Re: guilty until proven innocent?

[Austin <amckinle () andrew cmu edu>]

I'm a college student, so here's another side: when I was in high school, I 
was on the Model United Nations team. The access controls in place on the 
school district's internet stopped us from researching a lot of topics: 
arms control, genocide, the Israeli-Palestine conflict, nuclear 
disarmament, steps for dealing with rogue nations, cyberterrorism, regular 
terrorism, chemical/biological warfare, guerilla tactics, violations of the 
Geneva Convention...

It was a pretty huge bummer, since we had access to printers and copiers on 
campus, but not at home, where we could do the research.

I'm of the opinion that a school that needs to identify dangerously 
unstable students through their *browsing habits* instead of teacher 
observation, school counseling, classmate complaints, or administrative 
action has a serious problem. For a secondary school to rely on internet 
controls for anything more than legal defense against gross negligence is 
pretty silly. Disciplinary action against strong students who's curiosity 
got the best of them is a sure fire way to build resentment in your best 
and brightest.

Austin McKinley
Carnegie Mellon University

--On Tuesday, January 24, 2006 10:09 AM -0500 Mary Landesman 
<mlande () bellsouth net> wrote:

> I'm a parent, so I come at this from two sides. And I grudgingly have to
> admit that I don't know what else the schools are supposed to do. Most
> kids (all the ones that hang out at our house, anyway) are fully aware the
> schools' computers are monitored. I don't know why this particular kid did
> not.
>
> It's not a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 either. It began in the late 90s
> because of increasing violence in the schools. There are metal detectors,
> cameras mounted everywhere, onsite security officers, etc. That ongoing
> and pervasive surveillances was extended to computers when networks and
> labs became the norm, particularly in high schools.
>
> Some of it is designed to protect students. Some designed to protect the
> teachers and staff. And some designed to ward off litigation.
>
> It's a complex situation. I'm happy to discuss my views further and would
> love to hear some others views on these issues, particularly if you have a
> child in today's schools. But I am not sure it's an appropriate topic for
> this list; it's certainly not fun anyway. :P
>
> -- Mary
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Blue Boar" <BlueBoar () thievco com>
> To: "Larry Seltzer" <larry () larryseltzer com>
> Cc: "'FunSec [List]'" <funsec () linuxbox org>
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 8:12 PM
> Subject: Re: [funsec] guilty until proven innocent?
>
>
> Isn't anyone going to fly off the handle about how the school was spying
> on the kids, etc?
>
> BB
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.