Computers & Security, Vol. 18, No. 6

and a reduction in software piracy He went on to say that the real aim of the campaign was to get compa- nies to take action and check out their licensing. Computing, June 24, 1999, p.2.

Big brother is watching you, James Middleton and

Sinead Crew. Network managers fear that the latest net- work surveillance technology could turn them into cor- porate ‘big brothers’. Designed for US spying agencies, the Computer Misuse and Detection System (CMDS) will be sold in the UK through ODS Networks. It can determine if staff are late or early for work, or if they are downloading illicit files. It enables staff profiles to be built up by monitoring users’ work habits inclusive of server and E-mail access. In this way, network adminis- trators are alerted when users depart from routine, and this information is then available for management review. The Data Protection Registrar’s office is con- cerned by these developments, and a spokesperson said “Employees should have a right of appeal against the types of surveillance used. We are introducing a code of practice to deal with this sort of situation.“A spokesper- son fi-om Bull Information Systems said “Companies need to keep control of what’s going on in the network, but surveillance must be implemented with care so as not to cross that fine line and be an intrusion of priva- cy.” Network News, June 16, 1999, p. 1.

City braces itself for cyber attacks, Lisa Kelly. The British Bankers Association (BBA) and the Computer Crimes Unit (CCU) of the Metropolitan Police recent- ly met to discuss the threat posed by the ‘International Day of Action’: an onslaught organized by hackers on the 18th June. Corporate UK and the City of London are bracing themselves against the attack, which forms part of a global protest against capitalism. Large compa- nies in other sectors are being warned by the CCU to strengthen their cyber defences.The demonstrators will target businesses internationally, aimed to coincide with a G8 meeting in Germany of the world’s seven richest nations plus Russia. In addition to street demos by groups such as Reclaim the Streets and Class War, protestors plan to sabotage ATMs, while hackers try to prevent online banking and trading. Network security employees have been called to standby. Computing, June

10, 1999,p. 3.

PDAs spread virus epidemics, Andy Donoghue. A recent Gartner Group report outlines that mobile devices, in particular wireless smart phones and DPAs, will become a new “mobile virus propagation source”. The spread of hostile code is likely to be spread by smart phones owing to the sheer volume of devices in use - some 500 million by 2005. Wireless phones are evolving to become network computers and that information held within them will be open to being “stolen, modified and infected”. The report continues that because the devices are portable, “the threat (and the viruses) are likely to walk through an enterprise’s front door and onto the network”. A spokesperson from Sophos claimed that people can effectively bypass a company’s firewall by plugging their PDA into the docking station and downloading infected files. Although no viruses have been written specifically for PDAs, it is only a matter of time before this happens. Network News, June 9, 1999, p. 3.

EU-US data privacy dispute to continue. Fifteen European Union member states have failed to agree a package that provides the same levels of data protection for personal information held by companies in the US, as that which the data have under a recently introduced pan-European data protection law. At present, the US has no general data protection law. A system of industry self-regulation has been proposed by the US to ensure that private data on EU individuals gets adequate levels of protection and is not abused. Companies would be invited to sign up to safe harbours that safeguard vari- ous data protection principles issued by the US depart- ment of commerce. The package would provide US companies with guidance to meet the ‘adequate protec- tion’ standard, provide legal certainty for those adhering to it that data flows would not be cut off and ensure protection for data transfers from Europe to the US. The EU has said that it requires more clarity on the type of system that would need to be used to verify that companies were adhering to their princip1es.A concern for the US is to what degree independent national data protection authorities would be bound by the agree- ment.The safe harbour principles have to be approved by a majority of member states. However, once this has happened, the Commission cannot give a legal guaran- tee that national, or even regional, data authorities will not act independently Network Security, July 1999, p. 3.

523