[ale] [WAY OT] Ethics Question

[Chuck Huber]

On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 10:39:01PM -0500, Adrin wrote:
> If someone is doing some illegal on a system you admin, and you
> do nothing then you can be charged.

Close, but not quite precise.  You can be charged if it can be
proven that you had knowledge of the activity.  (There are 
other requirements about intent but not being a lawyer, I don't
know what they are.)  There's lots of activity that goes on on your
system that you have no knowledge about - especially transient
traffic like email and such.

Think, for a moment, about porno sites.  The "illegal" activity
in those cases would be distribution to a minor.  So the system
admin as well as the content provider must exercise due diligence
and reasonable effort to comply.  On the internet, it amounts to
"Click here if you're over 18" kinda thing.

Also consider Napster.  They were proven guilty of copyright
infringement because they had prior knowledge that their site
was being used to illegally distribute copyrighted material
and that they condoned the practice.  That's exactly what made
that case such a milestone.

> You know if he wanted to make the teacher sweat a little bit he could cut part of the
> email and let everyone know that this is not acceptable policy.

On the other hand, before you go pointing fingers and possibly
destroying someone's career, you had better make sure your marbles
are in a row and that there are no skeletons in your closet.
For instance... when was the last time you took a toke off a joint?
Do you think that the teacher's attorneys would never ever find
out about that?  While I used that as an example, it could be
anything that would discredit the witness.
When someone's fighting for their life, they
will use any means necessary to win, including destroying yours.

If this teacher has done this in the past and law enforcement
already has an investigation underway, then an anonymous letter
in the mail might be just what they need to get a warrant.  The
admin, in this case, should also document the fact that his
superiors took active measures to squash this.

i.e.  Have the admin send an email (something that can be
traced and submitted as evidence) to his superior stating that
he (the admin) doesn't think this is acceptable or lawful behavior,
and ask the boss what he should do about it.  If the boss is really
dumb, he'll reply back to the email.  If he's not so dumb, he'll
contact the admin verbally.  In either case, it establishes
the fact that the admin does NOT believe such activity falls
within the limits of the law, AND that he took active measures
to stop it.  That covers the admin's bases.  If the reply was
to do nothing, then the boss is risking himself.  If the reply
comes back in an email, then the boss just incriminated himself.
If the reply comes back verbally, then it's his word against the
admins.  He-said-she-said.

Hopefully, you'll get an email.  That in itself shows that 
officials of the school system are allowing a culture of such
activity to grow.  The ramifications trickle right on up to the
county superintendant.

Of course, if the admin is *certain* such activity is going on,
he could attempt to collect fruther evidence.  Perhaps another
email, or some files in a home directory that just happen to get
backed up.

Perhaps the best way to answer your question is to place yourself
in the shoes of the recipient of the abuse.  Would you want
this to go on?  Would you want someone with enough gonads to
step in and have it stopped?

Hope this helps.

Enjoy,
    - Chuck

-- 
"The purpose of encryption is to protect good people
from bad people, not to protect bad people from the government."
     Scott McNealy, CEO Sun Microsystems
"The best way for government to control people is to remain in
   a constant threat of war." ---Karl Marx
(18 USC 242), which applies to government agents overstepping their
authority:
  "Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation,
  or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory,
  or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or
  immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of
  the United States, . . . shall be fined under this title or
  imprisoned not more than one year, or both . . ."

---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.