HP Spying Incident Included Journalists 177
rufey writes "It is now being reported that the HP boardroom spying incident that occurred earlier this year also involved obtaining phone records of journalists from at least two news outlets. Journalists from CNET and the Wall Street Journal had their phone records obtained through a method called 'pretexting' to see who, if any, of the HP board members the journalists may have been in contact with."
Check out PJ's coverage at Groklaw (Score:5, Interesting)
This hits privacy and First Amendment issues to their core.
This is a legal matter and PJ has had her own share of similar hijinx in relation to her reporting on the SCO debacle.
Re:Some HP Officials May Go to Prison (Score:3, Interesting)
Justice? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Pretexting Ease (Score:5, Interesting)
From what I understand, the phone company also now allows you to have a "password" that they will ask you for over the phone.
The phone company isn't the villain here.
Re:This just isn't right. (Score:2, Interesting)
As an side note, I wonder if these hired guns that HP sicced on the reporters as well as its own people can be charged with identity theft. It seems to me that pretexting is, on a very small scale, stealing another person's identity. Imitation is one thing, but this is not imitation. Instead, it is an attempt by the hired guns to illegaly obtain what they had no right to by pretending to be someone else. Small scale, though it may be, it is the same thing criminals do when they wish to become another person to get what only that person is legally entitled to.
Re:Lying by Any Other Name... (Score:3, Interesting)
One of these days, the RIAA is going to blindly file suit against a Congressman's kid, and it's going to cause one hell of a flare-up. This ought to be a parallel situation, but it isn't, because the victim journalist involved was a "nobody."
HP General Counsel Tending to Execs' Stock Sales (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Pretexting Ease (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is one of the reasons why many think the USA is seriously lacking laws to protect the privacy of individuals.The idea is really simple: An organisation that wants to collect and store information on you has to:
- Inform you about it
- Explain why they are doing this
- Refrain from using the information in other ways
- Let you review the information they keep on you
- Honor requests for corrections and removal of said information
That mean that such an organisation is also legally responsible for ensuring that such information is not used in other ways. At least that gives them a strong legal incentive to take care.
As a nice side-effect it destroys te business model of parasites like doubleclick and friends.
, and the public service ethic they used to have died with Ma Bell.
Hmm. that is the same company that was inspiration for the statement "We don't care, we don't have to, we are the phone company" ?
Re:ummm... (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe there are at least 3 reasons for this:
1. This particular incident took place in the USA, so GP is not singling out the USA so much as commenting on the incident and the circumstances that allowed for it.
2. Right or wrong of an action does not depend on what others do, it depends on your action. In other words, pointing at others and saying "they are wrong as well/worse then me" etc is simply no excuse.
3. The USA claims to provide justice for all those within its borders, it is not strange that others hold them to those claims.
The remainder of your post I fully agree with.
Fiduciary Responsability (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:ummm... (Score:4, Interesting)
Apathy is acceptance of what should not be acceptable. It's possible to be an apathetic cynic; is also possible to be a passionate cynic who takes action to right the wrongs seen.
As a cynic, my personal problem is that the amount of wrongs I see are overwhelming, and it's hard to maintain an active philosophy of striving against wrong when it's everywhere you look, and so much of it is beyond the ability of one person (or even thousands of people) to change.
Re:Some HP Officials May Go to Prison (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Pretexting Ease--changed phone number (Score:2, Interesting)
A few years ago someone (nka "pretexter") called the telco and changed my phone number and made it unlisted. Since I still had dial tone and wasn't expecting calls I didn't notice until the service change confirmation arrived in the mail a week later.
Of all oodles of data the telco collects (e.g. ANI) all they could determine was which call taker entered the order, and he couldn't remember the details of that specific call. So they let me put a password on the account. They still ask me for it when I make changes, but I don't how far they'll go to enforce it.
The phone company isn't the villain here.
I disagree. Just that they aren't the only villian.
as a non-cynic (Score:3, Interesting)
that's a useless observation
because there is nothing but the efforts of people at affecting change
so to look at the task before them, and lament it is difficult is
1. obvious
2. pointless
of course the effort is hard. duh. but is there any other way? no. so what's the point is pointing out the obvious? have you made the task easier? have you pointed out a better way to do the task? have you pointed out a better task to do?
no, to all of the questions
therefore, your cynicism is useless, a waste of your time, and a waste of my time
uh, no, you're wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
essential human nature trumps cultural convention
go anywhere in the world, and you'll find that human nature is pretty much the same