quote:

---

Originally posted by: NoGnome
"The morning's session strained disbelief. Shelby et al are monitoring the emails of whomever they deem dangerous (i.e., those who disagree). A frightening prospect."

---

 I just visited the USM website and looked at the "Use and Security Policies" as stated by Information Technology.  I know all about "fair use" and how emails, like business phones, are not typically protected from employers.  However, USM states:

"



Rights of The University

Under routine conditions, the content of electronic communications is not monitored and network connectivity will not be revoked without informing affected parties prior to the interruption of service. However, the university has the authority to:

• monitor network traffic, including e-mail and Web browsing patterns 
  
• impound university-owned computers for any reason
  
• disconnect any computer from the network for the purpose of isolating it for analysis or to protect other resources from attacks originating on the computer

As I read it (and I'm no lawyer or IT professional), USM is basically saying that it will look at "patterns" not individual emails. Thames obviously violated this basic principle by instructing the spying via Stringer's and Glamser's emails.  Of course, "normal conditions" now includes a system-wide paranoia, so the "pattern" is probably mostly a bunch of nothing at this point. 

I find nothing in the policies to justify the administration's spying via email. Does the faculty handbook or contracts allow such acts? Just curious.

tiger, don't forget that everything Thames does is for the students.  He's probably just monitoring their e-mails for spelling errors and to help them remember their personal appointments and exam dates, since he has (likely) all that information as well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Invictus
" Listening to the hearing, I noticed that Judge Anderson specifically noted the "under routine conditions" phrase & asked Thames if he considered the Glamser/Stringer situation "routine." At this point, I'm wondering if Anderson was concerned that the policy ran afoul of state wiretapping laws. I do know that police can monitor communications secretly, but they have to get a court order first. Repeating free advice: If you're concerned, learn to use PGP. "

---

I didn't get to listen, but it is good to know that Anderson asked that question.  I have seen many cases that show email is not protected or safe in any way. If it exists, it can be read by almost anyone without legal repercussions. It is more like a cell phone call, and less like a land-line which has protection.

 That still doesn't mean that it is ethical or right to say, "we don't do that" and then to do it.

Well, they've already tried to punish Rachel by dragging her name into it (one of the most despicable manuevers of the whole thing) so I don't doubt other students will be punished as well.

You Tolkein readers, don't forget the Scouring of the Shire -- when victory over the Bad Guy had been won, some of his minions were still able to inflict a lot of hurt.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Speculation
"His computer was probably infected by one of the recent virus attacks.  He probably should bring it in or will the possibility of numerous problems.  If he doesn't trust iTech, then take it somewhere off campus."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: foot soldier
"I would assume the computer was university owned. But he was not told his computer had a virus. He was told he was spending too much time on the internet. (?!) I would like to know if this happened to other students."

---