IRS employee uses Outlook rules to intercept boss's e-mails, convicted of wiretapping
Here's an interesting question for you: if you set up a rule in Microsoft Outlook to forward messages from one account to another, and you do it without the knowledge of the owner of the account you're forwarding from, are you intercepting or merely copying mail? It may seem like a moot point, but for David Szymuszkiewicz, a former IRS worker, it's an important distinction. David was afraid of being fired after his license was suspended for drunk driving (he needed to drive to the homes of delinquent taxpayers), so he secretly set up this rule on his boss's machine to see what the world was saying about him. The rule was discovered and, wouldn't you know it, he was in trouble. The only question now: whether to charge him under the Wiretap Act for intercepting messages or the Stored Communications Act for merely copying of them.
So, what was your answer to the question above? You might be tempted to say he was simply making a copy, and indeed that was Szymuszkiewicz's argument, but any Exchange admin will tell you that Outlook rules are executed on the server, not at the client, meaning those e-mails were indeed being intercepted. Szymuszkiewicz was convicted of wiretapping but seems to have avoided a harsh sentence, with 18 months probation being handed down. A light punishment for wiretapping, but a heavy one for diddling menus in Outlook.IRS employee uses Outlook rules to intercept boss's e-mails, convicted of wiretapping originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 15 Dec 2010 12:52:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
ars technica | Email this | Comments]]>Category Article computers, electronics, mobile phone, review
One Response to “Games and Gadgets”
WOW everyone has this wrong - first the personnel files were not created by szymuszkiewicz - his computer crashed and IT dept created the personnel folders and transferred the emails they could save into them. IRS refused to give up the help tickets. Szymuszkiewicz was acting as a supervisor and this account was set up during his acting period. Szymuszkiewicz always acted during the holidays. In fact retired IT specialist indicated stepped forward indicating this was known practice though out the IRS and in fact working years with szymuszkiewicz that he requested help with his computer and in fact was not computer wizard. No one else would set up because the investigator send out email prior to trail scaring off others to come forward. He in fact told here supervisor and others heard it that he was getting her emails. Even went to the union and was told that it was the supervisor responsibility to check into what was wrong. Many emails that were forward by his supervisor were answered by her. Which puts here on notice. She wouldn’t omit that because this would of gotten here in trouble. She was too close to retirement. She might of lose her job and retirement benefits. The government stated he put this on the supervisor computer but had no evidence. This is pretty hard to when in a full office and secretary sitting outside her office. He received the DWI after he was receiving the email. In fact the supervisor was not even assigned to the Racine office - she was on extended sick leave. The government had nothing so they tried to state this was the reason. In fact O'Neil know this. But, mislead the 7th district - knowing that the facts would not be verify. In fact if szymuszkiewicz was in such trouble - why would be get out standing awards. Act as a supervisor and mentor others. In fact was never was discuss that this was a issue. If it was an issue the Government needed to put this in writing and offer him treatment. Which none of this happened. Szymuszkiewicz didn’t need a driver license - all agency worked at home 4 days a week. Went into work only to down load work load maybe once a week or the tax payers came into the office. They indicated that he was computer smart. The individual who testified didn’t know szymuszkiewicz in fact this individual didn’t work in the same office - Pewaukee via Racine. In fact she stated he was not computer knowledge at work but at home. That was hard because she was never at szymuszkiewicz home or friends. In fact this individual received supervisor promotion after testifying. Szymuszkiewicz got screwed because he pissed of the investigator on other cases defending others on union issue. Others would not step forward because they need there jobs and scared to get involved. The truth will come out very shortly - In fact the Federal system you can be convicted for a crime on hear say. As the judge stated you don’t need evidence. Just here say what people feel that might of happen.