Re: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- From: comphelp@xxxxxxxxx (Todd H.)
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:17:31 -0500
CodeMonkey <acuttitta@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
A buddy of mine used to have a PC that didn't work through his
employer's network but tapped straight into the internet (not sure how
that setup worked, so just bear with me). Recently, they moved from a
wired network to a wireless one. To our knowledge, that machine is
still set up with a direct connection (he uses an external computer
system and it doesn't work well with the netowork).
A mutual friend of ours happened to mention the concept of a packet
sniffer to him and now he's completely paranoid about using said PC
for anything other than the strictest of business. A day gets boring,
so you hit a few of your gaming forums, browse a bunch of news sites,
and maybe doing some instant messaging (GMail ftw!), whatever. No,
he's not hitting porn; he's bored, not a moron!
I've tried explaining to him that the only reason they're going to be
checking his traffic is if he's given them a reason to do so. He
busts his ass for the company, is almost always on time, works OT at
the drop of a hat, and is basically his boss's right hand man. Even
so, he won't so much as crack open his GMail now to check it during
the day out of fear of Big Brother watching.
So I ask: How likely is it that his IT department is bothering to sit
down and piece together his IM threads to find out about us talking
about Dr. Who's season finale? Sure they COULD do that, but does any
IT group turn that kind of stuff on by default, or is it only a "Yeah,
this is Jones up in Finance. I want to keep track of Larry
Riley...can you see what he's doing online?"
It varies from "almost certain because they're logging IM traffic
automagically and proxying it to the internet" to more along the lines
of what you're suggesting--auditing on an as needed basis if he's
screwing up in something else. Depends on teh size of the
organization, their risk tolerance, and IT infrastructure.
It also depends on what he signed in terms of paperwork when he was
hired.
I will share this though:
I know of a guy who worked for a large retail chain's front end
development staff. He had exchanged ongoing jocular banter between
him and a colleague that had a high incidence of Jerky Boys quotes.
It came to management's attention some how and they were both fired
for it. I don't have the entire story, so take that for what it's
worth, but there's reason to be extremely cautious with this.
Personally though, if my employer won't treat me like an adult and
allow me casual and resonable access to a personal email account
during the day, I don't wanna work for them.
If you want to keep them from being able to read your personal email,
that's where encryption and proxies come in.
Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- From: Skywise
- Re: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- From: Leythos
- Re: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- References:
- Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- From: CodeMonkey
- Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- Prev by Date: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- Next by Date: Losing part of the Internet-connection, from time to time.
- Previous by thread: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- Next by thread: Re: Likelihood of IT using a Packet Sniffer
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
