Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62

Thread: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

  1. #41
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article <fmt11t$hn3$1@aioe.org>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > "Gerald Vogt" <vogt@spamcop.net> wrote in message
    > news:a16642d4-15d0-4dec-a28d-222bacff4b69@c23g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
    > > On Jan 19, 9:56 pm, "Chilly8" <chil...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > >> I had a cousin some years ago in who wanted to check up on
    > >> his chidlren.. He worked
    > >> at an office quite a ways away, with a long commute to work,
    > >> so I set him up on my proxy, at the time, where he could
    > >> log in to his home computer, and check up on what his
    > >> then teenage children were up to. It is NOT unethical
    > >> to help a parent check up on their children, which I was

    > >
    > > It is unethical to help someone break company rules which are
    > > implemented to protect the company networks and network resources.
    > >
    > >> doing in both cases. As far as *I* was concerned, he
    > >> was excerising his PARENTAL RIGHTS to know what

    > >
    > > He has a lot of rights but that does not give him the right to break
    > > rules or laws.

    >
    > Using my proxy did NOT break ANY laws. I must say it AGAIN
    > that using my proxy, to check up on his then-teenage children
    > DID NOT break ANY laws.


    And, yet, the person that used your proxy could get fired for such a
    violation of company policy - and if you instructed the person on how to
    violate the policy you could be liable for his loss and the companies
    loss if their network is compromised by that violation.

    --

    Leythos
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  2. #42
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article <fmt0te$h0o$1@aioe.org>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > The parents where NOT breaking ANY laws provding
    > their duaghter with the means to bypass the Bess filter.


    The computer, while personal property, the user is subject to school
    rules while it's on their (school) network - the user agreed to that
    when they were given access (in 99% of all cases I know of) and that
    means they agreed to NOT violate policy.

    Personal computer, privately owned, it doesn't matter - when you are on
    someone else's network you play by their rules or suffer any penalty the
    network owner wants.

    You continue to show that you're unethical.

    --

    Leythos
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  3. #43
    Gary
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote in his original post:

    > I did turn one of my proxies back on for a few minutes to see what
    > people are using my proxy for, when surfing from work,

    ....
    > Any employer that would ban sites for planning a WEDDING is
    > NUTS. There is NOTHING unethical about using the company
    > networks to surf wedding-related sites for planning a wedding.

    ....
    > I feel good knowing that I was helping someone be able to plan their
    > special day, from work, without the boss being able to know what
    > he/she was up to.


    Well, Chilly8, one might question the ethics of a proxy provider snooping
    on their users. I'm sure that if your anonymous wedding planner knew that
    the allegedly anonymous proxy server you're hosting was being so closely
    monitored they might not feel so special. Of course, I'm merely assuming
    that your proxy is advertised as such but, as the rest of this thread
    seems to imply your lack of cluefulness in general in this discussion,
    don't you find it a bit ironic that you're the one raising the indignant
    moralist flag in this situation?

    As for the matter of company bandwidth usage, employers are well within
    their rights to limit staff use of company resources whether it be using
    the postage meter for personal mail, long distance calls to grandma, or
    printing your pictures of your ass on the color printer. The same goes for
    bandwidth consumption. So if your network admin wishes to restrict
    peer-to-peer traffic, flash or ActiveX controls, streaming audio/video, or
    any manner of site filtering/blocking, that's their right to do so as they
    are paying for the bandwidth and for the IT staff that maintains the
    network and cleans the cruft out of your bot net virus infected PC that
    wouldn't need scrubbing if you hadn't been looking at pictures of wedding
    porn in the first place.

    -Gary

  4. #44
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article <73e7.479398b4.b15c9@efn.org>, garyd@efn.org.spamsux says...
    > Well, Chilly8, one might question the ethics of a proxy provider snooping
    > on their users. I'm sure that if your anonymous wedding planner knew that
    > the allegedly anonymous proxy server you're hosting was being so closely
    > monitored they might not feel so special.


    See, you've exposed him when we were just going to let him hang himself
    in his own statements....

    --

    Leythos
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  5. #45
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Gary" <garyd@efn.org.spamsux> wrote in message
    news:73e7.479398b4.b15c9@efn.org...
    > Chilly8 wrote in his original post:
    >
    >> I did turn one of my proxies back on for a few minutes to see what
    >> people are using my proxy for, when surfing from work,

    > ...
    >> Any employer that would ban sites for planning a WEDDING is
    >> NUTS. There is NOTHING unethical about using the company
    >> networks to surf wedding-related sites for planning a wedding.

    > ...
    >> I feel good knowing that I was helping someone be able to plan their
    >> special day, from work, without the boss being able to know what
    >> he/she was up to.

    >
    > Well, Chilly8, one might question the ethics of a proxy provider snooping
    > on their users. I'm sure that if your anonymous wedding planner knew that
    > the allegedly anonymous proxy server you're hosting was being so closely


    Actually, I am not normally able to monitor what goes on. THAT
    proxy is a filtered proxy for my network, not meant for public
    consumption. The script kiddies that were scanning my site
    found it and posted it to the various public proxy sites. It turns
    out that some filtering proxies have a GAPING security hole
    that allows anyone from around the world to surf through the
    proxy,

    The proxy that IS meant for public consumptoin, the Tor entry
    proxy, I could not monitor that if I wanted to, which is
    why I now advocate people use the Tor proxy, when coming
    from work, because you merely go from machine to another
    random machine on the Onion Router network. By using
    the Tor proxy, instead of the filtering proxy, which was
    found and posted, your activities CANNOT BE
    MONITORED, either by me, OR by your emplyer.

    The Tor proxy is there to allow people to use Tor,
    without having to install the software, very handy
    for people on school or work computers that are
    locked down against installation of new software.

    > As for the matter of company bandwidth usage, employers are well within
    > their rights to limit staff use of company resources whether it be using
    > the postage meter for personal mail, long distance calls to grandma, or
    > printing your pictures of your ass on the color printer.


    There was a radio station in the America some years
    ago that had a contest for some hard-to-get concert
    tickets, of "Fax us a picture of your butt", where people
    had to take a picture of their backside on the company
    copy machine, and then fax that to the radio station,
    where they would decide who had the best backside.
    The winner got tickets to a New Kids On The Block
    concert, which was one of the hottest tickets anywhere,
    at that time.

    This morning DJ crew was one of the zaniest DJs
    ever on morning radio in America, and that was a
    rather zany contest the did.



  6. #46
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    On Jan 20, 10:53*am, Gary <ga...@efn.org.spamsux> wrote:
    > Chilly8 wrote in his original post:
    >
    >
    >
    > > I did turn one of my proxies back on for a few minutes to see what
    > > people are using my proxy for, when surfing from work,

    > ...
    > > Any employer that would ban sites for planning a WEDDING is
    > > NUTS. There is NOTHING unethical about using the company
    > > networks to surf wedding-related sites for planning a wedding. *

    > ...
    > > I feel good knowing that I was helping someone be able to plan their
    > > special day, from work, without the boss being able to know what
    > > he/she was up to.

    >
    > Well, Chilly8, one might question the ethics of a proxy provider snooping
    > on their users. I'm sure that if your anonymous wedding planner knew that


    Well, I don't keep the logs very long. I erase the logs and overwrite
    them with Evidence Eliminator every couple days or so, so any tracks
    of what they are doing are GONE, becuase I use the DoD spec of 7
    repetitions of destruction, plus three different kinds of destructs
    each pass, for a total of 21 passes. If the DoD spec is used, not even
    an electron microscope is going to recover the data.

  7. #47
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article <998a1d33-bc1b-4f1f-a4da-
    0bfed47553cc@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    >
    > On Jan 20, 10:53*am, Gary <ga...@efn.org.spamsux> wrote:
    > > Chilly8 wrote in his original post:
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > > I did turn one of my proxies back on for a few minutes to see what
    > > > people are using my proxy for, when surfing from work,

    > > ...
    > > > Any employer that would ban sites for planning a WEDDING is
    > > > NUTS. There is NOTHING unethical about using the company
    > > > networks to surf wedding-related sites for planning a wedding. *

    > > ...
    > > > I feel good knowing that I was helping someone be able to plan their
    > > > special day, from work, without the boss being able to know what
    > > > he/she was up to.

    > >
    > > Well, Chilly8, one might question the ethics of a proxy provider snooping
    > > on their users. I'm sure that if your anonymous wedding planner knew that

    >
    > Well, I don't keep the logs very long. I erase the logs and overwrite
    > them with Evidence Eliminator every couple days or so, so any tracks
    > of what they are doing are GONE, becuase I use the DoD spec of 7
    > repetitions of destruction, plus three different kinds of destructs
    > each pass, for a total of 21 passes. If the DoD spec is used, not even
    > an electron microscope is going to recover the data.


    And there is no proof of that. You still show that you are UNETHICAL AND
    DISHONEST.

    --

    Leythos
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  8. #48
    Sebastian G.
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:


    > Well, I don't keep the logs very long. I erase the logs and overwrite
    > them with Evidence Eliminator every couple days or so, so any tracks
    > of what they are doing are GONE,



    Most likely they're not.

    > becuase I use the DoD spec of 7
    > repetitions of destruction, plus three different kinds of destructs
    > each pass, for a total of 21 passes. If the DoD spec is used, not even
    > an electron microscope is going to recover the data.



    The best, overly aggressive stream generation scheme won't help anything
    against a horribly bad implementation. Evidence Eliminator is such one.

  9. #49
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.221819459090d038989a17@Adfree.usenet.com...



    >And there is no proof of that. You still show that you are UNETHICAL AND
    >DISHONEST.


    I have EE scrub all the empty space one per day on the hard disk, and at
    3 passes per day, with all three destruction types used on each pass, that
    is
    equal to 63 passes per week, well above the DoD specs for destruction
    of data. So, after a week, any previously erased logs would certainly be
    unrecoverable, once the space they were in had been overwritten
    a total of 63 times.

    I have a program that can start EE as a service and automatically run
    the disk scrub once a day, and then re-boot the server.



  10. #50
    Sebastian G.
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:


    > I have EE scrub all the empty space one per day on the hard disk, and at
    > 3 passes per day, with all three destruction types used on each pass, that
    > is equal to 63 passes per week, well above the DoD specs for destruction
    > of data. So, after a week, any previously erased logs would certainly be
    > unrecoverable, once the space they were in had been overwritten
    > a total of 63 times.



    I already told that this is very unlikely since EE is a pile of shot doing
    it's job improperly (which is actually not so unexpected).

  11. #51
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in message
    news:619aliF1ubcc6U1@mid.dfncis.de...
    > Chilly8 wrote:
    >
    >
    >> I have EE scrub all the empty space one per day on the hard disk, and at
    >> 3 passes per day, with all three destruction types used on each pass,
    >> that is equal to 63 passes per week, well above the DoD specs for
    >> destruction
    >> of data. So, after a week, any previously erased logs would certainly be
    >> unrecoverable, once the space they were in had been overwritten
    >> a total of 63 times.

    >
    >
    > I already told that this is very unlikely since EE is a pile of shot doing
    > it's job improperly (which is actually not so unexpected).


    Well, it is effective enough to hinder law enforcement. There was
    one investigation service, in Britain, that did try, some years ago,
    to get the program banned in Britain, becuase they were hollering
    that if EE had been used, none of their investigators could recover
    the data.

    There have been growing calls by investigators and law enforcement
    in Britain.to ban the program, becuase THEY say the cannot
    recover data from a hard disk where EE has been used. As the
    slogan goes "EE works, and now it's official".



  12. #52
    Sebastian G.
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:


    > Well, it is effective enough to hinder law enforcement. There was
    > one investigation service, in Britain, that did try, some years ago,
    > to get the program banned in Britain, becuase they were hollering
    > that if EE had been used, none of their investigators could recover
    > the data.



    They were also following the wrong assumption that EE would do its job properly.


    > There have been growing calls by investigators and law enforcement
    > in Britain.to ban the program, becuase THEY say the cannot
    > recover data from a hard disk where EE has been used. As the
    > slogan goes "EE works, and now it's official".


    I'd say they were just unlucky or didn't try properly, since it's actually
    quite trivial to create situations where EE fails. Maybe you should take a
    look at the description of "SDelete"
    <http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897443.aspx> to get a
    clue what details you have to take care of, and EE doesn't.

  13. #53
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical


    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de> wrote in message
    news:61b3ppF1u0g36U1@mid.dfncis.de...
    > Chilly8 wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Well, it is effective enough to hinder law enforcement. There was
    >> one investigation service, in Britain, that did try, some years ago,
    >> to get the program banned in Britain, becuase they were hollering
    >> that if EE had been used, none of their investigators could recover
    >> the data.

    >
    >
    > They were also following the wrong assumption that EE would do its job
    > properly.
    >
    >
    >> There have been growing calls by investigators and law enforcement
    >> in Britain.to ban the program, becuase THEY say the cannot
    >> recover data from a hard disk where EE has been used. As the
    >> slogan goes "EE works, and now it's official".

    >
    > I'd say they were just unlucky or didn't try properly, since it's actually
    > quite trivial to create situations where EE fails. Maybe you should take a
    > look at the description of "SDelete"
    > <http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897443.aspx> to get a
    > clue what details you have to take care of, and EE doesn't.


    Well, when it comes to disk wiping software, I would tell people
    to find something other than EE, because of the fact that in the
    newer versions, they have "product activation",. which ties one
    copy of the program to one machine, which I consider to be
    highway robbery. That is the only reason I have not upgraded
    EE in quite a while, and will almost certainly go to one of their
    comptitors, such as Evidence Blaster, the next time I need to
    upgrade.



  14. #54
    Sebastian G.
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:

    > and will almost certainly go to one of their
    > comptitors, such as Evidence Blaster, the next time I need to
    > upgrade.



    As if this program would be any less incompetent...

  15. #55
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    Some people think there is no legimate person needs Evidence
    Eliminator? Think again?

    http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Custom...from_0211.html


    Since I often travel to, or through the USA, I scrub my disk in TWO
    steps. First, I have a "clean" disk image made with Norton Ghost. I
    Ghost my machine with that. Then I use Evdience Eliminator to clean up
    anything that Ghost would miss. If your travel takes you to, or
    through, the US, you MUST have Evidence Eliminator to clean up all the
    empty space in the disk, beucase all kinds of temporary files will be
    created, even if all your data resides on another server elsewhere.
    Ghosting the machine, followed by a session of EE, or any other
    programme like it, will ensure that Customs agents in America, as well
    as Australia and Canada (where they are also examining computers now)
    will not be able to recover it. If you travel internationally, you
    NEED some kind of disk wiping program, especially before entering
    America.


  16. #56
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article <f65b1e2c-ea9d-46e5-95ba-45045b375fd0
    @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > Some people think there is no legimate person needs Evidence
    > Eliminator? Think again?


    No, people are telling you that EE is not all that you think it is.

    All criminal types and those that are unethical need to hide their
    tracks.

    --

    Leythos
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  17. #57
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical


    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.22217b3410dc70a2989a44@Adfree.usenet.com...
    > In article <f65b1e2c-ea9d-46e5-95ba-45045b375fd0
    > @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >> Some people think there is no legimate person needs Evidence
    >> Eliminator? Think again?

    >
    > No, people are telling you that EE is not all that you think it is.
    >
    > All criminal types and those that are unethical need to hide their
    > tracks.


    Read the article, Customs can copy ANYTHING from your
    computer, even confidential company information. With all
    kinds of privacy laws, especially if any part of your business
    is in the EU, you could run afoul of EU laws, for what U.S.
    Customs copies off your hard drive. And it could cause
    problems with privacy laws in other countries. To keep your
    company information confidential, EE, or a programme like
    it is a MUST for those who travel internationally, especially
    to, or thorugh, the United States. This way they cannot get
    any temporary files you might generate while accessing your
    company network remotely. If you access your company
    network remotely, EE, or a program like it, is a MUST,
    so that if your computer is ever lost, seized, stolen, etc, etc,
    your confidential company data will STAY that way.



  18. #58
    Sebastian G.
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:

    > If your travel takes you to, or
    > through, the US, you MUST have Evidence Eliminator to clean up all the
    > empty space in the disk, beucase all kinds of temporary files will be
    > created, even if all your data resides on another server elsewhere.



    Well, didn't I already tell you that Evidence Eliminator is an unsuitable
    tool for such a purpose? It will leave traces in file slack, MFT, journaling
    log, USN journals, ...

  19. #59
    DevilsPGD
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In message <61qioiF20jtgaU1@mid.dfncis.de> "Sebastian G."
    <seppi@seppig.de> wrote:

    >Chilly8 wrote:
    >
    >> If your travel takes you to, or
    >> through, the US, you MUST have Evidence Eliminator to clean up all the
    >> empty space in the disk, beucase all kinds of temporary files will be
    >> created, even if all your data resides on another server elsewhere.

    >
    >
    >Well, didn't I already tell you that Evidence Eliminator is an unsuitable
    >tool for such a purpose? It will leave traces in file slack, MFT, journaling
    >log, USN journals, ...


    In fairness, US Customs doesn't have the expertise to evaluate such data
    unless you're declared a person of interest...

    Usually they're just surfing for porn or whatever else they can nab
    easily.

  20. #60
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article <fp8c4p$okf$1@aioe.org>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    > news:MPG.22217b3410dc70a2989a44@Adfree.usenet.com...
    > > In article <f65b1e2c-ea9d-46e5-95ba-45045b375fd0
    > > @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > >> Some people think there is no legimate person needs Evidence
    > >> Eliminator? Think again?

    > >
    > > No, people are telling you that EE is not all that you think it is.
    > >
    > > All criminal types and those that are unethical need to hide their
    > > tracks.

    >
    > Read the article, Customs can copy ANYTHING from your
    > computer, even confidential company information.


    If you are traveling with private information on your computer or
    company/medical data on your computer you are asking for trouble.

    Now, you failed to address what I responded it - EE is not all you think
    it is.


    --

    Leythos
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

Similar Threads

  1. Certain PARTS of sites take a long time to load
    By alpinemonkey in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 07-13-10, 06:39 PM
  2. Anniversary Church Wedding
    By Joint Chiefs of Staff in forum Digital Media and Photography
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-23-08, 05:37 AM
  3. connecting remote sites to main server help!
    By vintagecar in forum Networking Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-19-06, 08:57 AM
  4. The wedding Night
    By blacklab in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-16-06, 12:11 PM
  5. ZonedOut released-Manage IE Restricted Sites
    By Chachazz in forum Network Security
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-28-05, 03:05 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •