>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:28 2024
Received: by 10.90.98.12 with SMTP id v12mr4110944agb.9.1241486620867;
Mon, 04 May 2009 18:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <jm..._at_tscm.com>
Received: from swip007.ftl.affinity.com (lvs00-fl-swip007.ftl.affinity.com [216.219.253.17])
by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 14si954644gxk.7.2009.05.04.18.23.40;
Mon, 04 May 2009 18:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 216.219.253.17 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of jm..._at_tscm.com) client-ip!6.219.253.17;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 216.219.253.17 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of jm..._at_tscm.com) smtp.mail=jm..._at_tscm.com
Received: from [72.70.98.196] ([72.70.98.196]:35268 "EHLO Raphael.tscm.com")
by swip007.ftl.affinity.com with ESMTP id S751639AbZEEBXd (ORCPT
<rfc822;T..._at_googlegroups.com>);
Mon, 4 May 2009 21:23:33 -0400
Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.2.20090504211827.131a55a0_at_tscm.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0
Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 21:23:20 -0400
To: TSCM-L Professionals List <TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com>
From: "James M. Atkinson" <jm..._at_tscm.com>
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {3667} Question Please
In-Reply-To: <b003fa04-9bcf-4490-b1cc-0bf8779298cc_at_s31g2000vbp.googlegro
ups.com>
References: <b003fa04-9bcf-4490-b1cc-0bf8779298cc_at_s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="===========_491304500=.ALT"
X-Mail-Filter-Gateway: Not scanned
X-Mail-Filter-Gateway-SpamDetectionEngine: not spam,
SpamAssassin (not cached, score
autolearn
sabled, HTML_MESSAGE 0.00, RDNS_NONE 0.10)
X-Mail-Filter-Gateway-From: jm..._at_tscm.com
X-Mail-Filter-Gateway-To: tscm-..._at_googlegroups.com
--===========_491304500=.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; formatowed
Not an issue, you simply perform the sweep for the executive, not for
the partnership.
Talk to your attorney for guidance.
-jma
At 05:04 PM 5/4/2009, j..._at_spytecinc.com wrote:
>Dear Group
>
>My firm has been asked by ONE of the principles of a TWO partner group
>to determine if any keyloggers or keylogging software has been
>installed on the computers in the company. The issue is that the
>principle hiring my IT person thinks his partner is the one who
>potentially installed the "spyware". How would you suggest I proceed
>in terms of a signed document by one of the principals allowing us to
>examine the companies computers? They are equal partners. I assume
>that some of you may have done a sweep for one partner who may suspect
>another partner of some kind of "bugging".
>
>Thanks for any suggestions,
>
>Jon
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James M. Atkinson Phone: (978) 546-3803
Granite Island Group Fax: (978) 546-9467
127 Eastern Avenue #291 Web:
http://www.tscm.com/
Gloucester, MA 01931-8008 E-mail: mailto:jm..._at_tscm.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamesmatkinson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No enterprise is more likely to succeed than one concealed from the
enemy until it is ripe for execution. - Machiavelli, The Prince, 1521
--===========_491304500=.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
<body>
<br>
Not an issue, you simply perform the sweep for the executive, not for the
partnership.<br><br>
Talk to your attorney for guidance.<br><br>
-jma<br><br>
<br>
At 05:04 PM 5/4/2009, j..._at_spytecinc.com wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type te class te cite="">Dear Group<br><br>
My firm has been asked by ONE of the principles of a TWO partner
group<br>
to determine if any keyloggers or keylogging software has been<br>
installed on the computers in the company. The issue is that the<br>
principle hiring my IT person thinks his partner is the one who<br>
potentially installed the �spyware�. How would you suggest I proceed<br>
in terms of a signed document by one of the principals allowing us
to<br>
examine the companies computers? They are equal partners. I assume<br>
that some of you may have done a sweep for one partner who may
suspect<br>
another partner of some kind of "bugging".<br><br>
Thanks for any suggestions,<br><br>
Jon<br>
</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
James M.
Atkinson
Phone: (978) 546-3803<br>
Granite Island
Group
Fax: (978) 546-9467<br>
127 Eastern Avenue
#291
Web:
<a href="
http://www.tscm.com/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.tscm.com/<br>
</a> Gloucester, MA
01931-8008
E-mail:
<a href="mailto:jm..._at_tscm.com" eudora="autourl">mailto:jm..._at_tscm.com<br>
</a> <b>
<a href="
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamesmatkinson" eudora="autourl">
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jamesmatkinson<br>
</a></b>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
No enterprise is more likely to succeed than one concealed from the
<br>
enemy until it is ripe for execution. - Machiavelli, The Prince,
1521 </body>
</html>
--===========_491304500=.ALT--
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:28 CST