Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Harvard Secretly Searched Deans' Email

Posted by timothy on from the scream-like-howard-dean dept.

theodp writes "Taking a page from HP's playbook, Harvard University administrators secretly searched the emails of 16 deans last fall, looking for a leak to reporters about a case of cheating. The deans were not warned about the email access and only one was told of the search afterward. Dean and CS prof Michael Smith said in an email Sunday that Harvard will not comment on personnel matters or provide additional information about the board cases that were concluded during the fall term. Smith's office and the Harvard general counsel's office authorized the search, according to a Boston Globe report. Smith's Harvard bio notes that his entrepreneurial experience included co-founding and selling Liquid Machines, where Smith coincidentally invented a software technique designed to keep unauthorized people from reading electronic documents."

18 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. All places I worked by gagol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was always made clear to me that my work email could be monitored for any reason. Dean or janitor, you are an employee.

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
    1. Re:All places I worked by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Apparently, according to TFA this was made explicit contractually for Harvard faculty that they enjoyed greater freedom from intrusion than this,(and more generally, in the traditions of academia) Faculty, tenured ones doubly so, are treated as a very special flavor of employee, one whose independence, so much as it can be preserved while still getting them to show up for scheduled classes and not perv out on undergrads, is considered to be one of their major valuable features.

      It's one of the curious tensions of academic structures: the students are 'customers'; but part of the 'product' can consist of giving them what they don't want(shitty grades, failing them for academic misconduct); faculty are 'employees'; but part of the value of a really good and prestigious faculty is the appearance(and ideally the reality) that, while the university signs paychecks and schedules classes and other administrative work, the faculty are free to pursue their research and teaching, and new faculty are 'peer reviewed' through the tenure process, rather than being hirelings beholden to HR.

    2. Re:All places I worked by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Informative

      It was always made clear to me that my work email could be monitored for any reason. Dean or janitor, you are an employee.

      I work at a state university, and we are reminded of this at least once a year. Pretty much everything related to our jobs is available to the public, if the public cares enough to pursue the information.

      Harvard's private, but onerous contract language seems to be the norm these days just about everywhere. The deans probably don't have any significant legal recourse. Being faculty, though, I doubt it ever occurred to them anyone would actually dare do this.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:All places I worked by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Faculty, tenured ones doubly so, are treated as a very special flavor of employee, one whose independence, so much as it can be preserved while still getting them to show up for scheduled classes and not perv out on undergrads, is considered to be one of their major valuable features."

      But nonetheless they think that these people are dumb enough to use their work email to leak stuff from work?

    4. Re:All places I worked by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Everything relates to academic independence. It's the diplomatic immunity of the academic world.

  2. There was no unauthorized access. by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 4, Informative

    re: "...Smith coincidentally invented a software technique designed to keep unauthorized people from reading electronic documents." [emphasis mine]
    .
    Since the Deans and Faculty members are technically employees of the Harvard Corporation / Harvard University, then there was no unauthorized access, since I am sure that Harvard reserves the right to peruse and otherwise scrounge through the work product of its employees. Whether it can do that to its students, though, may be another matter.
    .
    Anyone here have direct access to a Harvard Faculty / Administration Employment Manual or Employee Agreement or Contract? That's the only way to be sure: look at the actual contract.

    1. Re:There was no unauthorized access. by Kupfernigk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The point is whether, given the supposedly Enlightenment ideals of the Western idea of a university, they should have done. If they are just a corporation that educates people for money, that is one thing. If they are a university set up to stand for the possibility of a better society, that is another. Personally I prefer universities when they fight corporatism, not when they support it.

      --
      From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    2. Re:There was no unauthorized access. by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally I prefer universities when they fight corporatism

      You do realize that almost all universities (including Harvard) are corporations? Corporatism is hard to fight when it is the default organizational style for everything beyond the size of a few people.

    3. Re:There was no unauthorized access. by Kupfernigk · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I note I was down-nodded for an honest statement of opinion. It looks like a lot of people on /. approve of Big Brother. But you miss the point. Corporatism is giving rights to corporations that supersede what we in Europe call human rights. The existence of corporations does not imply corporatism if individual rights are protected.

      As an example, the Netherlands has an army but is not militaristic. North Korea has an army, and it is.

      --
      From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  3. Thoughts on this from former Harvard College Dean by haus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is Harry Lewis thoughts on the matter...

    http://harry-lewis.blogspot.com/2013/03/email-privacy-at-harvard.html

    For those not familiar, Harry Lewis was not only the Dean of Harvard College for a number of years, he is also a Professor of Computer Science.

  4. anyone stupid enough by v1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    to leak something USING the source's computers deserves to get caught. Just sayin'

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  5. Assume far more than your email is read by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When you work for someone you need to assume that your email is read, your website are logged, your SSL traffic decrypted and your computer inventoried. It is also a fairly safe assumption that login, logoff times, screenshots and keyboard strokes as well as mouse movements are all routinely captured.

    Depending on your place of employment many of these big brother activities are demanded by law (SEC etc). It's not a question of whether or not you like or the IT department likes it, because neither of you do. It's a question of someone /way/ up your food chain has made the decision to perform that level of monitoring. If your going to get mad, get mad at the VP, the legal team, the SEC, or other person typically at the VP level that had the power to demand the level of logging to begin with.

    To illustrate my point on how these things are often driven by and watched from the top you need only look at Yahoo. Their new CEO looked at the VPN logs when she saw the parking lot emptier than she thought it should be. She concluded people were slacking off and not really working and ended telecommuting for everyone at Yahoo. This was a data driven decision based on the logs that Yahoo's servers kept and their CEO reviewed.

    I'm not justifying this, I'm not defending this, I'm simply explaining how these things work in the real world.

  6. Mixed Messages by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Harvard has a problem because of THIS:

    Harvard University Information Security

    FAS Policy Regarding the Privacy of Faculty Electronic Materials

    The Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) provides the members of its faculty with computers, access to a computer network and computing services for business purposes, and it is expected that these resources will be used in an appropriate and professional manner. The FAS considers faculty email messages and other electronic documents stored on Harvard-owned computers to be confidential, and will not access them, except in the following circumstances.
    First, IT staff may need access to faculty electronic records in order to ensure proper functioning of our computer infrastructure. In performing these services, IT staff members are required to handle private information in a professional and appropriate manner, in accordance with the Harvard Personnel Manual for Administrative and Professional Staff. The failure to do so constitutes grounds for disciplinary action.
    Second, in extraordinary circumstances such as legal proceedings and internal Harvard investigations, faculty records may be accessed and copied by the administration. Such review requires the approval of the Dean of the FAS and the Office of the General Counsel. The faculty member is entitled to prior written notice that his or her records will be reviewed, unless circumstances make prior notification impossible, in which case the faculty member will be notified at the earliest possible opportunity.

    They were not notified according to this policy.

    Could get messy.

  7. No privacy by Emperor+Tiberius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When are people going to learn that they have no privacy on their employer's computer systems? Geeks and IT folks seem to have the biggest problem with this. If you really need that privacy, go out to your car on your lunch hour and use your smartphone. At the end of the day, it's your employer's power, bandwidth, space, and equipment. If they want to monitor their systems, they have every right to do so. Now obviously, some monitoring is a huge gray area when it comes to moral and ethical issues. So why not simply side step the issue by using your own person accounts, devices, and access?

    1. Re:No privacy by dkf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You do when policy clearly states a degree of confidentiality and due process for breaching it, both which were not followed. This will likely become a big deal, with the administration coming down hard to Protect The Brand.

      It's particularly a big deal when you do it to a substantial number of Deans. I'd assume that a number of people in the administration will be without jobs before too long, and maybe also a change of general counsel too. Not that anyone will say anything nasty; there will just be a general agreement that some people need to... well... move on; personality clashes, changing priorities, that sort of thing. And that perhaps it is time to ring the changes with who provides legal advice. No fault implied. No public link with this incident at all.

      In a commercial organization, I'd expect more recriminations in public for spying on the executive members of the board (damn close to what's happened here, in explicit contravention of their own policies). Universities tend to prefer to keep things a bit quieter. But no amount of union membership or past history of good relations is likely to save those responsible for authorizing this. A key rule of university politics is this: unless you have cast-iron evidence of wrong-doing, you DO NOT MESS WITH ANYONE WHO CAN TAKE YOUR BUDGET AWAY. Or who can replace the person with that power.

      Pass the popcorn. I'm going to enjoy watching this from afar.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  8. /., I am disappoint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here we have a story about how students, generally of wealth and privilege, being caught cheating, and being handed less severe sentences then are handed out by low ranking local state schools. Adding to that, the school's biggest concern now seems to be to get whomever had the audacity to air Harvard's dirty laundry.

    Slashdot reaction? Silly noobs, e-mail is insecure. Employers have the right to search company e-mail.

    Hey guys, how about concern about what these people are teaching the kids who, let's face it, will be future congresscritters and other leaders. Hey, it's OK to cheat, just don't get caught, or else you'll get a slap on the wrist. Oh, and be sure to exact revenge on whoever lets the plebs know.

  9. Pelton by xstonedogx · · Score: 3, Funny

    This would never happen at Deandale! I mean Greendale!

  10. Re:Who is Dean? by paiute · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's a last name, not first. It was Jeremy Dean and he ended up killing himself.

    You never sausage a horrible thing.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine