Computers are used in a wide range of purposes by a wide range of people. And, wherever there are people, there are paranoid people. The shady private eye has given way to personal use spyware, which is both inexpensive and easy to install. This technology means that anyone’s Internet activity could be monitored by anyone else. I’ll be focusing on technology used without malicious intent, and on the ethical implications of such monitoring.
The technology varies, but some commonly used pieces of software are keystroke loggers and software that records Internet history. A popular brand is Spector. The programs used in this possibly well intentioned endeavor are the same as those used for malicious hacking, but people wishing to spy on those they know have the advantage of being able to directly install hardware.
In workplaces, managers increasingly concerned both with productivity and liability for sexual harassment have stepped up the amount to which they monitor employees. In addition to classic overbearing CCTVs, large companies have begun installing spyware on their networks to monitor their employees’ use of company computers. In some instances, employees with disagreeable material in their hard drives or inappropriate emails have been disciplined or fired.
Originally in the name of fighting terrorism, US and Canadian governments have increased the amount of monitoring they do online. This has further extended into fighting sexual and financial crimes. The United States government has asked Internet firms to save data of its users for up to two years after its use. The Canadian government recently ordered Bell to monitor and turn over information it considered relevant to law enforcement (see Youtube video). And, in addition to attempts by the US government to catch sex offenders online, it has created an online sex offender registry, allowing, extremely easily, average citizens to monitor each other.
In the home, parents are installing, in addition to more traditional internet blocks, software to monitor the internet use of their children. Spouses suspicious in Internet infidelities have a plethora of resources at their disposal to spy on each other, from software focusing largely on monitoring chatroom activity to software that takes screenshots and records email and keystrokes. Also, websites have arisen for the sole purpose of catching cheaters online.
All of those employing this technology think they’re doing what is right and necessary. The government would be able to stop more crime if given access to records. Sexual harassment would fall if employees knew they might be caught. Children would be safer online, and spouses would have reduced temptation to cheat. Does that make it right?
I enjoyed this:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=VcP3V9bgUoI
Where should the line be drawn as to what kind and scope of internet monitoring is acceptable?
The intentions of office managers, law enforcers, parents, and cuckolded spouses are, at least in their own minds, noble. What ethical similarities are there between these types of monitors and those who illegally install spyware meant for gathering personal information for purposes of theft?
Can someone lend me a cable to connect my Mac to the projector?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
As far as internet monitoring in the office goes, I believe that if the office computers are owned by the company, then the person or persons with the correct authorization should be able to monitor anything that goes through that company's system. I also believe that if an employee is bringing their own computer to the office, as well as their office computer, if they are connected to the company's network and using internet or bandwith, then the company has the right to monitor what they are doing.
As far as the government goes, they should have access only to certain things, i would imagine anything that may look like terrorism should be allowed, but i don't think that they need to know how many times I post on my blog, or how many times i visit my facebook. I would think they have more to do than watch me and the websites I go to! O'Well.
The whole idea that the world is getting smaller is demonstrated in this entry. I feel as if the world will some day be one where everyone knows everything about who they want to know information about. That concept scares me and I hope that legislation will control the rate that survailance is currently growing at.
The monitoring done by companies is meant to increase productivity and reduce fraud and corruption. On the other hand, this monitoring process, which is basically all that managers are intended to do, requires often vast resources that can become quite costly in the long run for a company. Spyware on the otherhand is traiditionally synonymous with hackers, crackers, and malicious programs that have a little extra in them than all that they claim to be fronting. These are the guys that you don't want to mess around with. Usually, however, using Adaware 7.0 or Spybot Search & Destroy gets rid of any spyware that may be plaguing your computer, both on screen and off, affecting the physical resources that your computer needs to run, and slowing all of your applications and background services down.
I have no problems with companies monitoring their own network to ensure productivity and proper conduct among the workers. The company is the entity providing the Internet access and the paycheck to the employee who is supposed to be doing the work so they should be allowed to keep track of what their employees are using the network for. They don't even have to be all secretive about it; they can just make it clear to the employees that if they do what they are supposed to be doing, there will not be any problems.
When it comes to the much-contested topic of surveillance for national security purposes, I feel that some sacrifices must be made. There was that one case where government surveillance of patterns of language over the telephone led to the thwarting of a terrorist attack on the Brooklyn Bridge in 2003 (NY Times Article). I would like to see the government pulling out all the stops to prevent another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and I think sometimes people can be too quick to jump and say "This is 1984" or "Big Brother" without weighing the positive with the negative aspects.
I have to agree with Saverio about the government doing anything and everything it can to prevent terrorism. It's their job to protect us. People scream about how they're losing their privacy. If you're not helping terrorists, then why are you worried about the government knowing what sites your looking at? People shouldn't be embarrassed about what they view on the internet.
With buisnesses monitoring their workers online actions, it's just simple buisness. If people are not working, they're hurting the company, and that mean less income, which leads to less paychecks for everyone in the company.
I believe that employers have the right to monitor their employees activities while at work. This does not constitute a violation of privacy or individual freedoms because the employee chooses to work for his respective employer and thus it's not coercive in that sense. In regards to personal relationships I think the issue is null and void. Any snooping around is indicative of a comorbid disorder that doesn't stem from the Internet itself. It simply manifests itself there in particular instances.
Government monitoring of personal computers is a gross intrusion on privacy, it really should never be allowed.
When you enter into corporations its more of a grey area. The computers are owned by the company, and technically the worker is owned by the company too for the hours they are being paid to work, so if you are using their computers for non-work purposes you are not only mis-using their property you are cheating them out of the salary they are paying you
spyware is a real threat. in offices, employers take certain privacy rights when they hire you and are allowed to monitor proper use of company funded equipment, but in the rest of the world, spy technology is getting so commonplace that you have to be paranoid and protected nearly everywhere you go. the floods of malicious spyware are rediculous and cause me much grief cleaning my harddrive to retain optimal speed.
Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither.
Government monitoring citizens is the first step of a slippery slope that I am not willing to take. This is just the same as call monitoring, you absolutely should need a warrant for any private personal information online. Internet companies are obligated to keep all private information out of the government's hands unless they have a warrant.
Company monitoring of employees wouldn't be so bad, as long as the employees were fully aware of the monitering they faced.fredfred1
Post a Comment