I work in the computer forensics industry and I'm going to start by saying that anyone that assumes anonymity in an electronic transaction is sadly mistaken, especially on a public computer. Let's take the electronics out of the picture for a second though...
If you are on a public street, and you step into an alley and purchase an illegal substance... do you have any expectation of privacy that this transaction was not witnessed or recorded in any fashion. Both in the legal, ethical, and common senses... the answer is NO.
Now, putting the electronics back in... Can you reasonably use a public computer, that you have no idea what is installed on it, what network equipment may be monitoring it, or any idea of who may come use the computer right after you and legitimately expect that what you did was kept 100% confidential? Again, the answer is absolutely not.
Can someone freely (and legally) install something such as Tor on a publicly-owned, library computer? Probably not.
Can someone freely (and legally) install and configure any sort of encryption program to protect their data? Probably not.
Can someone freely (and legally) install anything on a library's computer? Probably not.
That being said, there is no legitimate or legal way to secure the information rendering the terminal as "non-secure". Anyone who transacts information on a non-secure terminal is in a sense, making a transaction in plain public view.
Also, in a legal issue, you have to look at the computer use agreement that is in place for many publicly-owned systems. There is usually some governing document or policy that states that users are not allowed to install software, access illegal content, pornographic images, and in most cases stipulates a reduced expectation of privacy for the user. I can't say definitively what the Frederick County Public Library's computer user agreement says, so I'll refrain from comment on that.
This is the same concept though of using a computer that is owned by a company. The company has, in most states and in the federal government, both explicit and implicit rights and abilities to limit (or completely eliminate) a user's expectation of privacy. This has been upheld time and time again by courts as being a valid exception to the Fourth Amendment.
In the absense of a specific law granting privacy to the information stored on the library computer, I don't see where there is any legal violation of any statute or Constitutional Amendment. While there are laws protecting "library records," I believe that public computer terminals are different considering the person walking up behind the current user has an inate ability to see, access, and modify activity artifacts of the previous user whereas another library patron does not have the ability to check out a book as me, does not have the ability to see what books I've checked out, or obtain my address.
I just don't see the controversy over this.
Slashdot Mirror
I work in the computer forensics industry and I'm going to start by saying that anyone that assumes anonymity in an electronic transaction is sadly mistaken, especially on a public computer. Let's take the electronics out of the picture for a second though... If you are on a public street, and you step into an alley and purchase an illegal substance... do you have any expectation of privacy that this transaction was not witnessed or recorded in any fashion. Both in the legal, ethical, and common senses... the answer is NO. Now, putting the electronics back in... Can you reasonably use a public computer, that you have no idea what is installed on it, what network equipment may be monitoring it, or any idea of who may come use the computer right after you and legitimately expect that what you did was kept 100% confidential? Again, the answer is absolutely not. Can someone freely (and legally) install something such as Tor on a publicly-owned, library computer? Probably not. Can someone freely (and legally) install and configure any sort of encryption program to protect their data? Probably not. Can someone freely (and legally) install anything on a library's computer? Probably not. That being said, there is no legitimate or legal way to secure the information rendering the terminal as "non-secure". Anyone who transacts information on a non-secure terminal is in a sense, making a transaction in plain public view. Also, in a legal issue, you have to look at the computer use agreement that is in place for many publicly-owned systems. There is usually some governing document or policy that states that users are not allowed to install software, access illegal content, pornographic images, and in most cases stipulates a reduced expectation of privacy for the user. I can't say definitively what the Frederick County Public Library's computer user agreement says, so I'll refrain from comment on that. This is the same concept though of using a computer that is owned by a company. The company has, in most states and in the federal government, both explicit and implicit rights and abilities to limit (or completely eliminate) a user's expectation of privacy. This has been upheld time and time again by courts as being a valid exception to the Fourth Amendment. In the absense of a specific law granting privacy to the information stored on the library computer, I don't see where there is any legal violation of any statute or Constitutional Amendment. While there are laws protecting "library records," I believe that public computer terminals are different considering the person walking up behind the current user has an inate ability to see, access, and modify activity artifacts of the previous user whereas another library patron does not have the ability to check out a book as me, does not have the ability to see what books I've checked out, or obtain my address. I just don't see the controversy over this.