Corporate E-mail monitoring
Moderator: Moderators
Corporate E-mail monitoring
So, I have always been in favor of a company's right to read the e-mails of their employees on the company sever. But recently, a thought occured to me about it. Every day, more and more people switch from standard mail, to electronic mail, and if I were to open up a letter sent to an employee that worked for me, it would be a felony. I guess I was wondering how everyone else felt about the issue, because I'm a little torn on it now.
General Scott wrote:The only unforgivable mistake is a common one.
Sometimes to fight the darkness, one must walk in shadows.
sabs wrote:DUDE REALLY?
You just skullfucked a zombie post from 2005 just to say Thumbs up?
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Corporations should be allowed to monitor an read emails sent to corporate addresses as long it is made unambiguously clear to both employees and anyone sending them emails that they are in the public record. Ideally this would be indicated in the address itself, but it's a bit late for that. This should be true of government correspondence as well. In fact, the emails should all be publicly accessible to any interested party (member of relevant corporation or governance).
Employees also have to be allowed to maintain email addresses which are completely private, but should not be used for official correspondence that belongs in the public record (I'm looking at you, Sarah Palin).
Employees also have to be allowed to maintain email addresses which are completely private, but should not be used for official correspondence that belongs in the public record (I'm looking at you, Sarah Palin).
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
You can't do this, because many gov. depts. deal with people's personal lives. A person has the right to expect that their emails with their tax details will not become public property.CatharzGodfoot wrote:This should be true of government correspondence as well. In fact, the emails should all be publicly accessible to any interested party (member of relevant corporation or governance).
Likewise, legal advice and sensitive documents are often sent by email and need to remain private.
Check your local privacy laws.
I'm of the opinion that you should not read emails and have company policy to delete them within a few days, to reduce exposure to law suits. Reading and archiving email is just waiting for something embarrassing to come out.
King Francis I's Mother said wrote:The love between the kings was not just of the beard, but of the heart
- PoliteNewb
- Duke
- Posts: 1053
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:23 am
- Location: Alaska
- Contact:
This is dead on...I work for a state agency, and we get a lot of highly private information sent to us by clients (members of the public) we're trying to serve. All that stuff has to be kept in strictest confidence, and there are some pretty severe penalties for failing to do so.Blasted wrote:You can't do this, because many gov. depts. deal with people's personal lives. A person has the right to expect that their emails with their tax details will not become public property.CatharzGodfoot wrote:This should be true of government correspondence as well. In fact, the emails should all be publicly accessible to any interested party (member of relevant corporation or governance).
Likewise, legal advice and sensitive documents are often sent by email and need to remain private.
This, on the other hand, does not work for us...because by statute, we have to keep everything case-related (including emails, if they pertain to a case) for seven years...in case it is relevant to a future court proceeding or formal hearing.
I'm of the opinion that you should not read emails and have company policy to delete them within a few days, to reduce exposure to law suits. Reading and archiving email is just waiting for something embarrassing to come out.
It probably is good policy to delete as much as possible, and (if feasible) convert it to a more formal memorandum (rather than keeping the original email) for the file, if you need to keep such things.
I am judging the philosophies and decisions you have presented in this thread. The ones I have seen look bad, and also appear to be the fruit of a poisonous tree that has produced only madness and will continue to produce only madness.
--AngelFromAnotherPin
believe in one hand and shit in the other and see which ones fills up quicker. it will be the one you are full of, shit.
--Shadzar
--AngelFromAnotherPin
believe in one hand and shit in the other and see which ones fills up quicker. it will be the one you are full of, shit.
--Shadzar
-
- Duke
- Posts: 2434
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Re: Corporate E-mail monitoring
We have to keep those records in case someone submits a Right To Information request. Since the government email system is run on tax dollars we also have to make sure its used appropriately, so email is subject to being read.KaNT wrote:So, I have always been in favor of a company's right to read the e-mails of their employees on the company sever. But recently, a thought occured to me about it. Every day, more and more people switch from standard mail, to electronic mail, and if I were to open up a letter sent to an employee that worked for me, it would be a felony. I guess I was wondering how everyone else felt about the issue, because I'm a little torn on it now.
PoliteNewb is spot on. Extra bonus notice, never send anything to a government agency that you wouldn't want turning up in an investigation. Everything that makes it past the spam filters is recorded prior to it reaching the employee. Even if they delete it without reading it theres a copy. My understanding is that US agencies have similar requirements and systems.
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 723
- Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:23 am
It would be nice if corporate email policies were made abundantly clear to some of the old guard. It makes me laugh when some chick in her 50s saves every work email she's ever received because she thinks trading scrap-booking ideas with someone the next office over is inexplicably subject to HIPAA compliance.
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
And here I thought scrap- booking was handled by FISMA
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Corporate emails belong to the corporation. Someone who sends private emails using their corporate email address is an idiot. You should have your own private email address for private emails. And be sure to read them in an encrypted client. Or better yet, don't read them from work, Corporations often sniff packets at the firewall level.
- PoliteNewb
- Duke
- Posts: 1053
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 1:23 am
- Location: Alaska
- Contact:
My guess is that if someone leaned on Google hard enough, they would be both willing and able to supply those emails, and it's entirely possible a court would back them up as having the right to do so.Falgund wrote:Does this means that emails sent using a gmail address do belong to Google ?
I mean, of course Google knows everything about its users, so why not the content their private emails.
Email is not the USPS. There is no inherent expectation of privacy, as far as I'm aware...even if it may be implied and for the most part de facto. Whether or not it's de jure...I have no idea. Read the TOS with a fine tooth comb, or better yet, have a lawyer do it for you.
I am judging the philosophies and decisions you have presented in this thread. The ones I have seen look bad, and also appear to be the fruit of a poisonous tree that has produced only madness and will continue to produce only madness.
--AngelFromAnotherPin
believe in one hand and shit in the other and see which ones fills up quicker. it will be the one you are full of, shit.
--Shadzar
--AngelFromAnotherPin
believe in one hand and shit in the other and see which ones fills up quicker. it will be the one you are full of, shit.
--Shadzar
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
Under a Patriot Act request, the police can just get your email without a judge.sabs wrote:US Judges have already ruled that email on a 3rd party mail system can be obtained through a subpoena to that 3rd party, and there is no need to serve the primary, or even inform them of the subpoena.
It's supposed to be for terrorism, but the cops use it for basically everything because there is no oversight and no penalties for abusing it.
That being said, most companies simply provide electronic records when asked. They really don't care about you and assume (correctly) that the cops will protect them from privacy laws. This is how all the warrant-less wiretapping was done in the Bush-era before the Patriot Act was passed, and it's been the model ever since.
Basically, never do anything online that you don't want the government to know about.
Last edited by K on Fri Sep 09, 2011 9:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Corporate emails are controlled by the corporation. I think that in theory everything you do with your work email is supposed to be work-related and therefore the corporation has every right to read it. As a practical matter the fact that they run the server the email resides on means they can read it at any time they feel like.
Also, corporations and government agencies should archive every email for some reasonably long period because responding to a legal inquiry about possible misconduct by saying you deleted a bunch of your email because it was unimportant looks incredibly shifty. After all, once the email is deleted there's no way to prove anything about its contents, so deleting it could potentially qualify as destroying evidence. There's no real reason to store it on an actual computer, though. Keep an email archive in the same manner as backups and you should be fine.
Also, corporations and government agencies should archive every email for some reasonably long period because responding to a legal inquiry about possible misconduct by saying you deleted a bunch of your email because it was unimportant looks incredibly shifty. After all, once the email is deleted there's no way to prove anything about its contents, so deleting it could potentially qualify as destroying evidence. There's no real reason to store it on an actual computer, though. Keep an email archive in the same manner as backups and you should be fine.
DSMatticus wrote:It's not just that everything you say is stupid, but that they are Gordian knots of stupid that leave me completely bewildered as to where to even begin. After hearing you speak Alexander the Great would stab you and triumphantly declare the puzzle solved.
Well, that's not entirely true. You do get some expectation of privacy, because the right to privacy is a constitutional right, "the First Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is protected from governmental intrusion." This is because of "penumbras, formed by emamanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance" (per Griswald v. Connecticut). It's a great outcome, but a really, really terrible reason.PoliteNewb wrote:My guess is that if someone leaned on Google hard enough, they would be both willing and able to supply those emails, and it's entirely possible a court would back them up as having the right to do so.Falgund wrote:Does this means that emails sent using a gmail address do belong to Google ?
I mean, of course Google knows everything about its users, so why not the content their private emails.
Email is not the USPS. There is no inherent expectation of privacy, as far as I'm aware...even if it may be implied and for the most part de facto. Whether or not it's de jure...I have no idea. Read the TOS with a fine tooth comb, or better yet, have a lawyer do it for you.
-
- Duke
- Posts: 2434
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
And that would matter at all if anybody at all actually used Griswold to determine what they should do in a privacy case, specifically the penumbra's part of it, that has been completely ignored as a justification in every single case since Griswold.fectin wrote:Well, that's not entirely true. You do get some expectation of privacy, because the right to privacy is a constitutional right, "the First Amendment has a penumbra where privacy is protected from governmental intrusion." This is because of "penumbras, formed by emamanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance" (per Griswald v. Connecticut). It's a great outcome, but a really, really terrible reason.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.