Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!decwrl!uunet!snorkelwacker!apple!rutgers!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f
From: gl8f@astsun.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Stoll and privacy issues
Message-ID: <1990Oct5.022152.20894@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 5 Oct 90 02:21:52 GMT
References: <1990Oct04.211114.9489@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu>
Sender: news@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Lines: 17

In article <1990Oct04.211114.9489@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu> zippy@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Patrick Tufts) writes:

>The Epson case is a better example of privacy invasion.  Remember,
>tho, that many computer centers get you to sign a 'no privacy on this
>system' waver.  I wonder if Epson spelled that out to employees?

I was recently talking to a random undergraduate from an Ivy League
institution who said that not only did they have to sign such a
waiver, but that the systems people read their mail frequently. That
is, their mail wasn't read if they were suspected, but mail was
randomly sampled.

Is this common? If my institution had such a policy I wouldn't like it
one bit.

--
"Restraint, hell. I'm just too fucking busy." -- Bill Wisner