into the bench area Slams down a shiny bottle of wine & says thanks a fuckin lot.

    My boss says thank you come again.

    The husband still shops there service & purchase.

    Moral of the story: If you are gonna spy on your kids do it with your loved one. Opened the wine on my wedding day. Wife loved it.

    --
    OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
  102. Re:Keylogging is not objective. -- My 2c by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

    That's not really the point I was going after.

    If you truly have a lazy employee (and yeah, they exist) who spends all of his time goofing off and doesn't get the job done, I'm pretty sure getting rid of him is a smart move.

    Or, if you are paying good money for an employee who, despite their best efforts can't handle the work load which other employees have no problem with, then she really isn't right for the job either.

    But that doesn't mean you don't treat your employees with respect. A company that's a success is typically one that understands that the well being of their qualified, productive employees are more important to them then their customers.

    --
    The Internet is generally stupid
  103. From A Friend Of An Administrator by alexo · · Score: 1


    A friend of mine, who was at the time the sysadmin of a moderately large company, once told me that management wanted him to start tracking personal internet use.
    The reason? The load on their internet connection was so heavy that it was affecting job-related activities. Mind you, that was in the early '90s and bandwidth per capita was quite meager.

    I suggested that he announce a new corporate policy - all internet traffic is to be logged, analyzed, broken down, summarized and anything suspicios or compromising will be sent to corresponding sent to department heads.
    I argued that the mere announcement would be enough to fix the problem so no actual measures will have to be implemented.

    He tried it. It worked like a charm.

    Traffic immediately dropped to manageble levels, management got off the admin's back and people stopped sending sensitive emails over unsecure protocols (a good thing!)

  104. Did you RTFA? by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 1

    The exception from the privacy laws is for a government agency so that they may perform government functions. The privacy commisioner determined that the use was not neccessary as a government function which prohibited the use the same way that a corporation is prohibited.

  105. I am the employee in question! by Eh-Wire · · Score: 1

    There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye. If anyone cares to delve into this in a little more detail feel free to check out my blog (click the URL above). The bonehead lawyers representing Parkland Regional Library have issued me with a "cease and desist" order so it's hard to say how long the information will be available. In any case I'm happy with the decision I received from the Privacy Commissioner and I did it on my own without legal counsel. Just goes to show you what kind of lawyers they had assisting them. Most of the documents relating to this case are available at the following URL: http://www.terremoto.ca/privacy/privacy.html Dan W. Armeneau

  106. Re:Keylogging is not objective. -- My 2c - reply by iamcf13 · · Score: 1

    interstellar_donkey: Or, if you are paying good money for an employee who, despite their best efforts can't handle the work load which other employees have no problem with, then she really isn't right for the job either.

    In this case, you can:

    1) Put/dump the extra work the employee in question can't handle on the other employees. If they are paid by the hour, you may be in for (unwanted) overtime expenses.

    2) You can fire her and get someone else. Won't that be rather expensive (if she is not let go on solely job performance reasons)? Will her replacement be as trustworthy and more productive as she was? How many replacements will you have to hire and fire before you can find the one person who can take up the workload the employee in question couldn't handle? Could it be that it is ultimately cheaper to do option 1 or get rid of her and personally replace her (you do trust yourself, do you :) )?

    No wonder the credo of entrepreneurship is 'Fire Your Boss!' The people who are truly self-employed and depend on no one but their customers for their next paycheck have nothing but awe and admiration from me--how about you?

  107. Keystroke Monitoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see it this way, It is hard if not impossible to deal with every bone-headed moron, crook, thief, etc. In a LARGE production environment. You are on my network, my computers, and playing in my sandbox, if you don't like me watching you play, go play elsewhere.

  108. Reason why it's illegal? by Mr.Fork · · Score: 1

    Duh! It's because of our Alberta's FOIP law. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. You can't collect any personally identifiable information without a) letting the person know, b) for legimit legal/lifesaving reasons, and c) plain and simple: it's against the law. Plain and simple.

    Check out the law here..

    From the FAQ on the law...
    Your employer can collect personal information that relates directly to and is necessary for an operating program or activity, as well as any information they are authorized by other legislation to collect (section 33).

    Under the FOIP Act, your employer must tell you what authority they have to collect this information, and how it will be used (section 34(2)).
    Normally, your employer must collect personal information directly from you. However, section 34 of the Act allows for information to be collected indirectly in some cases, for example, to determine whether you are eligible for a program, benefit, honour or award, or for the purpose of collecting a debt owed to the public body.


    Guess this is really a moot point. Keylogging, if done discretely, and is without merit other than to spy on activities or productivity, is illegal. Plain and simple.

    --
    Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things. - Peter F. Drucker