Question about U2U's, page 1

reply to post by trivialtantrum

---

Given the sheer volume of U2U's I would guess that viewing each one would be impractical, but I also would surmise that there should be no real expectation of privacy, the same as anywhere else.

reply to post by KSPigpen

---

That's a very good point. I imagine by volume alone it would seem improbable to monitor them all. Although I do still wonder if the have the ability to.

Originally posted by trivialtantrum
reply to post by KSPigpen

---

That's a very good point. I imagine by volume alone it would seem improbable to monitor them all. Although I do still wonder if the have the ability to.

Of course they do. Ability and motivation being entirely different fish.



Typically at institutions with which I am familiar keywords are employed as part of the standard filtering/discovery process. As it IS electronic messaging, certain state mandates may apply to retention for the mitigation of legal liability. Flags will be generated when something needs to be looked at more closely, but everything is retained for several years. The ability to search the repository of messages typically exists and administrators can query the message repository for any word, user, time, etc.

I'm not saying they DO, I'm just saying they probably CAN. Again, a lot of difference.

reply to post by KSPigpen

---

Yeah I imagine it's this way. By using the service we submit our self to a lack of privacy and then there's the argument that we don't need the privacy or need to worry if were not doing something we shouldn't be. I like idea of privacy regardless of that argument. Either way your probably right about the filtering and flagging process. Kind of like a mini echelon project for ATS.