US School used student laptop webcams to spy on them at school & home

[pete]

Aside: What do you say if some manglement bod walks up and asks you to closely track someone's network activity?

 

It depends if it's actively track or review what we already log? But generally, it's "Without giving away any information I don't need to know, why do you want me to do this?" (i.e justify the need). Further responses from me are dependent on their answer.

 

Active tracking does set off my "fishing expedition" alert.

 

Does it make a difference if the target is Student or Staff (where they might just be fishing for reasons to dismiss)?

 

Yes - staff monitoring has a much higher "burden of necessity", need for documentation, SMT oversight.

 

For students it's most likely to be "based on what $parent has complained about, we think W is doing X to Y via Z (where Z is something computery) can we confirm it either way?"

 

Do you have a policy pertaining to this area?

 

Our tech wiki has this:

 

====== Log Requests ======

 

If asked for logs regarding staff or students for potential (and / or possibly criminal) investigation, we need to know:

 

* What is the reason the information is required?

* What date / time ranges is it required for?

* Who will the information be shared with? (unions, the LA, etc)

* Once the data is handed over will there be signatures, etc.

* Is there a log kept of who looks at this data?

 

**Get it all in writing** - if they're not prepared to do so, find Pete or $SMT_member. You're not being obstructive, you're safeguarding the school, the Head and yourself. If an incident is potentially serious enough to investigate, it's serious enough to do it properly.

 

Make the requestee aware that if there are not satisfactory answers to the above then the data may be laughed at should it go to tribunal.

 

No fishing expeditions

 

===== Laptops/Computers used in the suspect activity =====

 

If it's a criminal investigation then the machine(s) in question should be isolated so no-one can touch it until authorised people can investigate it. No-one in school should be investigating this - insufficient training and accusations of bias.

 

Document

 

* The date and time you were asked to remove machine

* The date and time you did remove the machine

* Explain any significant difference between the times eg person did not have laptop in school

* was the machine in use when it was removed?

* how was it in use?

 

How you isolate the machine is also important. somebody will have to sign a police statement documenting its isolation and who could have had access to it. The police will need to be sure the trail of evidence is maintained. so if it is in a safe in an office. The key to the safe and the office should not be in the possession of one individual.

 

Laws regarding the monitoring of employees: The laws relating to monitoring your employees | OUT-LAW.COM by Pinsent Masons LLP

[TheITCrowd]

The whole model in the US education sector is different since the district are pretty much independent governing school bodies. There are very few standards that are across the board even in surrounding districts. I imagine that are more standards in the UK. Also, I've heard it school administrator who told the IT technician to trace the laptop. As someone who currently works in US, I know all to well the unique of dealing with school administrators who are not well versed in IT policies and for that matter any kind of legal implications that is not directly involved with education.

[AngryTechnician]

As someone who currently works in US, I know all to well the unique of dealing with school administrators who are not well versed in IT policies and for that matter any kind of legal implications that is not directly involved with education.

That's by no means a problem restricted to the US!

 

The school district's own report into this fiasco was released earlier this week, with some good coverage in the Philadelphia Inquirer. The report was prepared by lawyers defending the school, so as one might expect, it pretty much admits what was already known while claiming there is "no proof that school staffers intentionally used the technology to spy on students."

[danrhodes]

The lot of them should be sacked, and prosecuted. They give school IT staff a bad name.

 

Agreed, this is a very worrying article, imagine how the pupils and familys must feel, this is not the kind of advert we want for Educational IT Staff.

 

D