...Admissions Director of Princeton,
entered Yales Website, violating the privacy admonitions of
the site.
|
Hacking
Through the Ivy:
Moral Relativism at Princeton
We
admit to a perverse fondness for stories relating the perfidies
of academia, although we diligently attempt to mask that perversity
by citing more serious principles for our interest. It is thus that
we discuss Princeton Universitys Internet second story job
on Yale Universitys admissions Website.
Last
April, Stephen E. LeMenager, then Admissions Director of Princeton,
entered Yales Website, violating the privacy admonitions of
the site. To implement his unauthorized entry, LeMenager used birth
dates and social security numbers of applicants to both schools,
information required by Princeton, but provided with a reasonable
expectation that it would be used for no untoward purpose.
What
LeMenager and later other employees of Princetons admissions
office to whom he described his little sneak and peek were
looking for or found, or what they did with the information, is
still somewhat murky at this point. Following an internal investigation
concluded several weeks ago, Princeton president Shirley M. Tilghman
indicated that the motivation was no more than interest in Yales
Website security and curiosity. Perhaps, but that explanation rings
a bit hollow. After all, Yale regarded the intrusion as serious
enough to refer to the U.S. Attorney in Connecticut.
University
presidents are among the slickest operators in the universe, and
Tilghman didnt get to Princeton on the back of a turnip truck.
After submitting that the Princeton admissions office was inhabited
by technological naïfs, she said, "That does not excuse
what happened, but it helps explain their failure to recognize that
what happened was wrong. We will learn from this and make changes
and move on to a better place."
To
be sure, LeMenager has been transferred to another job, and all
involved are to be disciplined, albeit in some unspecified way.
Princetons Dean of Admissions, Fred Hargadon, who knew of
LeMenagers actions, but did nothing to stop or report them
to others in the administration, is being allowed to retire at the
end of the academic year, as previously planned. Princeton has provided
the results of the internal investigation to the U.S. Attorney.
Yale
President Richard C. Levin, no slouch himself, was exceptionally
gracious regarding the contretemps, saying, "President Tilghman
has handled a very difficult situation in an exemplary manner."
The
New York Times weighed in, writing in an editorial, "
the
ethics and legality of using the Internet are still so poorly grasped
by even our most sophisticated citizens
.we still have a long
way to go before it is widely understood that prying into a Web
site is no different from ransacking a mailbox and stealing a letter
addressed to someone else."
Thats
true, but hacking is hacking, and hacking is a crime. Were this
any university other than Princeton, one might simply cluck over
universities spying on one another and let the U.S. Attorney finish
his investigation. But Princeton is also the home of Professor Edward
Felten and other computer scientists, who know as much about this
stuff as anyone alive. Felten is the cryptographer who cracked a
digital anti-copying technology and then decided to publish the
results. Thus ensued a long, nasty, highly public battle, culminating
in a federal district judge dismissing a case brought by Felten
and the Electronic Frontier Foundation to have the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (DMCA) declared unconstitutional.
Technologically
ignorant they may be in Princetons admissions department,
but technologically ignorant they aint at Princeton. Tilghman
is herself a distinguished scientist and for years chaired Princetons
Council on Science and Technology, the specific purpose of which
is to teach science and technology to non-science students.
Felten,
the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Napsterites and their progeny,
a bunch of open source code proponents and others, some of whom
are employed by other prominent universities, can be said to be
leading the charge for what could be aptly described as "the
everything is free and should be public movement." They march
under banners of academic freedom and exceptionally tortured interpretations
of fair use and the First Amendment.
Each
and all are contributing to a growing culture without respect for
privacy or intellectual property rights, as any recording, movie
or software company executive can tell you. Computers and digital
technology are nifty developments, in their place, used wisely and
honestly. But they created no licenses to invade the privacy or
steal the property of others, whether through ignorance, larceny
or misguided principles.
Lets
hope President Tilghmans concept of "moving on to a better
place" really means that and not just moving away from Princetons
temporary embarrassment. Princeton could be as likely a university
as any to rediscover, and perhaps even teach, that right and wrong
still mean something.
[September
5, 2002]
Return
to Technology
Index
|