1 In 3 Sysadmins Snoop On Colleagues

klubar writes "According to a a recent survey, one in three IT staff snoops on colleagues. U.S. information security company Cyber-Ark surveyed 300 senior IT professionals, and found that one-third admitted to secretly snooping, while 47 percent said they had accessed information that was not relevant to their role. Makes you wonder about the other 2 out of 3. Did they lie on the survey or really don't snoop?"

Comments

No Ethics

[Bandman]

It's a damned poor state of affairs that so many people put in that situation of trust betray it.

I've been a systems admin for the better part of a decade, and the only time I've ever accessed the company's assets are when it was warranted.

The same goes for user files. I'm not going to snoop through other people's files. Really, I don't care what boring files you keep, just that they don't fill up the partition they're sitting on.

Do that, and suffer my wrath.

Re:No Ethics

[dtml-try MyNick]

Humans are curious by nature.

If you forbid someone something and grant them acces to it 9 out of 10 people *will* take a look. Combine that with the powertrip most people get when put in a control position it get's to good to bet let alone.

For those reasons alone I never trust any sysadmin anywhere, period.

At work or anywhere else I simply asume some admin will read my email on a bored day and I simply asume he will browse through my files the other day.

Re:No Ethics

[kc9fyx]

I have to agree with that. Sure, I could look at my user's files, but why would I want to? There's no doubt that I'd see things that no amount of eyebleach would fix. So long as nobody's filling up the server or causing me to get phone calls from network security, I'd rather not know what they're doing.

Re:No Ethics

[scubamage]

Ditto, I honestly could care less what files people keep. Have some mp3s? Fine. A few questionable video files? I still really don't care. Just don't be downloading malware or anything like that. Basically I figure I wouldn't want anyone accessing my files, so why would I want to access their files? Then again, I also despise knowing passwords because of liability because I genuinely don't ever like touching other people's accounts.

Re:No Ethics

[Southpaw018]

It's not even the eyebleach that's required. It's that peeking through peoples' files will undoubtedly reveal something you shouldn't, aren't supposed to, or (in the case of purely personal information) don't want to know or have no need to know. And once you know it, you have a responsibility to safeguard it - moral, most importantly, but legal as well depending on its nature. Who wants to safeguard other peoples' personal information for no damn reason at all?

Re:No Ethics

[stableos]

I can't manage my own workload well let alone having the time to snoop around everyone else's crap.

Re:No Ethics

[slashname3]

I had an admin that worked for me once that made the mistake of accessing the executives email accounts and then leaking information from those emails. I was notified of the problem and checked the log files. The admin did not cover their tracks very well. As a result they lost their job and I had to call a meeting and remind everyone on the team that with great power there comes great responsibility.

Seems to have worked. Either that or they are better at covering their tracks now.

Some of this I blame on the current school systems in place. There seems to be a lot more cheating going on and as a result not much character building. The rest I blame on poor roll models for the kids today. What with athletes almost openly using steroids and rappers thinking its cool getting busted the kids today don't have anyone to look up to. The easy way out is how it is done. A real shame that it has devolved to this.

Re:No Ethics

[Bandman]

There seems to be a lot more cheating going on and as a result not much character building

Exactly. The 'if they don't catch me then I'm allowed' mindset is definitely the wrong mindset to have.

Re:No Ethics

[foobat]

would mod you up if I had points. Yeah i snoop through you files... as in, I run a search to see if you've decided to backup your ENTIRE itunes collection, Hi-def tv series, pictures/videos of your boring family, install massive programs to your home directory that i installed centrally on the file store 4 months ago or other entirely pointless files that do not need to be backed up and is eating up half of that space ON OUR REALLY EXPENSIVE SAN STORAGE otherwise, your files are boring and I have much better things to be doing.

Re:No Ethics

[omeomi]

At work or anywhere else I simply asume some admin will read my email on a bored day and I simply asume he will browse through my files the other day.

It's probably a good assumption, but I have to admit I'm surprised the number is as high as 1 in 3, considering that getting fired for snooping on others' email or files is something that could probably cost you your entire career. Who would hire somebody as a sysop who had been caught snooping?

Re:No Ethics

[Thaelon]

Funny, that's the same mindset most corporations and US leaders have these days.

So why do we look less favorably on the children who do it and are just not as good at it?

Just look at about every 5th story (or more) on techdirt for an example.

Think of the children? No, think of the old people acting like children.

Re:No Ethics

[MetalPhalanx]

Who is to blame for those hours spent watching TV? It's up to the parents to teach their children/control their habits until they have a firmly fixed world view.

Of course, if the parents watch a lot of TV, the athletes and musicians aren't the only bad role models for the kids.

Re:No Ethics

[myowntrueself]

For those reasons alone I never trust any sysadmin anywhere, period.

Then please take the advice of a sysadmin; never *ever* hire a sysadmin.

If you can't trust your sysadmin then don't have one. Don't be in a position where you need to hire or manage one.

Re:No Ethics

[wasted]

I'm busy enough keeping our systems running and taking care of whatever issues our clients come up with. I don't have time to go snooping around for the fun of it.

Maybe not applicable in your situation, but in general, from my very limited experience, those most likely to snoop were those that were less competent, and snooping and such gave them a sense of power. If these less-competent, morally challenged coworkers weren't so busy snooping in everyone's personal business, maybe they could learn their jobs and help with the workload.

Scary

[Itninja]

I know a place where they have'nt changed the root/admin passwords in years. They have so many servers that it would be "a huge pain" (their words exactly) to change all the passwords. I wonder how much of a pain it would be for a former DBA or sysadmin to snoop around and start publicly posted how much everybody makes?

Re:Scary

[slashname3]

Ah! The hard and crunch on the outside and soft and chewy on the inside security approach. Yummy!

Seriously, that approach is just waiting for that one opening that allows someone inside. Security in depth, multiple layers, is the best practice.

Re:Which is worse?

[RingDev]

How exactly is reading another employee's email, or monitoring all of a user's web traffic (with out instruction to do so) going to help you in maintaining your domain?

Is being able to flip through the HR database and seeing everyone's pay rate going to make your network more secure?

And if your users learn of your snooping, is it going to be a boon to your company when either you are fired, or employees leave rather than be snooped on?

If you are snooping and you are looking at anything more than purely technical information, you are likely going over the bounds of ethical behavior if you don't have managerial backing.

-Rick

Sysadmins mostly honest

[fyoder]

So in other words, a significant majority of sysadmins are honest. Given that they have "the keys to the kingdom" in the words of the article, that's pretty impressive.

I don't snoop

[ebunga]

I don't snoop. Truth be told, I don't really care about anyone or what they're doing. Besides, most sysadmins are lazy. Good sysadmins do their best to automate as much as possible so they have to do as little as possible. Do you seriously think we want to create more work for ourselves?

Define Snoop.

[kcdoodle]

Yeah, I definitely have done it. No matter how you define it.

I CAN say that I have never logged into systems I wasn't allowed in, but I have
cd /home
and looked around.

However, I have never USED the information. I never really found anything incriminating, except TONS of porn. Hey, if you have a proxy server at work, all the porn you view is cached on the proxy. Our proxy used to show the file owner, ha ha, you are busted. I never busted anyone however, just backed up the porn to CDs and deleted it. Anyone want some old CDs?

Also, I used to work nights. If you just turned me down for a raise (poor-mouthing how bad the company is doing), do not leave your 6 month $14K bonus paperwork lying around on top of your desk. I was just delivering reports, but damn, I lost all respect for you. That is why I do not work for you anymore.

So?

[Neko-kun]

As far as I know, sysadmins are bound by privacy laws.

And if those are the same laws that apply everywhere I've worked at, then it doesn't matter if they access my files or read my email.
As long as the info is not made public, used maliciously, discussed between colleges, then it doesn't matter.

It's not what you know, it's how you use it.

Re:And?

[LordSnooty]

How do I know that the monkeys in Personnel aren't firing up my salary details or absence reports for the hell of it? Techies too have to trust people who have access to information just like they have to trust us. If someone is found to be abusing the access and earning some gain, action will be taken I'm sure. But overall it has to work on trust, or we'd all be drowning in audit trails.

Re:They have a life

[gedhrel]

Agreed. The "makes you wonder" comment makes you wonder about the professional ethics of the submitter.

There are three basic reasons why sysadmins don't snoop, in increasing order of importance:

1. It'd get you fired.
2. There isn't time in the day.
3. Basic bloody professional standards.

My institution recently underwent a long (very long) pay restructure. At about the point where things were finally settling down, the DBAs were hauled in and "reminded" that exposing or snooping through the resulting data would be a Bad Thing. My instant reaction was, "that's a fucking insult;" didn't think much of the middle-managers involved in passing on that message for not standing up for their staff. However, I think the reflection upon the personnel staff who issued the memo in the first place is that they are greasy, underhanded slime balls.

So no change there then.

Re:Which is worse?

[malkavian]

I've been a sysadmin for ages (started on that track in the early 90s, so a good 15 years already), and can honestly say, I can't be arsed to snoop people. The only time the records are examined is when I'm officially requests to investigate at the behest of the directorate, with agreement of HR and if appropriate, the relevant unions.
Part of the reason being that I am too damn curious, except not in the "curtain twitcher" way of spying on people around you. I'm always probing the systems to see if they're happy or not, and seeing if I can tweak them to be more secure, or perform better.
I'm also happy with my illusions of them being pleasant, professional people with no hangups or problems (unless they enter the 'mates' category, in which case I either ask, or listen, or both). Saves a lot of friction, and lets me get on with what needs doing.
The biggest reason though, is that I think the world should be a better place than it is. I like my privacy, and think it's something valuable. Therefore, I show people the respect I think they should have, and politely decline to riffle through their private information. If I can't meet my responsibility for privacy, I have no business claiming the right.
There comes a point where it's asked "Who watches the watchers..".. And I'd have to say they're damn poor watchers if they can't watch themselves.
To be a sysadmin in a sizable environment, you need people on your side; you need them to trust you, and have a bit of faith in you.. Otherwise, the first big disaster that happens (and we all know they do, no matter how much you plan), you WILL be strung out to dry by everyone with an axe to grind, rather than having their support and help at the time you need it most.

Boring

[Orgasmatron]

Ok, here's the thing...

After you've flipped through dozens of inboxes and home directories as part of your job, you know how pointless it is to do it for fun. People are boring. They have boring mail. They have boring files.

TFA == crap

[Sun.Jedi]

Strictly from the P-O-V of a UNIX admin.

1. 300 is too small a sample. Far too small.
2. No breakdown on size of shop per admin. My SA/server ratio is 1:100, which means very little time. (I MAKE time for /. -- shutup :P)
3. No breakdown on 'admin' roles. If this is a mom-pop-shop admin survey, then I guess it makes sense. Cisco riders can't touch a server in my shop. Neither can the Domain/AD Admins.
4. MSNBC? Now -theres- credibility. ::eyeroll::
5. These shops obviously don't log admin activity. Someone needs to watch the watchers.
6. I am not a snitch. I don't get paid to snitch.
7. auto_home FTW, baby!
8. 1 out of 3 survey topics are meaningless.

YAIASAS(Yet another Ima a system admin story)

[BytePusher]

I've been a system administrator for about 10 years now and I've never really found snooping to be interesting. I even tend to look away when people type their passwords, open files with their personal finances or other information. I show them how to use encrypted FUSE file systems. In general, I don't care about someones personal files unless they're taking up too much space.

However, I should say, from time to time you stumble across "information that (is) not relevant to (your) role," unintentionally. That can't be helped, but it is possible to not abuse the situation.

Unintentional Snoopage?

[LoudMusic]

I've sys admin'd for over a decade and can say that I've never intentionally spied on a colleague. However! I have stumbled onto quite a lot of unusual and interesting things. Some of these things I chose to ignore, some I reported, and some I think might have even been planted for me to find.

Also, I was never asked to spy on a colleague by an employer. Basically the rule was, as long as you're getting your job done and you're not breaking any laws or offending any coworkers, why should we stop you from doing as you please?

When you're root, what's snooping?

[Zapman]

Today a DBA came to me and asked why the partition filled up. I had to drill into oracle to find the answer (Oracle trace files. Let's just say I've worked with smarter DBA's). Was that snooping? Granted, that was in the realm of solving a problem.

As an email admin, I've routinely seen subject lines of emails that made me raise eyebrows. It was almost always in the context of looking for a missing email. Is that snooping?

Personally, I'd REALLY like to see the data. 1) What does '300 Senior IT Professionals' mean? 2) I'd REALLY like to see the survey questions asked.

I often tell people that, as a sysadmin, if you don't trust me, fire me now, and escort me out the building. I have more than enough power to do irrevocable damage to the company.

Re:Much more than the schools

[slashname3]

Flamebait? Someone that apparently steals software has some mod points. I'll bet they read co-workers emails too.

Re:They have a life

[Hatta]

It's pretty pathetic to have to get one's jollies snooping on others rather than actually doing something.

Could you please explain Youtube then.

Humanity is pretty pathetic.

I wouldn't call that snooping

[snuf23]

I don't think this constitutes "snooping". It's your job generally to ensure that company resources aren't being wasted by personal files such as music collections, videos, photos etc. Most of the time you are just looking for particular filetypes in excessively large profiles.
As far as software installs go, it isn't important from a licensing and security standpoint to identify illegal or insecure software that an employee has installed. Just as it is to identify rogue network hardware.
I don't think finding out that salesman Bob likes Britney Spears is in anyway a moral conflict. Reading through employee mail or accessing documents you have no right to (human resources for example) - now that is snooping.