Return-Path: <sentto-279987-2188-1001124798-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com> Delivered-To: fc@all.net Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 21 Sep 2001 19:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 2135 invoked by uid 510); 22 Sep 2001 02:14:12 -0000 Received: from n8.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.58) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 22 Sep 2001 02:14:12 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-2188-1001124798-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.1.224] by fk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 22 Sep 2001 02:13:46 -0000 X-Sender: fc@big.all.net X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 22 Sep 2001 02:13:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 99629 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2001 02:13:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by 10.1.1.224 with QMQP; 22 Sep 2001 02:13:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO big.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta2 with SMTP; 22 Sep 2001 02:13:46 -0000 Received: (from fc@localhost) by big.all.net (8.9.3/8.7.3) id TAA32342 for iwar@onelist.com; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 19:13:46 -0700 Message-Id: <200109220213.TAA32342@big.all.net> To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List) Organization: I'm not allowed to say X-Mailer: don't even ask X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net> Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 19:13:45 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Subject: [iwar] [fc:US.panel.sets.compromise.over.cyber.surveillance.of.judges] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit US panel sets compromise over cyber surveillance of judges ANANOVA, 9/21/01 http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_403814.html A judicial panel in the US has decided jurors and court employees should have some of their internet activities monitored, but not their email. The move establishes a policy for around 30,000 federal court employees, including around 1,800 judges. It comes after judges objected to a proposal to allow unlimited surveillance. They feared illegal snooping by administrators in Washington. The Judicial Conference approved a compromise allowing some tracking of internet use, such as to identify whether pornography or music had been downloaded. US District Judge Edwin Nelson of Birmingham, Alabama, says the constitution gives judges independence in decision-making, but did not place them above the law or free them from responsibility and accountability. Judges had moved against an earlier proposal that would have required them and their employees to agree to unlimited monitoring of their email and internet use. The new plan accommodates their concerns by omission - it doesn't mention email and has removed the earlier reference to 'unlimited' monitoring. A recent study by the University Of Denver's Privacy Foundation estimated that a third of all US workers with internet access are routinely monitored. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get your FREE VeriSign guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions, securing intranets, and more! http://us.click.yahoo.com/XrFcOC/m5_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-09-29 21:08:47 PDT