BIG TEACHER IS WATCHING YOU

[Allrule]

*Puts on Orwell hat*

WAR IS PEACE!
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!
WE ARE AT WAR WITH INDIVIDUALISM! WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH INDIVIDUALISM!

*takes off Orwell hat*

It had to be done.

[Newfoundworld]

You realise that no matter what you say the legal side of things will come out on my side, right?

Suck it up, buttercup.

Luckily Nervun has given me an idea for dealing with people who seem to lack reading comprehension skills...

I most certainly oppose the webcam monitoring...

As stated before, the line they crossed was taking images of inside somone elses property (someones house, with the webcam)...

Though, as I've stated, the actual webcam use is stepping over, since it extended from monitoring the laptop, to monitoring the inside of the student's parent's private property...

I would still have a problem with keystroke tracking and the like. That can lead to compromising of seriously invasive personal information, such as passwords or details.

[Tekania]

I would still have a problem with keystroke tracking and the like. That can lead to compromising of seriously invasive personal information, such as passwords or details.

Keystroke monitoring IS licit... It's school property... So is desktop monitoring... it is also licit.. These aspects have ALREADY been tried in court in the past and schools have passed on this issue... Schools have the right to monitor all activity on laptops they themselves issue... They even have the right to monitor traffic to and from PRIVATE systems on their own network... Where they crossed the line this time is that their monitoring extended OUTSIDE of school property (outside the notebook itself)...

[Newfoundworld]

It's morally compromised. I'm fairly sure most of the system will be tried again after this case concerning this type of stuff.

[Tekania]

It's morally compromised. I'm fairly sure most of the system will be tried again after this case concerning this type of stuff.

Morally compromised? For an entity to monitor the usage of its own property for which it bears primary public liability for?

[Ardchoille]

<snip>
People like you are why our kids keep getting dumber...

People like you are why our kids keep getting dumber. Oh wait, they aren't. I suppose it's just people like you that need to double check their shit before looking like an idiot because they got it all wrong

People like you two are flaming. Since those posts came before Nerv told you to cool it, I'm not going to take it any further, but know that you both dodged a bullet there. Tekania especially: after six years of relative virtue, you really, really don't want to start the sort of condescending put-down that could bring your earlier record back into active consideration.

You both know it, but I'll put it in big, unfriendly red letters:

Argue the post, not the poster.

[Newfoundworld]

It's morally compromised. I'm fairly sure most of the system will be tried again after this case concerning this type of stuff.

Morally compromised? For an entity to monitor the usage of its own property for which it bears primary public liability for?

Depends on the kind of monitoring its doing.

[Pschycotic Pschycos]

It's morally compromised. I'm fairly sure most of the system will be tried again after this case concerning this type of stuff.

Morally compromised? For an entity to monitor the usage of its own property for which it bears primary public liability for?

The problem is that a webcam points outward from the system in question. Thus it is no longer a device intended for monitoring the system, but rather a device to monitor events occurring away from the system. Were desktop tracking and keylogging devices the only things implemented on these systems, there would be no foul play as these measures would be internal security checks for the system in question. But a webcam, as it cannot be turned inward to watch the system, cannot be argued as a measure to monitor the entity's property.

This all has become a problem because the school could remotely activate these devices at any time without user notification. And, as I have just explained, it cannot be activated to monitor the system. Therefore, it can only be activated to monitor the user in a private setting. This is fundamentally immoral and illegal.

[Enistopia]

WHAT.THE.FUCK

[Non Aligned States]

The problem is that a webcam points outward from the system in question.

Tekania is not saying the webcam, especially a remote operated webcam is legal, or permissible. He is saying that if they put keyloggers, or inspect the HDD with a backdoor program, that's fine, since it is their system. That's it.

[Pschycotic Pschycos]

The problem is that a webcam points outward from the system in question.

Tekania is not saying the webcam, especially a remote operated webcam is legal, or permissible. He is saying that if they put keyloggers, or inspect the HDD with a backdoor program, that's fine, since it is their system. That's it.

Noted and addressed in the third sentence of that post. I was quoting his to help highlight the difference between what is and is not morally compromised and draw a distinction.

[Ifreann]

Indeed, but the important part is "without their knowledge". If the school had told the students and parents that there was a keylogger on the laptops, then there's no problem. If they didn't then one could argue that failing to inform people about their lack of privacy creates an assumption of privacy. Less hacking, more fraud, still a crime.

I don't think they need to do that either... It's gov't property... I've had public access and loaner machines out of which I could monitor the usage of... It's a liability protection issue on the part of the school, since it is the school's machine, the school maintains primary liability for its usage, even when in the possession of another... The schools certainly have a right to monitor keystrokes, internet history, email and all other forms of communication on the computer to which they own... Where they drew the line was monitoring the web-cam, and thus extending the system's monitoring beyond the scope of their own property and into the privacy of another by taking video feed which portrayed an image of an area which was private and not school property....

It doesn't matter who owns the property, they can't use it to violate someone else's privacy.

But at the core, the laptop is school property, whether it is at school, on a bus, or in someone's house.... And I see no need for the school to notify people that the school is monitoring the school's property, especially since checking personal email, or personal bank accounts or personally posting on blogs is not legitimate use of a laptop issued for the purpose of school work and study...

There is every need. Sensitive information can be sent with a computer. If that information is being recorded, the end user needs to be told. Failing to tell them, in my opinion, creates an assumption of privacy.

Consider, my parents own a liquor store. They also own the credit card reader by the till. They could, hypothetically, install a card skimmer to record people's credit card details. Do they have the right to do this, without informing their customers? No, of course not. And in the same way, the school does not have the right to the same information, sent over their laptop. If they're going to be handing these laptops out, they need to tell people that their use of the laptops will be monitored, and information on it is not private.

Likely the only thing a win here (for the defense, on any issues past the 4th amendment issue) would accomplish, is schools no longer issuing students/teachers laptops, which would penalize the poorer children with less access/exposure to technology.... simply because they could no longer monitor a crucial area of liability as needed...

I'd rather children not have laptops if the school is too damned stupid to let people know they don't have privacy when using them.

It is a gov't laptop, not a personal laptop... NOT A PERSONAL LAPTOP... not PERSONAL property...

Yeah, I know.

I most certainly oppose the webcam monitoring... keystrokes, internet cache, file monitoring, however, no issue... The school is perfectly within its powers to monitor the occurrences taking place on the school's property... And the laptop is SCHOOL PROPERTY...

Yes, it is perfectly entitled to do so, but only so far as they are not violating people's privacy. They can't put cameras in the toilets, they can't steal credit card details.

EDIT: IF it was an issue of the kid taking an inappropriate photo of himself on the webcam, and saving it to the disk of the laptop, I would consider this in its entirety a non-issue...

It isn't, as I understand it.

[Tekania]

It doesn't matter who owns the property, they can't use it to violate someone else's privacy.

Webcam is illicit... keystroke monitor isn't.... webcam extends into another's property, keystroke monitor is limited to their property...

There is every need. Sensitive information can be sent with a computer. If that information is being recorded, the end user needs to be told. Failing to tell them, in my opinion, creates an assumption of privacy.

Consider, my parents own a liquor store. They also own the credit card reader by the till. They could, hypothetically, install a card skimmer to record people's credit card details. Do they have the right to do this, without informing their customers? No, of course not. And in the same way, the school does not have the right to the same information, sent over their laptop. If they're going to be handing these laptops out, they need to tell people that their use of the laptops will be monitored, and information on it is not private.

The system itself records ALL pertinent information from the card, those readers can be used to RERUN and edit those transactions, and you can pull out details on every account number ran in a batch cycle... So this does not help your view point... It's based on a false assumption that the STORE does not have access to the CUSTOMERS personal information during the transaction; the store does, as they have a right to... There was never ANY privacy between the store owner and the customer; anymore than there can be between the student and the school in such a case... When it comes to information on or through the laptop there never is, never can be and never should be an expectation of privacy on the part of the person who is simply been authorized to use the laptop for educational purposes...

I'd rather children not have laptops if the school is too damned stupid to let people know they don't have privacy when using them.

IF someone doesn't KNOW they don't have privacy while using a piece of equipment that is not theirs... Then the "stupid one" isn't the "School".. it's the students and parents...

Yes, it is perfectly entitled to do so, but only so far as they are not violating people's privacy. They can't put cameras in the toilets, they can't steal credit card details.

Keystroke monitoring =/= cameras in the bathroom... Especially when you consider a piece of EDUCATIONAL equipment...

It isn't, as I understand it.

It isn't, but if he did, such monitoring of the file system to see this having happened would NOT be illicit, nor should it be, since there NEVER WAS any reasonable expectation of privacy of stored files on the part of the student...

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Free laptops... now why didn't I think of that?

[Antilon]

Free laptops... now why didn't I think of that?

Don't you believe in pie-and-mud educational institutions?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Free laptops... now why didn't I think of that?

Don't you believe in pie-and-mud educational institutions?

Well, not just pie and mud. That's reserved for first period and phys. ed.

[Ifreann]

It doesn't matter who owns the property, they can't use it to violate someone else's privacy.

Webcam is illicit... keystroke monitor isn't.... webcam extends into another's property, keystroke monitor is limited to their property...

Which by no means precludes violation of someone else's privacy.

There is every need. Sensitive information can be sent with a computer. If that information is being recorded, the end user needs to be told. Failing to tell them, in my opinion, creates an assumption of privacy.

Consider, my parents own a liquor store. They also own the credit card reader by the till. They could, hypothetically, install a card skimmer to record people's credit card details. Do they have the right to do this, without informing their customers? No, of course not. And in the same way, the school does not have the right to the same information, sent over their laptop. If they're going to be handing these laptops out, they need to tell people that their use of the laptops will be monitored, and information on it is not private.

The system itself records ALL pertinent information from the card, those readers can be used to RERUN and edit those transactions, and you can pull out details on every account number ran in a batch cycle... So this does not help your view point... It's based on a false assumption that the STORE does not have access to the CUSTOMERS personal information during the transaction; the store does, as they have a right to...

Account numbers and names, but not PINs. We don't get enough information to steal from their accounts.

There was never ANY privacy between the store owner and the customer; anymore than there can be between the student and the school in such a case... When it comes to information on or through the laptop there never is, never can be and never should be an expectation of privacy on the part of the person who is simply been authorized to use the laptop for educational purposes...

But if the school doesn't tell people that, they could well expect they have some privacy. Wrongfully, perhaps, but none the less.

I'd rather children not have laptops if the school is too damned stupid to let people know they don't have privacy when using them.

IF someone doesn't KNOW they don't have privacy while using a piece of equipment that is not theirs... Then the "stupid one" isn't the "School".. it's the students and parents...

Or, you know, both.

Yes, it is perfectly entitled to do so, but only so far as they are not violating people's privacy. They can't put cameras in the toilets, they can't steal credit card details.

Keystroke monitoring =/= cameras in the bathroom... Especially when you consider a piece of EDUCATIONAL equipment...

Because you sure couldn't use keystroke monitoring to steal credit card details. Nope, not a chance that keystroke monitoring could monitor the keystrokes someone uses to buy things online. Nope.

It isn't, as I understand it.

It isn't, but if he did, such monitoring of the file system to see this having happened would NOT be illicit, nor should it be, since there NEVER WAS any reasonable expectation of privacy of stored files on the part of the student...

You'd think the school might have mentioned that when giving out the laptops. But then, I suppose that would make it harder to spy on people with the webcams.

[Axis Nova]

Looks like the FBI is getting involved.

http://cbs3.com/local/Lower.Merion.Scho ... 06516.html

Also, the big reason for the principal's report?

*drumroll*

The kid was holding a piece of candy and she mistook it for a pill.

[Sarzonia]

I used to work for a college where the IT staff would monitor every e-mail sent, or that people would attempt to send.

If you tried to criticise the IT department in the course of an e-mail, you mysteriously received an error message even if you'd just sent an e-mail to the same person without the criticism and it went through.

I don't know if that practice continues there or not...

[Bazatia]

I just read a story about why the school used the webcams like that, they were using them to "find lost laptops". Apparently that school's IT personnel don't know anything, or else they would know they could buy programs that are basically lo-jack for computers

[Bazatia]

I used to work for a college where the IT staff would monitor every e-mail sent, or that people would attempt to send.

If you tried to criticise the IT department in the course of an e-mail, you mysteriously received an error message even if you'd just sent an e-mail to the same person without the criticism and it went through.

I don't know if that practice continues there or not...

[Ifreann]

I just read a story about why the school used the webcams like that, they were using them to "find lost laptops". Apparently that school's IT personnel don't know anything, or else they would know they could buy programs that are basically lo-jack for computers

Using a webcam to find a stolen computer is a pretty stupid way to go about it.

[Bazatia]

I just read a story about why the school used the webcams like that, they were using them to "find lost laptops". Apparently that school's IT personnel don't know anything, or else they would know they could buy programs that are basically lo-jack for computers

Using a webcam to find a stolen computer is a pretty stupid way to go about it.

Pretty much, so either they are incredibly dumb or *fwap* *fwap* *fwap* was the goal in mind.

[Tekania]

[the peanut gallery speaks]

"The laptop computers that will be issued to all Lower Merion and Harriton students are the property of Lower Merion School District. Students are responsible for the appropriate use of these laptops both at school and at home. The laptops are for the use of students for educational purposes. All commercial, illegal, unethical and inappropriate use of these laptops is expressly prohibited....

...shall not be used:
...
for gambling or commercial purposes or for any non-school related
purposes;"

[1] The laptop is school property, not personal property...
[2] Students are responsible for their use at home as well as school
[3] Commercial use is prohibited...
[4] non-school related purposes are also prohibited...

Perhaps I should come to your parents store, write my credit card info on a yellow sticky... and plaster it on the front their register, then turn around get a lawyer and sue them for violating my privacy... Because this makes about as much sense as what you're saying... Which is none what-so-ever... The laptop's are not for processing credit cards... they are not for checking facebook... they are not for playing games, they are not for tons of shit... so to claim a right to privacy in a case where you're illegally appropriating equipment (read stealing) is absurd... There is absolutely no expectation of privacy on the property of another...

[Ifreann]

[the peanut gallery speaks]

Peanut gallery? Cute.

"The laptop computers that will be issued to all Lower Merion and Harriton students are the property of Lower Merion School District. Students are responsible for the appropriate use of these laptops both at school and at home. The laptops are for the use of students for educational purposes. All commercial, illegal, unethical and inappropriate use of these laptops is expressly prohibited....

...shall not be used:
...
for gambling or commercial purposes or for any non-school related
purposes;"

[1] The laptop is school property, not personal property...
[2] Students are responsible for their use at home as well as school
[3] Commercial use is prohibited...
[4] non-school related purposes are also prohibited...

See, that's fair enough.

Perhaps I should come to your parents store, write my credit card info on a yellow sticky... and plaster it on the front their register, then turn around get a lawyer and sue them for violating my privacy... Because this makes about as much sense as what you're saying... Which is none what-so-ever...

What is it exactly you think I'm saying?

The laptop's are not for processing credit cards... they are not for checking facebook... they are not for playing games, they are not for tons of shit... so to claim a right to privacy in a case where you're illegally appropriating equipment (read stealing) is absurd...

Stealing? What?

There is absolutely no expectation of privacy on the property of another...

That rather depends on the situation, doesn't it?