A Search Engine For Corporate Desktops 117
Chibi writes: "Wired has an article about Altavista creating a new application that allows corporations to search their own networks, e-mail systems, and computers. It allows for certain areas to be designated off-limits and companies can determine who has access to the application. They claim it is a tool to increase productivity, but what are the chances it will be used to monitor people instead?" As the article points out, if a business implements this kind of desktop snooping, though, they could face additional liability as well.
Strangesearch lives. (Score:1)
Re:Big Brother IS watching you. (Score:1)
Heh, I use MS SMS for that... (Score:1)
Shit (Score:2)
Re:And..? Counter Point (Score:2)
I know, off topic, but I just hate to see incorrect information propagated...
Get Real (Score:2)
"paranoia a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others" Merriam-Websters
--
Look at it the other way! (Score:2)
The real increase in productivity (Score:1)
If a user can logon to a system that a sysadmin operates and a company owns, why can't a sysadmin logon to a system that a user operates and a company owns? Notice the common denominator there. Either way, the company can do whatever the hell they want because they own the systems!
If you don't like it, don't work there.
Re:Ya know, (Score:1)
--
Re:What!? (Score:1)
Once again, I'll posit that /. needs a moderation choice of "+1 (Flame)".
non issue... (Score:1)
if you have 1/2 a brain, you can avoid any detection in the heaviest watched networks.
This is NOT a new idea/product! (Score:2)
Actually, I've seen a demo of this very thing (probably a much earlier, less refined version, but still...) from a CD the Altavista guys were passing out at DECUS meetings (and possibly Comdex '96 as well) more than 4 years ago (IIRC, the demo explicitly EXPIRED at the end of February '97).
Also, realize what it is and is not designed to do: it isn't a spying tool (you can preclude it client-side from scanning certain directories), it's a productivity tool. Example -- this is employee Bob's train of thought:
MOO;IANAL.
One good use for this: (Score:2)
If you work for a big company that produces a lot of confidential documents, it's difficult to keep track of them and make sure they're stored securely. It would be useful to be able to find all documents across web servers, SMB shares, etc., check them for proprietary or confidential markings, and generate a report for the people that keep track of this sort of thing.
As far as privacy goes, whether or not you have an expectation of privacy on your work machine, you would have to be really dumb to leave anything personally sensitive on it. So I'm not bemoaning the loss of a privacy that never really existed.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
You can use SSH to do this, guys. (Score:3)
All large networks have a means of shoveling out system patches, upgrades, etc. For example, in a MSquishy or Novell network the login processes make the client run a script which the system admin specifies. I use these scripts to hack the registries of WinBlows boxes to make them less insecure, and to identify rogue boxes that lusers set up without loading minimum patch sets.
If you don't have this, you are either a wimpy little network (less than 1000 nodes for sure) or in a situation of impending doom as entropy grinds your systems into chaos.
So, the system admin shovels out a set of public keys, and an ssh daemon, and now he can run find remotely on you. If you can't afford ssh daemons that run on your OS, get linux ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H I mean write a beentsy little TSR that listens on a weird port and runs whatever find facility your OS uses. Pretty trivial really. You can half-assedly secure it by changing the keys daily, and you should block the port used on edge routers, but really, this is nothing compared to the stuff admins do on large networks as a matter of course.
Our chief network admin guy (not me, any more, hooray!) thinks it's a slow week if he hasn't edited files or registries on at least 400 PCs...
--Charlie
Remember findfast? (Score:2)
I'm sure that this eventually stops, once it is only necessary to index new and changed documents. I never waited long enough to find out.
Anyway, it's pretty obvious what's going to happen. This software is going to be installed, and the poor PC support guys are going to be flooded by complaints about sluggish systems, and everyone will just live with it. The workplace gets a tiny bit more hostile ...
Re:Shit (Score:1)
Re:"Increase Productivity" ... well, duh. (Score:2)
Hey, here's an idea, why not improve productivity by eliminating all bathroom breaks! Great idea. And let's charge employees for toilet paper, and dock their pay for sticky poop that leaves a mess on the side of the bowl! Why not? Hey, why shouldn't slavery be legal if the slave sells themselves? The answer to all of these is human dignity, apparently a concept unknown to you.
Only a simplistic idiot argues that everything you take away from employee freedom is a plus for productivity - except the kind of retards who aren't managers and are posting on company time - or else are in college and don't know a damn thing about work at all.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Re:"Increase Productivity" ... well, duh. (Score:1)
And their red Slimline stapler. Bastards.
"Increase Productivity" ... well, duh. (Score:2)
Increase Productivity = restrict anything that isn't productive.
You're work 8 hours a day. Company-related email checking, meetings, etc take, say, an hour out of that. 7 hours a day of real work. Anything personal - personal emails, personal calls, resume touch-ups, etc - is being non-productive.
Duh. Increase productivity by removing everything else.
______
Meanwhile... (Score:1)
Corporate Monitoring (Score:5)
--
All over the world... (Score:1)
"Well yeah, boss, there is a business reason for my needing that 61 inch monitor. It will help me insure that no nasty Outlook viruses would, say, for example, dump all those e-mails to 'HoneyBuns' from your outbox into your wife's inbox. No, don't bother deleting them now, they've all been archived. I can expect delivery tomorrow? Wonderful!"
Companies would have to be careful... (Score:2)
Search Tool != Monitoring, unfortunately (Score:2)
But in the mean time, I'll just keep takin' your money, sucking back the free "soda" and posting random shit on Slashdot. All in a day's work.
grep + network fs (Score:1)
egrep -r "regexp" / (Score:1)
Relinquishing my +1 bonus because I didn't read the article.
------
Been there, done that... (Score:1)
8-9 years ago I needed a way that a bunch of people in different departments could present a coherent front to customers through email and eventually hopefully link it to any system our support teams developed. So I invented "automaster".
We copied all of our corporate emails to the automaster by cc'ing it, and in-house built a simple search engine that would do lookups for us so that if I was dealing with CustomerA on Wednesday and someone else needed to on Friday, they could pick up where I'd left off, even if the customer didn't quote me in his next email.
Naturally at first they were all a bit worried that this was big brother in action, but the fact is in the long term it shouldn't put any more pressure on you that taking your role seriously does.
Our folks would point out the odd mistake to each other and the level of competence of our staff went up massively. It wasn't long before most of the other UK ISPs were copying the idea, and it spread fairly rapidly beyond after that.
What Altavista is providing is an excellent tool. And if it means that management can see how you deal with their customers, well, they pay you, surely they are entitled to know just exactly what they are paying you for. And if the company is willing to spend enough money on people to sit around and read all your emails then thats just less money in the CEOs pocket.
K
Re:And..? (Score:1)
This is the perfect analogy, because it points out the problem; if its what employers want to do, fine, its their money, their workplace, and their stuff. However, many employers don't want to do drug testing, but do anyway Why you ask ? Easy, insurance. I know a guy who owned a small business. Several of his employees used drugs on their off-time, he knew this, but was of the opinion that if it didn't affect their performance at work, they could do whatever they wanted. Unfortunately, his insurance company raised his rates, and then told him that they would lower them IFF he instituted a drug testing policy and submitted the results to the insurance company. He ended up losing some of his best people, and his company was never the same afterwards. So much for caring only about your employees doing their job.
-- Rich
Re:Well whadya know (Score:1)
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:1)
Ya know, (Score:5)
The problem with this viewpoint it that it flies in the face of the fact that most of us think DeCSS should be legal. We sit here and say that the new X technology is bad because it will be used against us; Judge Kaplan basically said the same thing when he ruled against DeCSS.
The fact of the matter is, this new corporate technology does have a legitimate business purpose. The same can be (and should be) said for DeCSS. We don't come down against DeCSS just because it can be used for piracy; we should not come down on this because it can be used for snooping.
If you are doing sketchy internet stuff at work, either use PGP for mail and browse the web through www.safeweb.com, or SSH to your home machine and be sketchy from there.
Slow searching (Score:2)
Because google has over 4,000 !! linux boxes with custom clustering software.
http://www.ee.ethz.ch/~slist/ee-talks/msg00056.ht
http://www.slashdot.org/articles/00/05/31/1242237
Cheers
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:1)
Work... (Score:1)
Don't like it, don't store anything sensitive on your work computer.
Wasn't ...? (Score:1)
Cool With This... (Score:1)
The article mentions peer-to-peer uses similar to Napster. Well, as long as all the computers on the network are peers I don't see anything wrong with this. What I'm getting at is that, as long as the Junior Graphic Designer has the same searching privledges as the Senior Vice President (or higher), then I think this new search application could be useful in finding files on a corporate network.
However, we all know it won't be the case. Management will be the ones with the access and the worker drones will be the ones with their privacies invaded. Is this really a big change from what could already be happening in the workplace? There is enough corporate "spyware" programs available that a new search application shouldn't be the wakeup call for a change in office privacy laws. Check out this link: http://www.pcworld.com/resource/printable/article
Here's to wishful thinking. Maybe companies will implement this new Altavista corporate search but give everyone equal access. Could help keep things kosher in the office and discourage incidents like this: http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,9375,00
redking
What this tells us. (Score:1)
Whether search engine technology will actually help is a moot point: at the place I work (multinational, financial services sector) the internal network is approaching unnavigability, even with a search engine and a structured topic list that's intended to point to the official starting pages for the more important areas. The trouble is that the company web has been growing without supervision and structure, there are no rules on flagging content with keywords, and the structured topic list which was hailed as the salvation of the company web when the prototype was rolled out never got the funding needed to stay current.
As for privacy implications, different jurisdictions have different rules. If you don't like the rules in the place where you live and work, give up the self-indulgent group whines and get involved in changing them.
Re:"Increase Productivity" ... well, duh. (Score:1)
If I didn't take the occasional 5-10 minute break I'm pretty sure I'd be less productive in the long run.
could !=should (Score:2)
it's like monty burns said... "let the fools have their tar-tar sauce"
---
I dont think you understand what a search engine (Score:1)
It does not monitor your ports and intercept email or activate the web cam in your montitor. A search engine isn't the same thing as echelon or coarnivore. It uses a program to follow links and build a database of pages it has visited, and then allows you to search the database. Then it returns a list of sites that match.
For instance, if you wanted to find the online company helpdesk page for installing netscape, you might use the corporate search engine and type:
netscape installation help
And with Altavista's customized corporate search you will also be able to look for an email you accidentally deleted on the exchange server with something like:
Report Q3 Project ABC
but because of permission restrictions, you wouldn't be able to see the version your boss forwarded to the VP after he erased your name and put his at the bottom.
Now, if you're running a Napster-like service on your shared network (F:) drive (Probabaly samba on Solaris) so you can listen to Enter Sandman when you're in the lab tracking down a bug, then your name will probably show up anytime someone types Metallica in the corporate search engine.
It's a two way street. (Score:4)
Why is it when Napster gets told, your product can be abused, Slashdot is quick to say that the users who abuse the system should be punished, not the system.
But when piece of software like this is mentioned, Slashdot jumps all over it because it can be abused.
Shouldn't we keep the same standard here?
Sure the software can be abused. That doesn't mean it will be. And if it is, it should be handled on a case by case basis.
--Ty
Come on, this is a troll right? (Score:3)
--
Re:And..? Counter Point (Score:2)
--
Re:And..? (Score:3)
What I do on my own time is my business.. Of course, if I show up at work high or whatever, that's another thing. But as long as my performance is fine then they shouldn't be messing around with my personal life.
--
Re:What!? (Score:2)
It's an insightful flame, cowlick.
Re:What!? (Score:2)
Amen to that. Sometimes these articles and posters need to be flamed, because they're just plain stupid.
What!? (Score:5)
Hey, did you hear that Windows has installed a "Find File" feature in windows so that my sister can spy on me?
Hey, did you hear that Google allows Government thugs to search my personal websites?
Hey, did you hear that flashlights a violation of our personal rights because they are being used to perform surveillance in previously dark corners of my garage?
Shut up already.
Re:Big Brother IS watching you. (Score:2)
Huh...? I thought CTS was a joke [slashdot.org]? :)
Guess What? (Score:1)
Get over it.
Counterproductive without Squelch (Score:1)
In CB Radio terms, it's like not having a squelch knob, and whatever knowledge is there to be heard is drowned out by static and background chatter. It's all about signal to noise.
Privacy issues aside, such an approach just is not very useful.. A better solution is to add value through accessability to things that people think are worthy of sharing (http://www.isysdev.com [isysdev.com]), and use technology to power that sharing. It's not necesarily just about personal privacy or freedom -- sometimes the best business results can be congruent with other ideals, and give a better result all round.
Couldn't this have been done with a (Score:1)
---
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:5)
and if they're getting it done in half the time, then spending the other half browsing porn and napstering, I'll want a goddamn good explanation
Well, I wouldn't be browsing porn or napstering, but I often read Slashdot after coding for a while. Why? What am I doing, reading Slashdot instead of working?!? ... Well, I'm trying to solve a problem. I've looked at the problem from one angle for long enough and now it's time to move on. It's not at all abnormal for me to come up with a solution to something after I've stopped actively working on it for a while.
In fact, generally speaking, if I were forced to be actively working on something every minute of an eight-hour day, my productivity would fall sharply. Many times I've spent an hour working on something, than left to do something else, and come back and looking at it fresh realized that instead of starting the variable with a "t" I meant to start it with an "r" - a stupid typo just wasted an hour of my time.
The bottom line is that computer programmers and network admins probably won't spend their entire day "working" - however, even when they're doing other "worthless" activities, their subconcious is still attacking something from earlier in the day, and when the programmer gets back to the task, they'll be far more productive than if forced to just pump out code all day.
--
new tool discovered. (Score:2)
This new tool lets you store information electronically, and store many thousands of pieces of information for instant recall using either simple searches or browsing through organized folders.
Although this new tool has been widely praised for its ability to help manage the enterprise, it is also vilified by some by its insidious capability to monitor and spy on people. Your actions can now be tracked and recorded for all to see.
This new tool can be combined with other like tools in a network, further increasing its capability for unleashing restrictions on your freedoms.
It's called...a computer.
privacy at work is not a right.. (Score:2)
Do you have those camera installed in the bathrooms as well?
It seems to me that my employer pays me for what I do not how I do it. I occasionaly take work home, and you know what? I also occasionaly take my personal interests to work. If I'm not doing the job I was hired to do, well, fire me. No need to spy on me.
Re:non issue... (Score:1)
Re:Sorry to inject a little bit of reality, but... (Score:1)
Re:And..? Counter Point (Score:1)
"What's that behind your back?"
"This? Oh, it's nothing"
"That's a 6" long needle, isn't it?"
"No... Er.. Yes... Ah, heck, just grab him!"
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:2)
I completely agree with you. BUT, why is everyone overlooking the legitimate use of this software? Corporations spend tons of time trading paperwork back and forth, often in an email-tag type atmosphere.
Consider this scenario:
An employee in California would like to review a draft of a memo written by an employee in London. Under normal circumstances, the only way to do this would be email the London based employee, who, due to the fact he's in a far distant time zone would not respond until the next day. Thus, the California based employee is forced to either attempt to search (shared resources, ftp sites, corporate file servers, whatever) manually for a document. This software, however, could expedite this process SUBSTANTIALLY.
So, I submit to the
2 things (Score:2)
Second, I think that this would be really great, you wouldn't have to go and ask "Bob the forgetful" or "Alice the daughter of chaos" for the sales figures / etc from '95. Honestly, waiting for people to get you stuff is a pain in the ass, especially if, well, you know.
As for privacy, well, quite honestly, if you're at work, don't expect any. Seriously, with windows boxes being so open, its a joke to even consider that your files can not be searched at the current time. Shit, everybody runs windows 95/98 at all companies I have worked for except one (they used nt 4.0).
\\BobsComputer\C\My Documents\FuckIHateMyBoss.doc
isn't exactly hidden.
I don't think emails should be included in the search, but you get enough "personal information" (read gossip) around the water cooler / coffee maker / cappuchino (SP?) machine / ping pong table.
as for
For instance, an employee alleging harassment by another co-worker could demand an employer search for incriminating evidence in e-mail accounts and PC hard drives.
They can do / do that stuff right now, lets not kid ourselves, have no expectation of privacy at work, shit, especially if they own the computers, facilities, etc.. there is nothing that they can not do.
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off hyper caffeineated
Re:What difference does it make? (Score:2)
Even if the IT group implements a fantastic security model with near perfect permissions and group heirarchy, the company will get burnt by this tool. I'd even wager that its guranteed to cause a company more harm than good.
No matter how hard you train/indoctrinate people, they are going to gossip, and someone is going to put it in an email or some other document. The next thing you know, items from an employee's confidential personnel file has found its way into the general index and the company is liable for that leak. As a paralegal, I've seen companies lose thousands for failing to properly safeguard personnel files in which one or two people improperly viewed them. This tool has the potential to raise the bar on the level of liability into the millions.
Now I'm not saying there are no beneficial uses to this program, but the article was right, this is an "Ivory Tower" tool.
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:2)
Now, do I think its right to monitor people's phones who don't interact with customers over the phone? No, but it is the employer's right, and if I don't like it I don't have to work there.
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:2)
No, because they don't own the package.
When I put my bag with private notes from my bookie/girlfriend/boyfriend/connection in THEIR credenza, does that give them the right to search through it?
They don't have any right to your private notes, but they certainly have every right to go through their credenza. They own it, not you. You are simply permitted to use their credenza. As for delving into the contents of the bag, that is a little grey. They can demand to search through the bag, but they have to have a good reason like suspecting you of stealing. Of course, if they're wrong there isn't much you can do either.
I use my own (i.e. paid for out of my own pocket with my own money) notebook PC, hooked to THEIR network when I'm in the office. So what rights do they now have? Can they intercept my personal email while it's going through their POP server and on their pipe, but once it lands on MY system I'm home free?
This one is just as clear in the eyes of the legal system. They can't search your laptop, but they can legally sniff every single packet sent over their network if they so choose. Again, you are being permitted to use their network. Furthermore, any email resting on their servers regardless of origin or destination is theirs for the reading. Also, they can demand to search the laptop for trade secrets or confidential documents that shouldn't be leaving the office, but I don't think they can force you to without a court order. Not sure on that one.
I don't disagree with the concept of ensuring that people are productive while at work, and I don't disagree with a company taking appropriate steps to safeguard its own legal liability as a result of its employees' actions. However, I've never been in favour of such intrusive spying, surreptitious scanning of email, web usage and workstation hard drives. Acceptable use policies and goal-oriented management (as opposed to counting lines of code generated, for instance) should be enough for a competent management team. (Fair disclosure: I am a 40+ executive in a tech company.)
I agree completely, if a company cannot treat me with respect and resorts to draconian policies with regards to snooping, I'm gone. Its there perogative though, and if they want to be dicks and make their employee's lives difficult they're going to find themselves constantly looking for help.
Re:What difference does it make? (Score:2)
I think you bring up an excellent point. However, right now the general problem on corporate networks is not too much information leaking, but too little -- data is locked up in thousands of word and excel files floating around on people's hard drives. Million dollar "knowledge management", document management, portals, groupware, and hell even fileserver solutions are attempts in trying to correct this, but for the most part, they only work as well as the users do.
This tool seems to take the underhanded approach of "Hell, if IT can't teach the lusers how to use their 'S:' drive or Outlook, why not go to the source and suck the files right off their hard drives." But, that begs the question that if users can't figure out how to use a shared drive, how will they understand a private/public directory setup on their local drive?
Not to mention the common HR attitude that IT can't be trusted to secure their personnel files, so they stay right on the computer locked in their office.
Re:And..? (Score:1)
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:1)
Sorry to inject a little bit of reality, but... (Score:2)
I mean obviously whatever evil corporation you work for may choose to abuse this type of product as another way to spy on employees, but be realistic - for the most part companies don't care what you do as long as you're productive and don't cause problems. Sure certain environments are very high on increasing productivity, to the point where washroom breaks are timed, etc, but most places are not like this.
In a less orwellian workplace, these types of products can be excellent tools to facilitate the search for knowledge. Would you know who to call in your company to get some obscure piece of info about how a particular system works? Would your co-workers? Probably not - that's why this type of global content indexing and affinity-mapping can be a great asset. I may not know who to call about the way an ACF2 subsystem on mainframe X is used by web application Y, but I can do a quick search and have someone recommended. I would kill for that capability in my job today - as an enterprise architect we need to know who the movers and shakers are in the company and keep a handle on ongoing projects, and unfortunately 80% or more of them never go in front of any sort of review board, so searching out the stealth projects is a big problem.
As a result, we've investigated a few products in this space - for those who are interested, a couple of other examples are:
Verity K2 Enterprise [verity.com]
and
Lotus Discovery Server [lotus.com]
Selection works both ways (Score:1)
Re:"Increase Productivity" ... well, duh. (Score:1)
But if you are in an office environment a good share of the work is mental-- especially the more professional the work gets. Writing/communications, working up ad campaigns, programming, managing products, managing people... even engineering and academia-- these are things that productivity can not be measured in widgets or in hours, but in results and achieved objectives.
Any professional is going to be given a budget to work against, whether this is an amount of time, or money to spend, the return on investment from the point of view of each next higher layer is all that matters. Completely degrading workplaces that lack basic privacy are not going to foster better results, it will simply stress people out who will then make mistakes.
Old News (Score:2)
Other Company (Score:2)
I like them and I like their product; however, it didn't quite set sales goals on fire. It's very difficult to get used to accessing your data through a search engine when you're used to opening up folders on your disk. It's a great replacement for the Start | Search feature in Windows, but the extra power and extra speed it provides never generated the enthusiasm the founders hoped.
This is perfectly legal (Score:1)
Re:Ya know, (Score:3)
A better way to get around corporate monitoring of browsing habits is to convert the IP address of the site you want to visit into a decimal number. That should confuse your typical admin enough. To convert:
There's a web site that does this too, but I don't remember it. Just remember, beware the proxy and the person that owns the logs. If he/she has time and a grudge against you, he/she can find all kinds of stuff.
Well whadya know (Score:1)
http://3630752905/ should work
It works! I sometimes see those stupid URL's in spam mail I get advertising porn sites. I always just assumed that they were stuffed up addresses and that the person setting up the mail just didn't know what they were doing.
And... (Score:2)
Hands up who's posting from work!
Gasp! (Score:2)
Re:And..? (Score:1)
What difference does it make? (Score:4)
The computers, network, servers etc. all belong to them in the first place.
Re:It's THEIR equipment... (Score:1)
Re:"Increase Productivity" ... well, duh. (Score:1)
NEW?! (Score:2)
It's called Windows and a Bad admin. This is implemented in plenty of places...
Unasked Question (Score:1)
Altavista Search (Score:1)
Now, what happens when Peer-to-Peer and the corporate world really get put together?
liability issues (Score:2)
Tim
Re:Sorry to inject a little bit of reality, but... (Score:1)
I was really excited about the dynamic expertise algorithms, and I think everyone should be interested in technology that helps people find other people who can help them, can't we talk about how cool some of this stuff is instead?
Is this a new idea/product? (Score:2)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't I just stick gnutella on all the computers in the network and just point them at each other? I've never tried it, but I've thought about doing that for finding stuff on a small network.
As for spying, that's what back orifice is for. I'm used to /. being paranoid, but not *that* paranoid.
Re:What!? (Score:2)
And the C:\WINDOWS\RECENT betrays the secret locations of her obscene love letters...(so does my cheap p0rns, DOH!)
I just love Slashdot sometimes... (Score:2)
Don't expect privacy at the workplace. There's no point to it -- your employer can do whatever they want.
Employers have been 'spying' (if you want to call it that) on their employees for years. What do you think 'quality assurance' is for tech support workers? That's right, "All phone calls may be monitored or recorded?"
How this qualifies as news is beyond me.
Re:And..? Counter Point (Score:1)
The easiest method of finding stuff (Score:1)
Subject: XXX.xxx needed
Message:
I'm looking for XXX.xxx document. I seem to have lost my copy. Does anyone have a copy I could borrow?
Thanks,
Dancin Santa
It works like a charm.
Re:And..? (Score:1)
Re:And..? Counter Point (Score:2)
Check out the FAQ [erowid.org] for more info.
Re:Ya know, (Score:1)
The following is probably either obvious or completely wrong, but let me try it:
If the browser shows an icon for a secure web page, then you've got an SSL connection. SSL is end-to-end, correct? The Proxy can't mount what is effectively a man-in-the-middle attack without your browser knowing it (and therefore failing to display a secure icon.) The situation you mention above would be obvious to any user who knows enough to look in the corner of their browser window (or better yet, check the Security properties for the page), correct? And if the icon isn't there, they can't really claim to be using a secure connection (hopefully most porn-surfers know this much.)
Since the GET requests you make over an SSL connection are all encrypted, the only thing the proxy would see is which host you're trying to connect to (Safeweb over and over again), not the full request URL (eg /cgi-bin/redirect?url=www.stinkypanties.com... etc).
A better way to get around corporate monitoring of browsing habits is to convert the IP address of the site you want to visit into a decimal number. That should confuse your typical admin enough
I would imagine that a half-serious porn-monitoring operation would log the IP addresses and use a reverse lookup (or at least, look at a table of known porn sites.)
Re:Ya know, (Score:4)
The difference is that we (the "Slashdot crowd") don't have the capability to declare things illegal. All we can do is make a lot of noise and hope the powers that be will consider our opposition before they head down a potentially abusive path.
If the MPAA had restricted its complaints about DeCSS to a few web pages and newspaper articles rather than heading to court to flex their newly purchased laws, I don't think we'd all be quite as annoyed with them.
Re:And..? Counter Point (Score:1)
But what is the case for the person that is high on coke and you can not tell. I believe in random drug testing.
I do believe in screening for LSD. LSD stays in the body for a very long time and can activate when a layer of your body ( i think it's the fat layer) come's into need. I would not like to see an a person working heavy machinery when under a LSD trip.
ONEPOINT
reasonable. (Score:3)
Has great possibilities... (Score:4)
As far as privacy concerns, well, don't store private things on your work machine. The software theoretically allows you to set certain areas as unindexed, but i wouldn't trust it at all. Look at it this way: would you leave private things in your (unlockable) desk before going home at night? Your computer is just like that in this system--it's a desk you can't lock.
I carry a backpack around with me when i go to the office; it contains random personal things, they don't go in my desk. Personal data should be in a data backpack of some sort, if you bring it at all.
All in all, i think this has more positive potential than it does negative. When it comes to productivity vs privacy at the office, i'll take productivity at the office, so i can get to my privcay at home.
Re:Corporate "Intrusion" (Score:2)
Corporate "Intrusion" (Score:4)
And..? (Score:2)
Deciding who to pay is a RIGHT; privacy at work is not.
It's THEIR equipment... (Score:5)