Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical - Firewalls

This is a discussion on Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical - Firewalls ; In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says... > X-No-Archive: Yes > > "Leythos" wrote in message > news:MPG.21fb2f7712805f93989993@Adfree.usenet.com. .. > > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says... > >> and her school-mates were using my proxy, to > >> circumvent the school filters, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 60

Thread: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

  1. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > "Leythos" wrote in message
    > news:MPG.21fb2f7712805f93989993@Adfree.usenet.com. ..
    > > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > >> and her school-mates were using my proxy, to
    > >> circumvent the school filters,

    > >
    > > See, you support unethical activity, you help people circumvent rules
    > > put in place to protect the networks and resources. You are unethical.

    >
    >
    > To tune in, as their school-mate was competing at this skating
    > event, to me, shows school spirit, and is NOT unethical.


    To break Company/School policy for any reason is unethical - it doesn't
    matter what the reason, and a personal reason makes it even more
    unethical, it's unethical to break policy when one exists.

    You are 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)

  2. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:

    > There is no POSSIBLE way the admins at Bob Jones


    > University could EVER figure out what she was up to.


    Are you dumb? As administrators, they have full control over the client, and
    could (technically) monitor whatever they want - including the execution of
    programs, URLs, screenshots, keyboard and mouse input...

  3. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    news:5ve4usF1m58jrU1@mid.dfncis.de...
    > Chilly8 wrote:
    >
    >> There is no POSSIBLE way the admins at Bob Jones

    >
    > > University could EVER figure out what she was up to.

    >
    > Are you dumb? As administrators, they have full control over the client,
    > and could (technically) monitor whatever they want - including the
    > execution of programs, URLs, screenshots, keyboard and mouse input...


    This was HER computer in HER dorm room. She would connect
    to her parent's computer from her own personal computer in the
    dorm room. Since it was her own personal computer, there
    would be no keyloggers, or anything like that put in by the
    university. Since the computer, in this case, was her property
    and not the school's property, they would have no way to
    use keyloggers or screenshot makers, or anything like that
    there.




  4. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Leythos" wrote in message
    news:MPG.21fba44bb04613d989998@Adfree.usenet.com.. .
    > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >> She told me that her parents
    >> did not agree with some parts of the Internet usage policy, so
    >> they set up an encrypted link on the parents broadband link at
    >> home. When she went to surf the Net, she would make an
    >> encrypted connection to her parents computer, and then
    >> surf the net from there. There is no POSSIBLE way the
    >> admins at Bob Jones University could EVER figure out
    >> what she was up to.

    >
    > Yes, there is a clear indicator that she was setup with an Encrypted
    > link to a residential site - as long as the policy does not permit such
    > links she could have her internet connection suspended.
    >
    > If she was found to have surfed, by means of inspecting her computer for
    > some reason, she could also have her connection suspended.


    This was HER computer, and was HER property, and NOT that
    of the unversity. That was done from her dorm room.



  5. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Leythos" wrote in message
    news:MPG.21fba4c0585cc5d9989999@Adfree.usenet.com. ..
    > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >> X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>
    >> "Leythos" wrote in message
    >> news:MPG.21fb2f7712805f93989993@Adfree.usenet.com. ..
    >> > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >> >> and her school-mates were using my proxy, to
    >> >> circumvent the school filters,
    >> >
    >> > See, you support unethical activity, you help people circumvent rules
    >> > put in place to protect the networks and resources. You are unethical.

    >>
    >>
    >> To tune in, as their school-mate was competing at this skating
    >> event, to me, shows school spirit, and is NOT unethical.

    >
    > To break Company/School policy for any reason is unethical - it doesn't
    > matter what the reason, and a personal reason makes it even more
    > unethical, it's unethical to break policy when one exists.
    >
    > You are unethical.


    ,
    ..

    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
    doing in both cases. As far as *I* was concerned, he
    was excerising his PARENTAL RIGHTS to know what
    his chidren were up to, and so giving him acccess to
    do that was NOT unethical.




  6. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    On Jan 19, 9:46 pm, "Chilly8" wrote:
    > This was HER computer, and was HER property, and NOT that
    > of the unversity. That was done from her dorm room.


    But it was not HER network connection but of the university which
    probably provided her with a free internet connection in her dorm room
    with certain restrictions and rules. It is unethical. She broke rules
    of a service which was provided free to her.

    Gerald


  7. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    news:adebdb65-0176-4524-88e5-adb68cd7fce3@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
    > On Jan 19, 9:46 pm, "Chilly8" wrote:
    >> This was HER computer, and was HER property, and NOT that
    >> of the unversity. That was done from her dorm room.

    >
    > But it was not HER network connection but of the university which
    > probably provided her with a free internet connection in her dorm room
    > with certain restrictions and rules. It is unethical. She broke rules
    > of a service which was provided free to her.



    However, her parents were fully within their legal rights to
    provide her with that encrypted connect. The TOS for their
    particular broadband provider allowed them to set up
    such a connection, so her parents were in the clear.



  8. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    On Jan 19, 9:56 pm, "Chilly8" 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.

    > his chidren were up to, and so giving him acccess to
    > do that was NOT unethical.


    So if he saw that his children were up to something and he jumped into
    his car to speed back home, breaking speed limits, breaking street
    laws, you would consider that, too, his parental right to check on his
    children and thus ethical? If you helped him to get quickly through
    some radar checks your doing would be ethical to help him to exercise
    his parental right?

    Or if he knew that from time to time his children would stay at some
    friend's place and he wanted to excersice his parental rights there,
    too, and he would thus secretly install some bugs and hidden cameras
    there because the friend's parents would never agree to that would you
    consider this ethical as well because it is just a parental right to
    check on his children? And if you help him to do that you think you
    are ethical?

    If you agree to work somewhere or agree to use some network resources
    at a dorm room you agree to comply with some rules. You usually sign
    those rules. Otherwise you would not get the job or you would not get
    network access granted. Breaking those rules is unethical. You agreed
    to comply with them and now you break them. You are always free to
    work somewhere else at a place with different rules or use some other
    way to access the internet at your dorm.

    Now, if you help someone breaking those rules you are unethical.

    Gerald





  9. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > I had a cousin some years ago in who wanted to check up on
    > his chidlren.. He worked


    So, you keep showing that YOU and people you know and help have a long
    unethical history of violating company policy for personal benefit.

    You and they are 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)

  10. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    > news:5ve4usF1m58jrU1@mid.dfncis.de...
    > > Chilly8 wrote:
    > >
    > >> There is no POSSIBLE way the admins at Bob Jones

    > >
    > > > University could EVER figure out what she was up to.

    > >
    > > Are you dumb? As administrators, they have full control over the client,
    > > and could (technically) monitor whatever they want - including the
    > > execution of programs, URLs, screenshots, keyboard and mouse input...

    >
    > This was HER computer in HER dorm room.


    You don't seem to understand, the students often sign or agree to having
    their communications monitored as part of the agreement for network
    service.

    --

    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)

  11. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    > news:adebdb65-0176-4524-88e5-adb68cd7fce3@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
    > > On Jan 19, 9:46 pm, "Chilly8" wrote:
    > >> This was HER computer, and was HER property, and NOT that
    > >> of the unversity. That was done from her dorm room.

    > >
    > > But it was not HER network connection but of the university which
    > > probably provided her with a free internet connection in her dorm room
    > > with certain restrictions and rules. It is unethical. She broke rules
    > > of a service which was provided free to her.

    >
    >
    > However, her parents were fully within their legal rights to
    > provide her with that encrypted connect. The TOS for their
    > particular broadband provider allowed them to set up
    > such a connection, so her parents were in the clear.


    No, the parents do not have ANY right to help her violate network
    policy, not at all.

    If the TOS permits remote connections for the purpose of surfing the
    web, to bypass restrictions, then yes, it would be permitted - but there
    is not a single school policy that states "You may use any means
    possible to subvert our network security or policy".

    --

    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)

  12. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Leythos" wrote in message
    news:MPG.21fbce2ea8fabb4e98999f@Adfree.usenet.com. ..
    > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >> X-No-Archive: Yes
    >>
    >> "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    >> news:adebdb65-0176-4524-88e5-adb68cd7fce3@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
    >> > On Jan 19, 9:46 pm, "Chilly8" wrote:
    >> >> This was HER computer, and was HER property, and NOT that
    >> >> of the unversity. That was done from her dorm room.
    >> >
    >> > But it was not HER network connection but of the university which
    >> > probably provided her with a free internet connection in her dorm room
    >> > with certain restrictions and rules. It is unethical. She broke rules
    >> > of a service which was provided free to her.

    >>
    >>
    >> However, her parents were fully within their legal rights to
    >> provide her with that encrypted connect. The TOS for their
    >> particular broadband provider allowed them to set up
    >> such a connection, so her parents were in the clear.

    >
    > No, the parents do not have ANY right to help her violate network
    > policy, not at all.


    Its the parents computer, and they can allow ANYONE to
    access their machine they want, as long as the AUP of the
    ISP allows the operation of servers from your connection.
    The parents where NOT breaking ANY laws provding
    their duaghter with the means to bypass the Bess filter.
    The computer back home in Kansas was the PROPERTY
    of the PARENTS, therefore they had the LEGAL RIGHT
    to allow anyone to access the machine they wanted, and,
    therefore, were NOT breaking ANY laws, in Kansas, where
    the parents lived. The parents were NOT SUBJECT to ANY
    prosecution for allowing their duaghter to access their home
    computer, under Kansas law.

    Its the same with all of us that operate public proxy
    servers, by they web proxies, Tor proxies, or whatever.
    We are NOT breaking ANY laws by allowing public
    access to our proxies. And since NONE of my
    proxies are in the United States, what comes
    through my proxy is NOT SUBJECT to United
    States laws.




  13. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes

    "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    news:a16642d4-15d0-4dec-a28d-222bacff4b69@c23g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
    > On Jan 19, 9:56 pm, "Chilly8" 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.



  14. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:


    > Using my proxy did NOT break ANY laws.



    It did. Will you accept it finally?


    (At any rate, why should we give anyone who abuses Outlook Express as a
    newsrader any technical and related juristic competence?)

  15. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    X-No-Archive: Yes


    "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    news:5vefu2F1lk8kpU2@mid.dfncis.de...
    > Chilly8 wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Using my proxy did NOT break ANY laws.

    >
    >
    > It did. Will you accept it finally


    No it did NOT. Using a proxy is NOT a criminal
    offence. It if were, Tor, and other aonymity services
    would not even EXIST.



  16. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article ,
    Jason@invalid.address.lan says...

    > Chilly is english not your native language?


    I don't think so - he's an American!
    ;^)

    Jim Ford

  17. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    On Jan 19, 11:21 pm, "Chilly8" wrote:
    > 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? The person who used your proxy broke corporate policies. Enough
    to get fired. You helped. You provided the service. Unethical.

    You can do many things without breaking any laws. It does not mean
    that they are considered ethical.

    Gerald

  18. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    Chilly8 wrote:

    > Using a proxy is NOT a criminal offence.



    Juristic offences don't solely consist of criminal offences... this one is
    clearly a civil law offence, specifically employment law.

    > It if were, Tor, and other aonymity services would not even EXIST.


    Nonsense. The one who uses them is the offender, not the one who provides
    the service.

  19. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > "Leythos" wrote in message
    > news:MPG.21fbce2ea8fabb4e98999f@Adfree.usenet.com. ..
    > > In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > >> X-No-Archive: Yes
    > >>
    > >> "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    > >> news:adebdb65-0176-4524-88e5-adb68cd7fce3@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
    > >> > On Jan 19, 9:46 pm, "Chilly8" wrote:
    > >> >> This was HER computer, and was HER property, and NOT that
    > >> >> of the unversity. That was done from her dorm room.
    > >> >
    > >> > But it was not HER network connection but of the university which
    > >> > probably provided her with a free internet connection in her dorm room
    > >> > with certain restrictions and rules. It is unethical. She broke rules
    > >> > of a service which was provided free to her.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> However, her parents were fully within their legal rights to
    > >> provide her with that encrypted connect. The TOS for their
    > >> particular broadband provider allowed them to set up
    > >> such a connection, so her parents were in the clear.

    > >
    > > No, the parents do not have ANY right to help her violate network


    Chilly, you sure post a lot of crap on this newsgroup.
    Little, if any, of it is related to Firewalls.

  20. Re: Wedding Planning Sites - NOT unethical

    In article , chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > X-No-Archive: Yes
    >
    > "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    > news:a16642d4-15d0-4dec-a28d-222bacff4b69@c23g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
    > > On Jan 19, 9:56 pm, "Chilly8" 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)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast