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.

* 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. 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 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

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 ...