Slashdot Log In
In Australia, Bosses May Get Power To Snoop On Emails
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:06 PM
from the just-for-hunting-terrorists-we-promise dept.
from the just-for-hunting-terrorists-we-promise dept.
Numerous readers noted the proposal by the Australian government for legislation to allow employers to snoop on employees' email and IM conversations. This is being proposed in the name of protecting the infrastructure from terrorism. The attorney-general cited the Estonian cyber-attacks as a reason why such employer monitoring is necessary in Australia — never mind that the attacks were perpetrated by a lone 20-year-old and not by a foreign government or terrorist. The law permitting intelligence agencies to snoop on citizens without permission expires this June, leading to the government's urgency to extend and expand it. The chairman of Electronic Frontiers Australia said, "These new powers will facilitate fishing expeditions into employees' emails and computer use rather than being used to protect critical infrastructure. I'm talking about corporate eavesdropping and witch-hunts... If an employer wanted to [sack] someone, they could use these powers."
Related Stories
[+]
Politics: DoS Attacks on Estonia Were Launched by Student 184 comments
As_I_Please alerts us to the fact that a 20-year-old Estonian student has been fined for participating in DoS attacks against various Estonian political and governmental websites last May. The situation was notable because it escalated tensions between Estonia and Russia when the latter was accused of initiating the 'cyber-attack'. Quoting:
"The fact that a single student was able to trigger such events is particularly ominous when you consider just how many potential flashpoints exist between various countries all over the world. The DoS attack against Estonia is an excellent example of how a cyberattack carried out by a 20-year-old student in response to real-life events further exacerbated an existing problem between two nations."
Submission: Bosses to snoop on emails by Anonymous Coward
[+]
AU Government Demands Universal Wiretapping 236 comments
StonyandCher writes "The Australian government is pushing a bill to force all telecommunications providers to facilitate lawful data interception across fixed and mobile telephone systems, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), Instant Messaging (IM) and chat room discussions. Sweeping reforms will make it easier than ever for law enforcement to intercept communications if amendments to the Telecommunications (Interceptions) Act are agreed upon by a Senate standing committee. This follows from a story earlier this week where the Australian government is legislating to allow employers to snoop on employees' email and IM conversations."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
really? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:really? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:really? (Score:5, Insightful)
In that situation, you should consider anything the company owns as being enemy territory - and consider it the same as talking to your union rep while the boss is in the room. Find some other way. There are plenty. Maybe take your laptop to a starbucks and send an email there.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not everything in the world is the same as it is in the USA, kids.
Parent
Re:really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Thanks for catching up with the rest of us.
Parent
Re:really? (Score:4, Informative)
Thanks for being condescending.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
To avoid hassles, I simply opened up the email log file to all employees, so that any employee could peruse any other employees email, no
Re:really? (Score:4, Informative)
For example, if they have to call their bank, then it always always must be done during office hours. But calling their lover that can be done after office hours.
For e-mail: most people these days have an e-mail address already. Personal things they should send using that e-mail address. Work things are for the company provided address.
It would be scary for me to not be allowed to check on my employees, to see that they are doing what they are paid for. Scary to be never allowed to read their e-mails, when I deem necessary (hasn't happened yet but it's possible) - the most likely situation for me would occur when a customer says "I sent that to this employee", who happens to be on vacation then, upon which I'd start looking through their company mail box.
An employee should know that this is company resource, and the company also should have a right to check/limit the usage.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1. A phone conversation may not be monitored or recorded without prior consent from both parties. This is exemplified in calling the local telco and being told that our calls may be recorded for training purposes (my ass) and if you don't like it tell them so
2. Web traffic log generation is covered by the usage policy on the network. Providing they've signed
Eh. (Score:4, Interesting)
This is not news. Frankly sometimes I think privacy advocates overreact - and I think this is one of those times.
Farewell, 9-5 Slashdot... (Score:2)
It's a beatup about a non-story. (Score:5, Informative)
First I rang my local member, who referred me to Julia Gillard's office (she made the original idiotic statements). Her office referred me to the Attorney-General's office, as that's where it's coming from.
The nice functionary I spoke to there said it's a media beatup. Under Australian law it's illegal to intercept the communications of a third party without a warrant. There was some wondering about whether passing emails through a virus scan qualified as warrantless interception.
Rather than going through some court case about to settle the matter, it was felt that it would be easier just to amend the Telecommunications Interception Act instead.
So that's it. There's actually no story here at all. Though it did provoke me to write an angry rant [clubtroppo.com.au] before I started doing what the journalists should have done in the first place - check the facts.
Already legal in the US... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Someone shut the network down, I think with a P2P site.
The network guys sit right next to me. They were having a great time tracking down the culprit. And even funnier is people were coming out of the woodwork saying "my bad!" when it wasn't even them!
But I was very much OK with that. That person was saturating the network
Technology will overtake this (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Technology will overtake this (Score:4, Funny)
But then again, I'm a self-employed masochist.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet it seems to be normal. There are a lot of valid reasons to make a private call during work.
By your reasoning it's also ok for the employer to check the text message on your mobile phone.
In the end it's all about trust, if your employer doesn't trust you, either you did something wrong or your employer is paranoid.
Ok...so... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not a very good analogy... it doesn't take place at work. It doesn't take place during work hours. Finally, you aren't asking your employer to deliver the communication for you.
Take the same example as the GPP, but do it at work. You have finished your work, so you sit at your desk, take a sheet of paper from the notepad paid for by your work, write a letter to someone with the pen provided by your work, put it in the envelope provided by your work, maybe even go so far as to use one stamp that was also provided by your work, drop it in the company mail shute, and send it.
In that case, is it OK for your employer to open the letter and read it before it leaves the building?
Re:In Kiwi New Zealand (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:In Kiwi New Zealand (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:In Kiwi New Zealand (Score:4, Insightful)
P.S. I'm not sure what sort of intellectual masturbation led you to assume I empathise with osama but rest assured that its wrong.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Its not so much that he cares about civil liberties, champ (can I call you champ?)
You certaintly may, though I'm not sure why you would!! (out of curiosity--why would you?)
its that he is a terrorist, and his main job is screw with your head.
Ok, I completely disagree with this. His "main job" is not to "screw with" anybodies head--he has a series of discrete and explicit goals that he has repeatedly laid out. These include Western troops out of the Arabian peninsula. In fact this was one of his earliest causes and the one that made him target the US in particular.Troops out of Iraq is another one. Similar motivations took him to Afghanistan to fight the
Re:In Kiwi New Zealand (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not possible for employees, in the modern day and age, to sterilise themselves personally when they walk into the workplace. They still have friends they talk to, they still have families they think about, they still have pressing non-work issues they need to deal with. Expecting this to all disappear at 9am and reappear at 5:30pm is unreasonable, and as a business owner, I don't expect it of my staff, even though (assuming it's even possible which it isn't) it may increase productivity.
If I have an issue with a staff member stealing or doing something else that breaks the boundaries or law or morality, I don't want to deal with that issue by breaking the boundaries of law or morality. I can and will intervene to protect my business, but only if I don't violate their rights in the process. I have yet (in 8 years) to come across a scenario where I was not able to protect myself and still follow this principle. I don't believe I ever will. This experience affirms my belief that one does NOT have to trade freedom and/or morality for security and/or order.
Sheesh. This feeling of "anything goes" in the pursuit of security and law and order has gone way too far.
Parent
Re:In Kiwi New Zealand (Score:5, Interesting)
This goes for the bosses computer+email too.
There have never been any problems that I've heard of--I mean the general standard is, if you're reading someones email and you see its personal, dont read it. Just look at the business email. Not always possible, but it hasn't been a problem in my experience.
I don't really think most people use their business addresses for personal email very often incidentally--everyone seems to use yahoo/gmail/whatever. (I know I do)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no entitlement when it comes to work equipment. If you don't like it, find a place that doesn't do it. And if every place does it, nothing stopping you from building your own corporation that doesn't. That
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sound stupid to me.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sound stupid to me.... (Score:5, Insightful)
And it's no different than the paper "inbox" on their desk -- which is, of course, also owned by me, both the box and the desk itself. And the fact that it's clean.
Parent
Re:Sound stupid to me.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If my friends or family want to get in touch with me when I'm at work, they can call me on my personal cel
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm never on call, at least for now.
In principle, though, I'm with you. If the site isn't down in such a way that I'm the only one that can fix it - they can leave me alone, and they know it.
I'm of this mind too... (Score:3, Informative)
I've been paged to the floor while on my lunch more than a few times, sometimes more than once durring my lunch break. I'm punched out for lunch (company policy) and required to take one (state law) i made my bosses fill out the apropriate paperwork for me to get paid for those interrupted lunch breaks every time. Although personally i'd rather not
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I think looking for privacy in the workplace is stupid. It's kind of like having sex in the middle of someone else's yard and getting mad at the owners for watching.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Having worked in security in federal government (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No they don't. In fact, in most of the world, they aren't allowed to spy on you without your consent. The USA just has a pathetic lack of privacy laws. Judging from your post and others like it, they've also brainwashed the population into accepting it. I don't want my freedom eroded any more than it already has been.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)