Boardroom Spying Debacle at HP

theodp writes "As word spread that HP was dumping Board member George Keyworth for press leaks, Newsweek broke the bigger story: HP Chairwoman Patricia Dunn was so obsessed with finding the leaker that she authorized a team of independent electronic-security experts to spy on the phone records of calls made from HP Directors' home and private cell phones. Not only that, phone records were obtained via pretexting, the controversial practice of obtaining information under false pretenses. After Dunn laid out the surveillance scheme for the Board last May, HP Director Tom Perkins quit on the spot, characterizing Dunn's actions as illegal and unethical. HP is also coming under fire for playing dumb to the SEC about the reasons behind Perkins' resignation. Perkins, who helped launch HP's computer division in the 60's, has asked the FTC, FCC and the Justice Department to investigate."

Comments

just to put things in perspective...

[eshefer]

Tom Perkins, as in Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers.

This is pretty dramatic.

Smoking Gun

[treeves]

. . . has documents here: Hewlett-Packard Targeted Board In Leak Probe

Re:How did she do that?

[eclipz]

They did not actually tap the phones. According to TFA:

It was classic data-mining: Dunn's consultants weren't actually listening in on the calls--all they had to do was look for a pattern of contacts.

They did obtain the records under false pretenses though, which is illegal.

BBC Says CA AG will investigate

[igb]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5321034.stm

Employer agreements

[JimBobJoe]

I don't know if there's a legal precedent for email, but I do know that you usually sign an agreement stating that the corporation can watch anything/everything you do using their workstations, telephones, email servers, etc, etc.

Keep in mind though, that response is more relevant in the context of an employer-employee relationship. Board of Directors are not "necessarily" employees of the company. Their election by the shareholders binds them to the company, what the company can do with them is limited, and I certainly would think the company could not dictate an agreement to them to do X or Y. The Directors have an obligation to the shareholders, not to the "company."

Re:Which *MAY* be illegal.

[DragonWriter]

There's no law that makes it a crime to get someone to give you information (unless it's banking information).

In California, where HP is headquartered, it is a crime to obtain labor through "fraudulent representation or pretense" is guilty just as if they had stolen services with similar value (California Penal Code 532). By representing themselves as the customers of the phone company whose records were requested, they obtained the labor of customer service staff under false pretense.

It is likewise criminal, in California, to willfully obtain "personal identifying information" (including, among many other thingsother things, name, address, telephone number, place of employment, or social security number) of another and then use that information for any unlawful purpose, including "to obtain, or attempt to obtain, credit, goods, services, or medical information" (Penal Code 530.5, emphasis added), without the consent of the person whose information was used. Here, they used several pieces of personal information concerning the directors targetted to obtain services from people with whom those directors did business, and did so without the directors consent.

So to say there is no law which makes it illegal to use someone else's personal information to enable yourself to impersonate that person to get someone to give you information is, well, not exactly true, even outside of banking information.

Re:They didn't get mine

[Chris Burke]

Charlie is an author for The Inquirer, which has been the main source for leaks from HP since Carly started fucking things up. Including leaks about witchhunts for previous leakers, ampling demonstrating that the witchhunts weren't working. Charlie keeps his sources secret, HP has no way to compel him to release them, and all this is known by anyone who reads The Inquirer which is where the leaks show up. If he had posted anonymously, I would have ignored him. As it is, I've read many previous leaks on The Inq (including the sad/hilarious case of HP purchasing a new corporate jet in the midst of layoff season), and know what he is saying is probably true.

HP has a fundamental problem. The leakers are the symptom, and their inability to catch any significant number of leakers is evidence that the problem is truly endemic and well known by the employees. It's like catching insurgents -- to do it, you need intelligence, and to get intelligence you need cooperation. If the insurgents have grass roots support, you won't get that cooperation, and you're doomed.