Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Security > what is good software to log keystrokes on my computer?

Reply
Thread Tools

what is good software to log keystrokes on my computer?

 
 
Nomen Nescio
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
Jim Watt wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:35:49 -0600, Notan
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >So, this is incorrect?
> >
> >http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/stealing

>
> In English law, its incorrect.


I wouldn't say incorrect as much as incomplete or even irrelevant. The
problem here is we're not talking about illegally transferring
possession of an automobile, only "misusing" it for a time. the
definition is brief but more or less accurate as far as far as it goes.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rick Merrill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
Nomen Nescio wrote:

> Jim Watt wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:35:49 -0600, Notan
>><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>So, this is incorrect?
>>>
>>>http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/stealing

>>
>>In English law, its incorrect.

>
>
> I wouldn't say incorrect as much as incomplete or even irrelevant. The
> problem here is we're not talking about illegally transferring
> possession of an automobile, only "misusing" it for a time. the
> definition is brief but more or less accurate as far as far as it goes.
>


In the US the term is called "joyriding" and is equivalent to stealing.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rick Merrill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
ArtDent wrote:

> On 28-Aug-2006, Sebastian Gottschalk <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>> if it is for when a child is
>>
>>>using it, then a parent has every right to keep 'tabs' on what they
>>>do.
>>>Whether they tell them ahead of time or not. Which is almost the
>>>_only_
>>>time a keylogger is alright in my personal opinion.

>>
>>What about intrusion detection? What about security research?

>
>
> I did say 'almost'. These are obvious legitimate uses also. Although I
> am somewhat confused how a keylogger is supposed to help in intrusion
> detection. Intrusion = coming in from 'outside'.
>
>
>>I have a daemon that logs all key-strokes and writes it to a file that
>>is
>>only readable as an admin. I read it from time to time. I draw
>>conclusion
>>about my very own behaviour, and alos about those who use my computer.

>
>
> The question here would be, do those (others) that use your computer know
> that this logging is going on?
> If yes, where you (or your employer) have a specific _written_ policy,
> that each user is at least 'supposed' to read and know, then no problem.
> If no, where you (or your employer) have implemented this and not told the
> users, well... now you are getting into a very gray area indeed, this
> exact type of situation is working its way thru several court systems in
> the world right now.


Let's assume the OP is the employer and believes an employee is using
company computer for non-company or nefarious purposes. Would said
employer have the right to put a key-logger on a company owned machine?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Sebastian Gottschalk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
Rick Merrill wrote:

> Let's assume the OP is the employer and believes an employee is using
> company computer for non-company or nefarious purposes. Would said
> employer have the right to put a key-logger on a company owned machine?


An employer shouldn't have any administrative privileges. He thus might
install a keylogger, but it would only work under his very own user
account.

Beside that, users shouldn't be able to run any executeable but whitelisted
ones.

And if he has administrative privileges, there's much more to worry about
than just keylogging.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Borked Pseudo Mailed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
Notan wrote:

> > > Just so we're clear, if someone takes my car during the night, while
> > > I'm sleeping, and returns it before I awake, it's not stealing?

> >
> > Ironically enough it's not. At least not in most US jurisdictions, and
> > probably many others including the US military UCMJ. If the thieves
> > are caught before they return the vehicle they might be charged with
> > theft, but even if they're able to prove they were on their way to
> > return your car the official charges will likely read something like
> > "Wrongful Appropriation of a Motor Vehicle".
> >
> > A completely different offense from stealing.

>
> So, this is incorrect?
>
> http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/stealing


No. It's incomplete and/or you're misreading it or inferring something
that's not explicitly stated.

Your scenario falls outside the scope of your cited definition because
the intent was not to retain possession or "take" your property, only
to "borrow" it. There's a very real legal distinction between the two
irrespective of what your, or even my opinion is. Truth be known if
someone "borrowed" my car as you've described I'd feel as though it had
been stolen too. Unfortunately for both of us the law in our (assumed)
jurisdictions doesn't see things that way. Our "feelings" are
irrelevant to the task of defining the crime. Sentencing may be a
different story.

Note that this is US law, and even that can vary from locality to
locality. Autos stolen and not taken across state lines are State
Felonies I believe, so your state might have different guidelines than
another state. Federal law might diverge from state even further. Not to
mention the fact that "borrowing" a car in some turd world jurisdiction
might be an offense punishable by death.

 
Reply With Quote
 
ArtDent
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006

On 29-Aug-2006, Rick Merrill <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Let's assume the OP is the employer and believes an employee is using
> company computer for non-company or nefarious purposes. Would said
> employer have the right to put a key-logger on a company owned machine?


I believe that the courts - so far at least - have said that the answer to
that question is a definite yes.
A big part of the question tho, whether they have to tell the employee
about it, I think is still in 'limbo'.
Personally, I think that the employer should tell the employee if/that
they do - perhaps even if they didn't (keep 'em paranoid, eh?).

--
We apologize for the inconvenience
 
Reply With Quote
 
David H. Lipman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
From: "Rick Merrill" <(E-Mail Removed)>


|
| Let's assume the OP is the employer and believes an employee is using
| company computer for non-company or nefarious purposes. Would said
| employer have the right to put a key-logger on a company owned machine?

Simple answer - YES !

Complex answer has to do with disclosure of that fact.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm


 
Reply With Quote
 
ArtDent
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006

On 29-Aug-2006, Sebastian Gottschalk <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> An employer shouldn't have any administrative privileges. He thus might
> install a keylogger, but it would only work under his very own user
> account.


Erm... Sebastian, the employer is the one that pays the employee, I think
you may have gotten the two confused here.
The employeR is usually the one that owns the machines.
--
We apologize for the inconvenience
 
Reply With Quote
 
Borked Pseudo Mailed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-29-2006
Rick Merrill wrote:

> In the US the term is called "joyriding" and is equivalent to stealing.


False!

First of all joyriding is a State defined term, there is no US code that
addresses it as far as I'm aware. Not all States have a criminal code
definition of the term either.

That fact aside, the states that do define the term or define a crime
as "joyriding", I've not found any that don't differentiate between
joyriding and theft. Here's a cite from an Illinois case for example,
an appeal to the US Supreme Court...

ILLINOIS v. VITALE, 447 U.S. 410 (1980)

"The Illinois court relied upon our holding in Brown v. Ohio, supra,
that a conviction for a lesser-included offense precludes later
prosecution for the greater offense. There, Brown was first convicted
of joyriding in violation of an Ohio statute under which it was a crime
to "take, operate, or keep any motor vehicle without the consent of its
owner." He was then convicted under another statute of stealing the
same motor vehicle. The Ohio courts had held that every element of the
joyriding "is also an element of the crime of auto theft," and that to
prove auto theft one need prove in addition to joyriding only the
intent permanently to deprive the owner of possession. "

Please not the use of the word "permanently".

Utah defines joyriding as "unlawful control over motor vehicles,
trailers, or semitrailers" in ยง 41-1a-1311 of ity's criminal statutes.
Completely different from the definition of theft.

Here's another section of criminal code from the Yavapai Indian
Reservation in Arizona, to demonstrate the localization of joyriding laws
as well as point out its criminal status.

Sec. 6-104.01. JOYRIDING.
A person commits joyriding if, without intent to permanently deprive,
such person intentionally or knowingly takes control of another's means
of transportation.

Any person convicted of joyriding shall be sentenced to imprisonment
for a period not to exceed one hundred twenty (120) days or to a fine
not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00), or to both such
imprisonment and fine, with costs.

A clear distinction between theft and joyriding, and an appropriate,
lesser penalty to support that.

I could cite literally hundreds of examples that prove joyriding and
theft are completely separate crimes if you'd like, almost without
exception the difference being the intent to permanently deprive
someone of their property or not. And almost without exception showing
that joyriding is a misdemeanor, while auto theft is a felony. Unless
of course there's property damage or bodily harm involved while
joyriding.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Sebastian Gottschalk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-30-2006
ArtDent wrote:

> On 29-Aug-2006, Sebastian Gottschalk <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> An employer shouldn't have any administrative privileges. He thus might
>> install a keylogger, but it would only work under his very own user
>> account.

>
> Erm... Sebastian, the employer is the one that pays the employee, I think
> you may have gotten the two confused here.
> The employeR is usually the one that owns the machines.


My fault, but the facts remains. An employer shouldn't have administrative
privileges as well, only the admin should have. And it's his responsibility
to have the authority to refuse unlawful requests from his employer.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
rommon mode won't respond to keystrokes bw0507@gmail.com Cisco 4 02-05-2006 02:57 PM
where do the keystrokes go? Martijn Mulder Java 2 12-18-2005 07:54 PM
Send Keystrokes to Client Side Application Lucas Tam ASP .Net 5 12-02-2004 07:19 PM
how to handle specific keystrokes user@domain.invalid Java 3 06-28-2004 10:14 AM
Capturing Keystrokes Rob T ASP .Net 1 05-14-2004 11:52 AM



Advertisments