funsec mailing list archives
Re: guilty until proven innocent?
From: "Mary Landesman" <mlande () bellsouth net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:39:53 -0500
Well, I think the issue is a bit different where minors are concerned. Maybe it's dependent on the part of the country you live in, or the age of your children, but my son was in middle school when Internet access was first enabled and I remember there was a huge outcry from parents at that time. (I was not one of those complaining). Not long after that, CIPA (in Y2k) came into being and mandated that children must be protected from accessing certain types of online material if the schools were to continue receiving certain funds. And not long after that, EFF did a big study that was several pages long and simply concluded that blocking was inadequate but offered no constructive suggestions for what might be more effective. (No offense intended towards EFF). And this is just one of the many reasons monitoring is now being used. Yes. It is unfortunate. But I don't place it in the same category as phone taps, mail tampering, etc. And I truly don't know what else the schools are supposed to do. And regarding who owns the equipment because it's tax dollars - I donated some money to a forestry club recently to help build a bridge. Does this mean I own (part of) that bridge? :-) Seriously, though, I don't think that tax dollars are any different than charitable donations. It's a citizen/civic obligation and once the money passes hands, so does the ownership. But that's just my opinion. -- Mary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blue Boar" <BlueBoar () thievco com> To: "Mary Landesman" <mlande () bellsouth net> Cc: "'FunSec [List]'" <funsec () linuxbox org> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:07 PM Subject: Re: [funsec] guilty until proven innocent? Mary Landesman wrote:
It is, after all, the school's property and they have a right and need to protect both that property and the students who use it. I do think, however, they should be required to notify both
kids
and parents that the systems are being monitored (something my son's
school
does do).
The adult version of that is not minding if your usage of libraries and other public buildings is monitored, etc... or if the phone company listens in on your calls, or the post office reads your mail, etc... (IMNSHO, it's not "their" property, it's yours and mine. Government-owned stuff is different.) BB _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- RE: guilty until proven innocent?, (continued)
- RE: guilty until proven innocent? Larry Seltzer (Jan 21)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Mary Landesman (Jan 23)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Nick FitzGerald (Jan 23)
- RE: guilty until proven innocent? Larry Seltzer (Jan 23)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Blue Boar (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Drsolly (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Mary Landesman (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Blue Boar (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Mary Landesman (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Blue Boar (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Mary Landesman (Jan 24)
- Re[2]: guilty until proven innocent? Pierre Vandevenne (Jan 24)
- Re: Re[2]: guilty until proven innocent? Mary Landesman (Jan 24)
- RE: guilty until proven innocent? Gary Funck (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Nick FitzGerald (Jan 23)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Drsolly (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Blue Boar (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Drsolly (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Blue Boar (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Austin (Jan 24)
- Re: guilty until proven innocent? Dude VanWinkle (Jan 27)
- RE: guilty until proven innocent? Gary Funck (Jan 28)