Philipp Thomas wrote:
Depends on the country you live in :) Here in Germany its against the law to spy in on employees without their agreement.
True. Our company (South African) writes fleet management software (Windows based) that is marketed internationally by Siemens VDO. One of the options we had to include was the ability to completely disable all driver-based reporting as to produce reports on driver performance would be illegal in Germany and some other countries. -- Steve Crane http://craniac.afraid.org
måndag 16 februari 2004 07:36 skrev craniac:
True. Our company (South African) writes fleet management software (Windows based) that is marketed internationally by Siemens VDO. One of the options we had to include was the ability to completely disable all driver-based reporting as to produce reports on driver performance would be illegal in Germany and some other countries.
That's all good and dandy ... but in my book, I file it under "bigotry". The biggest problems with us here in europe, is that we're still rednecks in many ways. You know, the word "Echolon" applies to a function in linear algebra ... Pivot reduction. I wouldn't be so naive as to think no one answered, because of their inherent european nobility.
The Monday 2004-02-16 at 11:16 +0100, Örn Hansen wrote:
I wouldn't be so naive as to think no one answered, because of their inherent european nobility.
Do you really think that, nationalities an ethics aside, employees writing here would be happy to post a way to allow their employers spying on them? That would be throwing stones to our own roof. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
* Carlos E. R.;
The Monday 2004-02-16 at 11:16 +0100, Örn Hansen wrote:
I wouldn't be so naive as to think no one answered, because of their inherent european nobility.
Do you really think that, nationalities an ethics aside, employees writing here would be happy to post a way to allow their employers spying on them? That would be throwing stones to our own roof.
<rant> Please do remember when you talk about privacy what is legitimate or not "the way tou see the world depends where youy are standing". So It may be legitimate for the OP to have this type of monitoring where as where others are looking from that could be illegal againts employee rights etc etc. I just do not understand the attitude when people jump in and say it is illegal, unless there is a constitution for the world, that is crap. If you just want to not give an answer just ignore the question is that so difficult </rant> -- Togan Muftuoglu | Unofficial SuSE FAQ Maintainer | Please reply to the list; http://susefaq.sf.net | Please don't put me in TO/CC. Nisi defectum, haud refiecendum
The Monday 2004-02-16 at 17:11 +0100, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
<rant>
Please do remember when you talk about privacy what is legitimate or not "the way tou see the world depends where youy are standing". So It may be legitimate for the OP to have this type of monitoring where as where others are looking from that could be illegal againts employee rights etc etc.
Yes; I think that is the case here - or at least, I understood he said so.
I just do not understand the attitude when people jump in and say it is illegal, unless there is a constitution for the world, that is crap.
I think I said something like "would be illegal in many countries". I try to be precise.
If you just want to not give an answer just ignore the question is that so difficult
Sometimes, yes O:-)
</rant>
-- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
On Monday 16 February 2004 07:11, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
* Carlos E. R.;
on 16 Feb, 2004 wrote: The Monday 2004-02-16 at 11:16 +0100, Örn Hansen wrote:
I wouldn't be so naive as to think no one answered, because of their inherent european nobility.
Do you really think that, nationalities an ethics aside, employees writing here would be happy to post a way to allow their employers spying on them? That would be throwing stones to our own roof.
<rant>
Please do remember when you talk about privacy what is legitimate or not "the way tou see the world depends where youy are standing". So It may be legitimate for the OP to have this type of monitoring where as where others are looking from that could be illegal againts employee rights etc etc.
I just do not understand the attitude when people jump in and say it is illegal, unless there is a constitution for the world, that is crap.
No, thank god, there is not a constitution for the world, but there IS a constitution for ROMANIA, and Article 28 (Secrecy of Correspondence) clearly applies. Article 26 guarentees the right of Personal and Family privacy. But, Hey, Rant On Togan, don't let a little thing the the Constitution get in your way.... http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/ro02c___.pdf -- _____________________________________ John Andersen
måndag 16 februari 2004 14:21 skrev Carlos E. R.:
Do you really think that, nationalities an ethics aside, employees writing here would be happy to post a way to allow their employers spying on them? That would be throwing stones to our own roof.
Well, putting it that way ... don't you think it's a rather "moot" to put it into the law, that the employee has to agree to it? would he, normally? I was just pointing out the fact, that I'm skeptic about our "noble" nature being the cause of our silence. That implies to me as well as anyone else.
The Monday 2004-02-16 at 17:23 +0100, Örn Hansen wrote:
Do you really think that, nationalities an ethics aside, employees writing here would be happy to post a way to allow their employers spying on them? That would be throwing stones to our own roof.
Well, putting it that way ... don't you think it's a rather "moot" to put it into the law, that the employee has to agree to it? would he, normally?
Depends on how hungry he is :-p As a matter of fact, that is the case. For example... here (Spain) phone banking operations are usually not only monitored, but recorded - and the operator has to tell the client that the conversation is being recorded, for both sides safety. On other client centers I'm told that supervisors often listen to ongoing conversations at random. And many other measures of the sort. On some countries (USA?) the login information tells straight away that your keyboard operations can be monitored; even people entering the site illegally must be told, because it seems that if this is not done, the information gathered against the intruder can not be used in court. On the other hand, I remember the case of an employee fired for "excessive internet use", or use of "corporate email for private means", or something similar, and the firing was turned around in court because the employer had violated employee privacy. I'm not sure if that was in Spain or outside. Both ways, you see.
I was just pointing out the fact, that I'm skeptic about our "noble" nature being the cause of our silence. That implies to me as well as anyone else.
Agreed. But I can't feel too happy about spying. Not as the would be administrator (ethic issue) nor as employee under observation (egotist issue). And both things are true. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
måndag 16 februari 2004 21:58 skrev Carlos E. R.:
Depends on how hungry he is :-p
Exactly, that's also how I see it potentially ... an employer says "these are the conditions of your hiring", and the hungry employee has no choice, not really.
As a matter of fact, that is the case. For example... here (Spain) phone banking operations are usually not only monitored, but recorded - and the operator has to tell the client that the conversation is being recorded, for both sides safety. On other client centers I'm told that supervisors often listen to ongoing conversations at random. And many other measures of the sort. On some countries (USA?) the login information tells straight away that your keyboard operations can be monitored; even people entering the site illegally must be told, because it seems that if this is not done, the information gathered against the intruder can not be used in court.
It's necessary to inform the perpetrator, as if he's not informed it's not established weather he had any intent of a break-in, or violating information integrity. The statement "he's using the computer!" is not enough, computers don't hold any information of sensitive material, normally, and shold be categorized as "tools". And it's on the shoulders of the employer/owner to provide mechanisms to enforce the integrity and confidentiality of that information. Integrity and confidentiality of information, is not inherent in information systems. Of course, we all have seen movies where there's this huge sign "Tresspassers will be shot", and it's at a gate to a totally worthless wasteland ... or "do not step on the grass" before a grass without a fence between it and the sidewalk. Such totally groundless examples, are possible, unless some rules and guidelines are enforced. Unfortunately, this is not "understood" by our European parlamentarians. As can be seen in two European countries, concerning the word Windows vs. Lindows. The word Windows is not a "legal" registered trademark, as it's a public word, but the understanding of these issues is not inherent in being the peoples representative, and the corporations always seek monopoly. Factors, that need careful considerations and preparations. And without the representation of the "people's" interest, the trend will always be towards a monopoly for the biggest corporation or nation, depending on the scale of treaty/law.
Both ways, you see.
Luckily, yes ...
On Monday 16 February 2004 11:23 am, Örn Hansen wrote:
måndag 16 februari 2004 14:21 skrev Carlos E. R.:
Do you really think that, nationalities an ethics aside, employees writing here would be happy to post a way to allow their employers spying on them? That would be throwing stones to our own roof.
Well, putting it that way ... don't you think it's a rather "moot" to put it into the law, that the employee has to agree to it? would he, normally?
I was just pointing out the fact, that I'm skeptic about our "noble" nature being the cause of our silence. That implies to me as well as anyone else.
There might be valid reasons to agree to monitoring (having a record for your own protection; or in the case of a truck, in case you got lost). Also, an employer could prove to those outside his organization that something did not happen. Further, the agreement could be implicit (i.e. this system belongs to xyz company, and it is monitored and we will nail your a$$ if you do anything wrong in the motd). -- I would rather try to persuade a man to go along, because once I have persuaded him he will stick. If I scare him, he will stay just as long as he is scared, and then he is gone. Dwight D. Eisenhower
tisdag 17 februari 2004 02:55 skrev Mike Grello:
There might be valid reasons to agree to monitoring (having a record for your own protection; or in the case of a truck, in case you got lost). Also, an employer could prove to those outside his organization that something did not happen.
There are always supposedly legitimate reasons. But don't you think it should be "I", the trucker, who should be requesting the protection? Would you want the government to put surveillance equipment in your house, for protecting you ... after all, you never know when a bad guy comes. The normal answer is no. There are always exceptions, of course and those exceptions can request it.
Further, the agreement could be implicit (i.e. this system belongs to xyz company, and it is monitored and we will nail your a$$ if you do anything wrong in the motd).
When I was at my Uni, I was approached once by one of the professors who was in charge of the systems. He told me the following: "We've taken out the ability to change the keyboard settings" (This was on Sun Workstations) "because whenever you setup your Icelandic keyboards, the next user has a problem logging in as the keyboard settings aren't reset at logout". I took a close look at the guy with disgust, stood up and entered the Indy sections. Altered a keyboard settings file, to represent my keyboard and ignored the twit, the Indy did the "resetting at logout by default". His failure in setting up the systems properly, is not my concern. The computers are a tool, a tool for accomplishing my work ... the work of system integrity is certainly his, but if he can't do that without limiting my ability to utilize these tools... that's because of his incompetence. A University utilizing such incompetence as a professor, or a corporation employing such incompetence as part of their professional work is not something I want to be a part off ... I'm never that hungry, luckily.
participants (6)
-
Carlos E. R.
-
craniac
-
John Andersen
-
Mike Grello
-
Togan Muftuoglu
-
Örn Hansen