mailing list archives
Re: You shady bastards.
From: "J. Oquendo" <sil () infiltrated net>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:57:52 -0400
As mentioned multiple times by multiple posters, but apparently eluded
your reading, the recipient's consent:
A) May have never been given
B) May have expired with the employment contracts
C) May not apply at all if the monitoring party was not given
authorization by the company
You're basing your arguments on assumption...
A) I don't know ... Do you?
B) Most contracts have expiry dates on NDA's if signed. More then likely
with a security company.
C) You don't know. I don't know.
We can infer from B) and C) that 1) recipient worked for a security
company. 2) More than likely
signed an NDA or contractual agreement 3) Because they are a security
company in place, they
*should have* had some form of policy in place detailing things.
So if 2 and 3 are correct, there is no law broken period. So re-posting:
/ *SNIPPET * /
"Courts have held that the wiretap law required interception in
transmission before - finding that
seizing of a computer gaming company's email, perusing a secure website
under false pretenses,
reading an independent insurance agent's corporate email, installing and
using tracking cookies,
and even hacking into a computer and retrieving email does not violate
the wiretap law.
/ * STOP FOR A SECOND * /
See the last sentence?
/* SNIPPET * /
The courts have observed that to "intercept" something, according to the
dictionary, is "to stop,
seize, or interrupt in progress or course before arrival" and therefore
that "a contemporaneous
interception - i.e., an acquisition during flight - is required to
implicate the Wiretap Act.
/* STOP AGAIN */
See this last sentence?
/* SNIPPET */
Several court cases have upheld that checking email after transmission
is legal (i.e. email auditing),
since it is viewed as no different than searching through a file in an
/* END SNIPPET */
So before I go on... May I ask you how many times have you dealt with
these issues or
anything like them in court? Care to ask me the same?
See: "The Ordinary Course of Business Exception"
echo infiltrated.net|sed 's/^/sil@/g'
"Wise men talk because they have something to say;
fools, because they have to say something." -- Plato
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: You shady bastards. Jay Sulzberger (Jun 06)
Re: You shady bastards. Larry Seltzer (Jun 06)
Re: You shady bastards. Brian Anderson (Jun 06)