When Big Brother Watches IT 234
bdking writes "In an effort to protect sensitive data from internal security threats, some organizations are 'using new technology to look at the language of their IT staff's emails to determine whether their behavior or mind-set has changed,' the Wall Street Journal reports. Is secretly spying on and linguistically interpreting employee emails going too far in the name of security? From the article: 'I understand the need to be aware of the attitudes of workers with high-level access to data and networks, but this strikes me as creepy. What if an IT employee suddenly has relationship problems or family issues? Will they then be flagged by HR as potentially troublesome or even a data security risk? And all without them even knowing there's a dossier being created of them and their "suspect" behavior?'"
Re:Prevention cheaper (Score:5, Funny)
Wouldn't it just be cheaper to not treat workers like shit?
This one's going on the list.
Pretty much proves the point (Score:5, Funny)
What if an IT employee suddenly has relationship problems or family issues?
There's definitely something suspicious going on when IT employees have relationships, nevermind relationship problems.
Re:Prevention cheaper (Score:4, Funny)
you're confusing those types of bosses with people who see you as something more than an exchangeable cash cow.
Re:Prevention cheaper (Score:5, Funny)
Because they can get even more by hurting them *and* getting their golden parachutes after the havoc?
I wonder if I'm the only person who hears or reads "golden parachute" and gets a mental image of a CEO jumping from a burning plane with his company's stock ticker on the side, holding on to a dozen overstuffed briefcases full of cash like he's a modern-day DB Cooper. :D
Re:Prevention cheaper (Score:3, Funny)
Because they can get even more by hurting them *and* getting their golden parachutes after the havoc?
Until they get caught, and have to repay fradulently taken $$$, lose their golden parachute, and become unemployable.