Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, August 7, 1993 TAG: 9308070137
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Newport News Daily Press
DATELINE: NEWPORT NEWS LENGTH: Long
Data Processing Director Robert Yorks said an investigation found the snooper was guilty of "gross misconduct" and invasion of privacy for printing out copies of electronic mail correspondence - called E-mail. As depicted in copies sent anonymously to the Newport News Daily Press, electronic conversations in the city's data processing department ranged from backbiting remarks about co-workers to conspiratorial grumblings, and from inscrutable computer jargon to sexually explicit love notes.
City officials and computer privacy experts say it's pointless to try to control what kind of messages people send on company E-mail - it's just the water cooler of the '90s. But they insist that electronic eavesdropping is wrong.
The fired employee, Ann Crawford, had worked as a programmer for the city for three years. Her lawyer, William Hoyle, said she hasn't denied looking at the messages but is challenging her dismissal.
With millions of office workers now using computer networks and electronic message systems, the Newport News case illustrates growing questions of computer privacy and personal conduct in the electronic office, experts said.
"There's going to be a whole slew of these issues arising as we move forward with technology," said Gerald Clarke, a Boston University expert on the design of electronic offices.
There is "no definitive answer from any court that I know of as to what defines a reasonable expectation of a right to privacy in regard to electronic mail," said I. Trotter Hardy, a College of William and Mary law professor who specializes in computer law.
Although Crawford was apparently acting on her own, the city case also raises the question of unconstitutional search and seizure by the government, which is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment, Hardy said.
Marc Rotenberg, the computer privacy advocate who likened the Newport News eavesdropping to "an on-line soap opera," said common sense would lead to the conclusion that E-mail should be considered private.
"In absence of ground rules, people can claim that there may not be an expectation of privacy," said Rotenberg, a Georgetown University law professor and director of the To me, it's just general knowledge that E-mail is not real secure, so I don't send anything across E-mail that I don't want other people to read. If I send something confidential, I send it in a private memo. Personally, all I do is send messages to departments if they need to be at a meeting. For chitchat, I just call someone. Brian Garrett City architect Washington office of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. "But I think as a matter of common sense, whether it's a computer or telephone or message in an envelope, most people understand you don't go around snooping in other people's mail."
Yorks, the city's data processing chief, characterized Crawford's action as "an invasion of privacy and, from my standpoint, a breakdown in the integrity of the people who do it."
His greatest concern, Yorks said, is that the incident raises doubt about the privacy of a computer network with electronic tentacles reaching into every corner of city government. The computer storehouse includes criminal-justice records, data on real estate and social-service benefits and the city payroll. He said about 2,000 people in the city government and the school system are able to hook into the E-mail system.
"To have someone do that kind of thing really detracts from the integrity of our department, and we would not have any credibility with our users if we have people like that hanging around," Yorks said.
"We have to be above question," he said. "If I have people who get into files and are looking at things, where does it stop? You can look at all kinds of data, and you just can't have that. We have a lot of data that's not for public consumption."
Many of the intercepted messages fall in the category of common office gossip, such as "She tells me how much work she does. But all I see is her talking on the phone."
Others are sexually explicit love notes. A less-explicit example: "Thoughts of you, seeing you, smelling you, things you say, mail you send get me that way. You just really excite me. And I want to be with you and hold you and make love with you."
"My only concern in the whole matter is that someone went into a file in unauthorized manner," Yorks said. "All this other stuff is water-fountain talk. I'm concerned about the security of files; I'm not concerned with problems of other people."
Although Yorks said there is no explicit city prohibition against looking at other people's E-Mail, he said, "I don't tell people, `Don't get into my desk drawer,' either."
Rotenberg, of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, agreed. "The fact that you can do something doesn't mean that you should do something," he said. "It's a grave mistake when you're talking about the expectation of privacy to take the frontier attitude that `whatever is not nailed down, I can take."'
The E-mail network is supposed to be secure from prying eyes, Yorks said. But the system is only as good as the people who operate it, he said.
He plans to issue a new policy statement reminding employees how to use the system. The system is supposed to be used for "official business," but Yorks said he does not intend an outright ban on personal use, because "there would be no way to enforce that."
"We're going to tell people to make judicious use of it," he said. "We don't want people sitting around writing novels all day. But at the same time, if someone sends a message saying, `Let's have lunch today,' I don't want people to feel they can't respond to that."
Some Newport News employees said they are wary of using E-mail for any confidential or personal communication. "Anyone who thinks E-mail is private has lost their mind," said one city official.
by CNB