Slashdot Mirror
Security Fears Prod Firms to Limit Staff Web Use
Carl Bialik from WSJ writes "Companies are limiting employees' use of free Internet services, such as Skype and video downloading, to protect themselves from viruses, communications traffic jams and regulatory missteps, the Wall Street Journal reports. ABN Amro's global head of strategy and engineering tells the WSJ, 'I'm not allowing Skype because I don't know what it does.' Some colleges and departments at Cambridge University also ban Skype. The limits affect executives as well as the rank-and-file, the WSJ finds: ' "I used to think nothing of checking my Yahoo mail several times a day," says Global Crossing Chief Marketing Officer Anthony Christie. Now that he can't, his long workday makes it hard to avoid using his work email account for personal messages, he says.'"
What's next? Complaining that you can't use company funds to go on a vacation? Complaining that you can't use company computers to play games?
"I used to think nothing of checking my Yahoo mail several times a day," says Global Crossing Chief Marketing Officer Anthony Christie. Now that he can't, his long workday makes it hard to avoid using his work email account for personal messages, he says.
Sometimes I wonder if this is exactly what companies *want*. They don't want people to use outside e-mail (especially ones running over https) because then they can't easily monitor what their staff is doing.
If people are using their work e-mail for their personal use, the company gets to see exactly what, where, how, and when their employees are spending their own time. If the employee opts to not use their work e-mail for anything personal, the company knows that they now have the other added benefit of possible added productivity.
I'm just glad I can use SSH and tunnel everything over that. If I can't do that, I have GPRS service on my mobile device and I *could* use that for AIM, e-mail, and browsing instead.
Dear employee,
We hope you enjoy working here. Please work hard and do some great work for us!
Thanks,
Your employer.
P.S. WE DON'T TRUST YOU.
I'm not allowing X because I don't know what it does does not necessarily equate to X is bad
Banning an unknown service from a network is the more sensible default decision for a corporate network to take. Firewalls should block everything by default, corporate desktops should stop installations of anything not checked and cleared. Why should skype be any different?
As long as it's not against company policy, you could try using SSH tunneling to hit a proxy at home. It might be a lot slower, but you can go anywhere. I've been using one written in Python for six months and haven't had a hitch.
Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
I just started as IT manager for a small advertising agency. The systems were wide open before and it seems like every machine has Limewire, skype, five different IM programs... and lots and lots of problems.
When these items cause problems that reduce productivity they have to go. It's that simple.
Due to unrestrained (and uninformed) users I now have to go over all 50 machines with a fine-tooth comb to scrub off the bad stuff. Several of these machines are probably going to have to be wiped. This is 100% due to user loaded "personal" software.
As I fix each machine they are getting locked down. I've been directed by management to prevent users from pirating music on company machines or using filesharing to share pirated music. I don't see anything unreasonable at all about that.
Any app that is well-behaved and does not expose the company to liability is fine with me. Otherwise it has to go.
If your employees only need particular websites and particular applications to do their jobs, then why would you willingly open up additional attack vectors? It's a completely unnecessary business risk.
If you have employees complaining about needing to use personal email (what did they do before email in the workplace was common?), then simply set up a shared cheap PC in the coffee room for them to use on their lunch break. Firewall it off so that when all the inevitable crap gets onto the machine, it doesn't affect any important systems.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
As a consultant based overseas, using my client's corporate internet for Skype actually SAVES them a fortune. They would normally pay for the POTS international phone calls we make (VERY $$$$$), but the fact that they allow Skype means that we make all of our calls Skype-Skype without it costing them (or us) anything in call costs. Bandwidth charges are negligible in comparison.
If firms continue to be ignorant about new or alternative technologies then they will continue to be left behind. These savings can be significant over the long term, financially as well as productivity wise. Companies in the future will be split into two categories - those that embrace new technology and those that struggle under malinformed regimes run by beaurocrats who prefer the trusted path, the path of least resistance, over the newer, technologically superior one. I've seen this too many times than I'd care to remember.
I expect a few hundred flames of this statement, but it's a rock-solid security policy. Yes, this guy probably "should" know what Skype is in most people's opinions, but his default "deny" policy for anything he doesn't know is correct, and that attitude WILL prevent trouble. On a corporate network, especially one potentially carrying any kind of sensitive data, anything not specifically allowed should be denied. If employees can make a case about what any new service is and why they need it, it can be evaluated and perhaps allowed, but it should be denied by default.
-- http://frobnosticate.com
TFA makes it seem like GE has just started blocking IM and external email systems. But in the GE division where I have been contracting it has been like that for at least the last 5 years.
And I can understand why. By only allowing communications through official chanels, the companies can better protect themselves by doing such things as applying corporate wide virus checking on emails. It also provides a log as to what communications occurred when. Though I do admit that flash drives and take home laptops can easily bypass any of these measures.
One downside to this is that the corporate policies also block VPN accesses, so I can not get to my offices servers while at the GE location.
One amusing anecdote relating to this is that where I work there is an analog phone line kept for the times when you really need to dial up a system. One lunch time I was using it to send some private email and also to chat with some friends (MSN messenger I think). When I was done I just picked my laptop up and walked back to my desk and plugged into the corporate lan without powering down. I was surprised when 20 minutes later one of my friends initiated a chat session with me. After the shock of chatting from my desk wore off, I realised that the chat program used two separate protocols/ports: 1 for logging into the chat system, and another for the actual chatting. The corporate IT people had only blocked one system and not the other, perhaps in the belief that that was all that was necessary. Combined with the chat system not timing out during the walk back to my desk, I had effectively bypassed their strong security.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
I was stuck in a hotel all weekend and wanted to talk to my wife, so I installed it, and within 5 minutes I got a call from security saying that my machine was scanning the network. It was Skype trying to find a way out.
When I got back to work on Monday, my Thinkpad was taken away and reformatted, and handed back to me -- without local admin privileges.
Now I work for a University. It's a whole other world.
Users have proven themselves to be untrustworthy.
:P
Like this guy?
Some companies see giving employees small perks as part of keeping a happy and productive work force... can anyone remember the stories of the environment at EA? Now, we have tin foil hat stories about companies that give their employees pens and paper, but warn them to only write in block letters because anything else is a waste of company resources, or could lead to dangerous events in the file cabinets.
Ummm, perhaps its just me, but it is about fscking time that both government and businesses learn the lessons that have been sitting in front of them since about 1991... computers are here to stay, and the advantages and disadvantages of computers are here to stay too.... Its not that hard to limit outside network connections to a specific bandwidth, or monitor all packets in and out... this is not rocket science. Using draconian measures to squeeze every drop out of the company resources is not good for business... see Boycott, Company Stores et al, slavery,
I guess my point is that anything that stifles free and unfettered flow of information and ideas is going to stifle business productivity and innovation. I don't have links, but I thought this was pretty much already scientifically proven... or at least proven in the advent of F/OSS and what it has done to the computer and software markets. Just as the *AA needs to wake up and find a new business model, most of the rest of the business world has some work to do... its just common sense. Anything else usually involves putting holes in your feed with lead ladden projectiles.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Listen you selfish malcontent, letting you put whatever the hell you want on the company computers potentionally puts the company and its directors at risk. When your P2P music crap, or cracked shareware linefeed-corrector gets noticed by the suppliers it can cause huge problems and expenses for the company just to satiate your little cubicle fiefdom. IT admins and directors need to worry about far more than just your "getting the job done" easier. The reality is there is a lot of damage and liability these days which can come out of users free-reign over the office computers.
Don't like it? Fine, resign and start your own consulting business. Then you can put whatever crap you want on your own equipment.
{ - Generic Guy - }
See, you're not the problem; you're a computer professional and, at least in theory, you should be highly expert at using a PC. The problem is Tracy in Accounting and Bob the Receptionist, who haven't a clue what's going on with their machines, and who happily install spyware if it promises something slightly better than a sharp stick in the eye.
Think of it as the "OMG Ponies!" crowd, writ large. You just have no idea how freaking stupid these people can be.
Even in the best and brightest companies I've worked in, there have always been a few that got hired that knew a lot less about their PCs than they thought. In particular, they do not appear to hire salespeople for raw brainpower. The clueless users, especially the ones that don't realize (and never will) that they ARE clueless, cause enormous trouble. Unless the network is internally firewalled (which is getting to be a better and better idea, these days), they're often the vectors for network-wide infection.
The draconian policies of some admins may seem stupid, but remember that admins run on fear. They are, by and large, only noticed when things break, and then everyone is mad at them. When a single user can potentially bring a virus into the network that can stop the entire company dead in its tracks, well... it's a heck of a lot safer and easier to just lock EVERYTHING down and then install what people need, as they ask for it.
Think of it as a default-deny firewall.
The problem here is selective enforcement. Okay, so the admins allow you to run your unapproved application. What if Suzy the administrative assistant wants to run her fav screensaver app? And Jim wants to run Weatherbug so he knows when there's bad weather on his kids in the Midwest? The problem is that machines are locked down to prevent users from shooting themselves in the foot, because if you give them the loaded gun of admin access, they will. Then they start shooting other peoples' feet.
Find out how to get the software approved and do it. Go through the proper channels.
99.9% of corporate users should not have administrative access to their computers. There is no need to.
Don't ping my cheese with your bandwidth!