I would have to concur with evil Deji twin here. If you send clear text into the ether (or into the token if on tokenring snicker), the intended recipient is anyone who sees it. It would be like shouting at a crowded public beach and the only one allowed to listen is the person you are looking at and getting mad because someone else heard it.
The whole networking thing is based on the old school trick, pass it on. You write your note, you fold it up and put a name on the top, then give it to the person in front of you and tell them to pass it forward to the addressee. Anyone can open that and look at the contents and ascertain and distribute the message along the way. That is your fault due to using that delivery mechanism without any other compensating controls such as writing in piglatin or ferretlatin or at the very least sealing it in a real seal envelope. Writing "you suck if you read this and you aren't the person I wanted to read this" on the bottom of the note doesn't help a lot. joe -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 3:22 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question Interesting. I think the website makes some leaps in areas. For example, saying that a postmaster is not the intended recipient is technically inaccurate IMHO. It's a standard best practice (documented in the RFC's) that you should include a postmaster, abuse, etc alias for your domain name. It's also a defacto standard that when all else fails or in the event of failure, send a copy to the postmaster. That applies with messages sent from your domain (even if faked) to another. In that case, as an authorized user (postmaster) I am entitled to see the message and it's contents. Does that mean I am the intended recipient? I would argue yes in this case. About the only useful information on that site was the part about an email policy. I can understand your legal beagles' concept of putting the disclaimer on the message to prohibit misuse by network sniffing people, but I would argue to them about the appropriate use of technology. Something about how they weren't really trying to protect anything if they sent it plain text through Joe-the-isp's garage. Any network technician with a problem they're trying to fix would have access and would be the intended recipient in that case. Encryption is the answer to that in my opinion. If you only want the intended recipient to have access to the contents, then you should take appropriate and reasonable measures to ensure that the person reading the contents is the intended recipient. That technology exists and is "reasonable" (although I'm sure there's some dissenting opinions). Should be fun to watch one of these cases come to court though. -ajm P.S. I'm the evil twin. Deji's the good one. :) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stockbrugger, Brian L. Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 3:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question So I did hear a new legal spin on this today from our attorney's. There take on disclaimers from a legal perspective is that if you are the intended recipient such that it was sent to you by the sender whether this was a mistake or not, there is no legal ground to stand on. They do feel the disclaimer shows some due diligence in the case of sending to the wrong person but no legal foundation. However, the disclaimer is potentially helpful in the event that e-mail is hijacked or "sniffed" by someone who is not the intended recipient. We were advised by our attorney's to include disclaimers given the fact that a lot of correspondence is sent across the Internet with confidential or potentially damaging information if it got in the wrong hands. Has this been tested in court - I have no idea. So this has us discussing encrypting all email now. I did find an interesting albeit useless site on disclaimers. www.emaildisclaimers.com Brian -----Original Message----- From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 11:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question You aren't twins? Could have fooled me. The first time I saw you I walked up and said "Hi Deji" and didn't have a clue and I knew Deji back when he could barely spell NT (could thing they renamed it!!!). Seriously though, thanks for all of the responses. There was no specific reason I needed it. I was just curious because of all the work put into stamping those things on the messages and it is so, seemingly to me, obviously impossible to really do anything about it if the message is indeed sent to someone who uses it badly. Personally, I do not feel bound one iota by any disclaimer at the bottom of a message that I didn't get to until I read the rest of the content. I wasn't asked if I agree to the terms. I would think for this to be truly binding, you would have to agree to the disclaimer prior to being able to see the content in any way shape or form which implies some form of message encryption and an intelligent mechanism for asserting the agreement. To put it another way, if I am walking down the street and I walk through a wide open door of a building and see all sorts of interesting things and as I leave someone comes up to me and says, btw, everything you saw in there you are bound to not disclose I would laugh my fool head off at them. Anyway, it amazes me how much time and effort and wasted disk space is dedicated to these things, especially if there is no real proof they will actually help with anything. The one place I can see them kind of having any kind of influence is by people within the same company who already have agreements to not disclose corporate information and this is just a reminder that you shouldn't be thinking this isn't something exempt from that agreement. joe -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question You'd be surprised how similar alike we are. In fact, in public, most would think we're twins except that he hasn't received his cafeteria MVP award yet ;) <seriously> Either way, I am interested to hear what you get back from the legal-beagles. </seriously> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stockbrugger, Brian L. Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:13 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question Sorry I mistyped and meant you (Al) and not Deji - my bad. I finished reading one of his posts before I sent this out and had his name on my mind. I think those educators are rubbing off on me. Brian -----Original Message----- From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 8:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question I missed Deji's post but I'd be interested to hear the legal team's response to the intended recipient issue if you could post that back. More of a curiuosity issue, but I'm insanely curious about things ;) Al -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stockbrugger, Brian L. Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:29 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question Well I am no lawyer either but the disclaimer was attached at the request (directive) of our legal team. They also came up with the content of the message. I have not been following the specifics behind it but I was told (legal term - hearsay) that it was a direct result of some litigation and recent legislation here in CA. Again I have no specifics but will do a little checking. It also had something to do with showing due diligence since we are in public education and a lot of correspondence with parents, colleagues, and the state/feds happen via e-mail. Educators have been known to not be the most technical bunch and are often sending email to the wrong person (not sure how the "intended recipient" falls into that like Deji points out). However, the thought has been that if the recipient is clearly not the intended recipient that they do the right thing and delete the message instead of forwarding it on for some other gain. There are a lot of people critical of public education that would love to get information on a student's IEP and show the "tax payer's money at work". Other than that it is just more overhead on our messaging environment as far as I am concerned causing our help desk to receive more calls about this both from the sender (confused because they never typed this in) or the recipient wondering if they should "keep" the message or not. I do see more and more law firms and government agencies that we deal with that attach these disclaimers which is why we started doing it in the first place - monkey see, monkey do. Brian ________________________________ From: joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2005 12:59 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [ActiveDir] Legal Question Does anyone know if the disclaimer like the one below are actually legally binding on anyone? And if the answer is yes, has it ever really been tested in court? You don't have to agree to anything to read the email, you just look and by the point you see the disclaimer, it is too late, you have picked up the information in the note. The fact that you don't necessarily agree to it I think would mean you could forward it as you wish unless you worked for the company who stuck the disclaimer on the note in the first place. I think telling me I have to delete it if it doesn't pertain to me is like telling me I have to close my ears and forget anything I hear if a neighbor says something within my range and then says it can't be disclosed. joe ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stockbrugger, Brian L. Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 3:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [ActiveDir] Creating user accounts, home folders and assigning permissions to user and groups I need to create about 3400 user accounts, create home folders and assign the appropriate user and group permissions to the home drives automagically. We are using Windows Server 2003 and AD with a single domain. I know how to create the user accounts and home folders but not sure the best approach to assign the permissions. Any suggestions on doing all three or at least the permissions part. Thanks - Brian CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DISCLAIMER: This communication and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it constitute an electronic communication within the scope of the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 USCA 2510. This communication may contain non-public, confidential, or legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unlawful interception, use or disclosure of such information is strictly prohibited under 18 USCA 2511 and any applicable laws. CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DISCLAIMER: This communication and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it constitute an electronic communication within the scope of the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 USCA 2510. This communication may contain non-public, confidential, or legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unlawful interception, use or disclosure of such information is strictly prohibited under 18 USCA 2511 and any applicable laws. List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DISCLAIMER: This communication and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it constitute an electronic communication within the scope of the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 USCA 2510. This communication may contain non-public, confidential, or legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unlawful interception, use or disclosure of such information is strictly prohibited under 18 USCA 2511 and any applicable laws. List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DISCLAIMER: This communication and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it constitute an electronic communication within the scope of the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 USCA 2510. This communication may contain non-public, confidential, or legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unlawful interception, use or disclosure of such information is strictly prohibited under 18 USCA 2511 and any applicable laws. List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
