Re: Packet sniffing problems
chris_at_nospam.com
Date: 03/28/04
- Next message: Jeroen Wijnands: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Previous message: chris_at_nospam.com: "Re: email scan"
- In reply to: Thor Kottelin: "Re: Packet sniffing problems"
- Next in thread: Thor Kottelin: "Re: Packet sniffing problems"
- Reply: Thor Kottelin: "Re: Packet sniffing problems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:56:18 GMT
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:54:45 +0300, Thor Kottelin <thor@anta.net>
wrote:
>
>
>"Dom W." wrote:
>>
>> Recently, due to the dreaded "inappropriate surfing" problem, my boss
>> asked me to set up a way to monitor employee surfing habits on our
>> Windows 2000 server network.
>
>> The problem is that at my job we have
>> about 40 employees using only 4 different terminals. Thus, knowing
>> only the terminal used isn't much help. Each user has to enter a
>> login/password to access the system. Is it just not possible for a
>> packet sniffer to log this user info?
>
>Packet sniffers can only log information present in the packets you spy on.
>If you would like the persons you spy on to include their user name in every
>HTTP request, you must either ask or force them to do so.
>
>Btw., I hope you get caught and sued/prosecuted as appropriate. HTH. HAND.
>
>Thor
Why do you think he ought to be prosecuted? So long as the company
has a formal policy and the employees are properly notified of this
policy, he's in the clear. The company has every right to monitor the
use of their computers. The grey area is that they can't fire someone
for abusing the computers unless the employee has clear guidance on
appropriate use.
For the original poster, some of the web monitoring software can force
a user to login' to the proxy server before allowing surfing. This
also provides a great place to put a monitoring/acceptable use
statement. The alternative is getting every employee to sign a
written policy statement.
-Chris
- Next message: Jeroen Wijnands: "Re: fighting fire with fire as an approach to better network security?!?!?"
- Previous message: chris_at_nospam.com: "Re: email scan"
- In reply to: Thor Kottelin: "Re: Packet sniffing problems"
- Next in thread: Thor Kottelin: "Re: Packet sniffing problems"
- Reply: Thor Kottelin: "Re: Packet sniffing problems"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|