Harvard Defends Snooping on Employee Emails to Find Source of Media Leaks
March 12, 2013 11:19 AM
comment(s) - last by
Hunt for media source in cheating scandal appears to have led to a bigger scandal
Last year, a
. Approximately 125 students
including two captains of the basketball team
and players on the football, baseball, and hockey teams. The debate over the alleged cheating on a take-home exam in the large GOV 1310 "Introduction to Congress" class was hotly debated; collaboration was reportedly encouraged on earlier exams.
I. Email Snooping Outed, University Defends It
But the scandal itself may have been merely the clouds before the storm. Now Harvard is back in the news and under heavy criticism for combing employee emails, searching for the source of leaks of confidential emails involved in the cheating scandal.
The Boston Globe
The New York Times
were among the first to report on the violation of employee privacy.
on the topic.
The university acknowledged in the reports that it snooped on the password-protected university email accounts of its 16 resident deans, who sit on the board that probes academic misconduct. The resident dean involved in forwarding two emails was unidentified, but the breach was ruled "inadvertent" and no disciplinary action was taken.
Harvard's leading scorer was forced to withdraw due to the cheating scandal.
[Image Source: BroBible]
, dean of the
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
, dean of
, defended the search arguing that while "without precedent" it was necessary to protect student privacy from faculty and the media. The deans comment, "In every instance the actions and decisions in this case were motivated by the goals of protecting the integrity of our faculty-legislated processes and the privacy of our students."
In their comment, the deans state, "It was made clear at the time that absent clarification of what happened, an investigation would be required. No one came forward."
They claim that only the subject line, time, and name of sender of emails was searched, and that no emails were opened/read. Dean Smith and Harvard General Counsel Robert Iuliano approved the search, while Dean Hammonds supported it.
Harvard Dean Michael Smith approved the search of faculty emails. [Image Source: Harvard]
In a separate comment, Harvard President
, "I feel very comfortable that great care was taken to safeguard the privacy of all concerned, especially our students, and to protect the confidentiality of the Administrative Board process."
Jeff Neal, a spokesman for the university, adds, "Any assertion that Harvard routinely monitors e-mails -- for any reason -- is patently false."
II. No Student Emails Were Leaked by Faculty
But the university's stance is drawing fire, as the leaked email in question -- which
on Sept. 1 to the
student newspaper -- was not a student email, as the university's statements seem to suggest. Rather it was a confidential email by Administrative Board Secretary John Ellison to board members.
Thus the question is whether Harvard is falsely positioning the email leak as a student rights issue, when it really was a matter of
internal employee discipline
Harvard officials claim the leak might have endangered students.
The university suggests that this perspective is incorrect. They argue that the presence of regular leaks of closed door board meetings and documents represented a threat to student security. They point to
a second leak
that occurred weeks after the original week, detailing a closed-door meeting about the cheating scandal.
The deans comment in their statement, "While the specific document made public may be deemed by some as not particularly consequential, the disclosure of the document and nearly word-for-word disclosure of a confidential board conversation led to concerns that other information -- especially student information we have a duty to protect as private -- was at risk."
III. Civil Liberty Groups Blast Decision to Snoop
Civil liberties groups aren't buying that excuse.
Privacy counsel Chris Calabrese, who works for the
American Civil Liberties Union
advising legislators in Washington, comments to
that email subject lines are still
and should only be searched if a specific employee is suspected of violating workplace policies.
Civil liberties groups argue snooping is a slippery slope.
[Image Source: Dreamstime Illustrations]
He comments, "Individualized suspicion is the key element to a search. [With subject lines] we’re still talking about the content of the communication. If it wasn’t sensitive, they wouldn’t have wanted to search it."
Marc Rotenberg, president and executive director of the Washington-based
Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC), also is troubled by the search. He tells
, "Harvard had a very good policy for e-mail privacy. Intellectual freedom is critical to the university community. So, the news that administrators searched the e-mail accounts of deans to try to uncover communications with journalists is both surprising and unsettling."
IV. Some University Officials Also Upset
And some academic officials are also upset about the search.
Jenn Nichols, associate secretary in the Washington-based
American Association of University Professors
’ department of academic freedom, tenure and governance comments, "Individuals should have the same assurance of e-mail privacy as when they send and receive envelopes through the physical mail system."
She argues the search is akin to opening private mail and reading it.
Former dean and current Harvard
Computer Science Department
is also troubled by the search. He comments to
, "It’s sufficiently out of step with ordinary understandings of how we operate at Harvard."
Professor Lewis, who the
describes as a "frequent thorn in the administration’s side" says to the
that he will respond by "probably, after four decades, respond by moving most of my personal and frivolous e-mail [to Gmail]."
Some faculty say they will move to Gmail following the search. [Image Source: CNN]
He adds, "Given the university’s encompassing view of its rights to scan ‘employee’ e-mail, including faculty e-mail when the faculty have administrative responsibilities. I would not assume that the university would feel constrained."
V. Employee Policy Allows Email Snooping in Some Cases
Generally, the legality of
an email search
by an employer comes down to the employee policies that workers accept when they join a company or institution. And at Harvard it is clear that employees have "no expectation of privacy" regarding their documents on work networks, according to the
. The sole legal issue is that the employees involved were not notified.
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
does consider "faculty e-mail messages and other electronic documents stored on Harvard-owned computers to be confidential", but it makes it clear that internal investigations are exempt. However, it requires that employees be notified of the search.
Ultimately, it appears that the university nearly acted within its rights. However, ultimately the one major mistake appears to be that the employees involved were not notified; the resident deans were not informed in advance of the search. Some argue the search might have been fairer, had there been more transparency throughout the process.
Deans Hammond and Smith apologize "if any resident deans feel our communication at the conclusion of the investigation was insufficient."
Harvard administrators goofed in not informing employees of the search.
In a blog, two other Computer Science Department professors --
-- argue in support of their employer, saying the incident is being "blown out of proportion".
, "In my opinion, a Resident Dean made an understandable (and I would argue small) error in judgment in forwarding an email marked confidential. The administration was rightly concerned. In my opinion, the administration made an error in judgment by not treating the Resident Deans as faculty and strictly following the Harvard policy by informing them that a search was being done as part of an investigation into the matter. I'm not clear if they feel they made an error in judgment, but they have apologized."
It appears that debate over the email leaks regarding the scandal may ultimately overshadow the cheating scandal itself.
The New York Times
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
3/12/2013 1:05:11 PM
The University owns not only the computer and network systems, but they also own the emails as well. What the hell is wrong with people these days? Expecting "privacy" when using an employers infrastructure... moronic.
In fact, they undoubtedly signed a contract stating all of that. No case here.
RE: sorry ACLU
3/12/2013 1:32:35 PM
Agreed. I'm usually all for protection of privacy. But in this case, if you're on company time, using company property and resources, I don't see how you can expect your emails to be private. I think the university has every right to monitor what you're doing under these circumstances.
RE: sorry ACLU
3/12/2013 1:57:47 PM
Agreed. This is much ado about nothing.
RE: sorry ACLU
3/13/2013 3:20:33 PM
Schools are barred from making students' grades public, even though they have all of those grades on their equipment, just as they do the e-mails.
Just because information is stored by a university somewhere doesn't give the university carte blanche to do whatever it wants with that information.
Cases like this highlight the need for professionals to have a secure e-mail solution, since universities (and the government) clearly don't feel obliged to treat e-mail securely.
RE: sorry ACLU
3/13/2013 9:37:22 PM
Who said anything about posting the grades of students? Your name gets posted in national lists for making the dean's and president's list, so who cares?
The bottom line is that you sign papers stating that you understand all of the digital infrastructure is owned and controlled by the university. And it has a strict set of rules that go along with it. Fail to abide by the rules, and get kicked out.
"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)
FCC: Google Knowingly Used Street View Cars to Snoop on Emails, Texts
May 1, 2012, 3:16 AM
Michigan Man Charged with Felony for Seeking Adulterous Emails in Wife's Account
December 28, 2010, 12:27 PM
Germany to Outlaw Corporate Facebook Snooping, Mandates RFID Cards
August 23, 2010, 11:08 AM
Tech's Biggest Loser on Tax Day: eBay Pays Nearly 99 Percent Tax Rate
April 15, 2015, 3:28 PM
Death and Dragons -- Report Claims Game of Thrones Hit by Piracy "Tidal Wave"
April 10, 2015, 8:37 AM
Court Blocks Twitter and YouTube in Turkey After Pro-Communist Attack in Istanbul
April 6, 2015, 10:53 AM
In Graphics and Quotes: $10.4 Billion Charter & Bright House Merger
April 2, 2015, 5:19 PM
WSJ Report Implies That Google Leveraged Lobbying to Kill Antitrust Abuse Probe
March 25, 2015, 5:37 PM
Nationalist Hackers From Turkey Cause Chaos, Deface Dozens of Sites
March 16, 2015, 12:29 PM
Most Popular Articles
Raytheon $1.9 Billion Purchase of Websense Raises Tough Questions
April 20, 2015, 1:57 PM
After Record-Setting Week, Samsung Predicts 70 Million GS6/GS6 Edge Sales
April 17, 2015, 8:39 PM
HBO to VPN HBO Now Users: Prove You Live in U.S. or We Will Terminate You
April 21, 2015, 12:17 PM
Testers Trolled by Promise of Uninstallable Windows 10 Preview Build 10061
April 16, 2015, 2:52 PM
Apple Plans In-Store Workshops to Teach Users How to Use Its Smartwatch
April 17, 2015, 1:02 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information