The surreptitious use of keyloggers should be subjected to wider regulation by state or federal law. It also creates a lack of clarity for employers and employees regarding what is considered lawful conduct. The conflict of interpretations between jurisdictions leaves people in many states vulnerable to invasive employer spying. Additionally, in the absence of a consensus about federal law prohibiting keyloggers, some courts have interpreted state statutes to protect the public from having their strokes stolen. Several recent cases have suggested a broader interpretation of the ECPA than what has previously been held. However, there is evidence that this may soon change. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which includes the Federal Wiretap Act (FWA) and the Stored Communication Act (SCA), could potentially prevent keystroke theft, but thus far the protections it offers have not been extended to keyloggers. There is currently no federal law that has been interpreted to prohibit their surreptitious use. Managers argue that computer surveillance is important to ensure productivity, but alternative tools like website blockers, remote desktop access and time audits allow employers to determine whether an employee deviated from her task without risking the same breach of trust or employee humiliation associated with keyloggers.Īlthough keyloggers facilitate a major invasion of privacy, they are legal in many jurisdictions. Employers are using keyloggers more often in the workplace to oversee employees without their knowledge.
SNIPERSPY ALTERNATIVE SOFTWARE
These easy to use and inexpensive hardware or software devices record keystrokes and allow a monitor to access email, and other password-protected accounts of an unsuspecting typist. “CyberPatrol, ” “SniperSpy,” and “IamBigbrother” are the names of keyloggers that might be installed on your office computer. Commentary Notes First Amendment Written by Susanna Lichter
0 kommentar(er)
