🚀 go-pugleaf

rule for Internet traffic is "don't send anything you
>  wouldn't want to read about in tomorrow's newspaper".

I think it's pretty obvious why company traffic involving company systems
is monitored. After all, companies aren't democracies.

Finally, I should point out that all the people at both sites were told
repeatedly that Internet email was being monitored; this includes all
traffic picked up by my JobTalk analytic:

> Salomon site.
>  
> All sites start out with the employment contract stating unequivocally
> that the systems are the company's and are to be used only for work
> purposes. And that they are subject to inspection. You signed it.
>  
> Salomon's goes further by stating the firm's computer systems may be
> audited and that they have the right to do so even if you have put
> personal information on the system.
>  
> After the first couple of months of security incidents at Salomon,
> they began issuing global email broadcasts saying that a new security
> package "Internet Risk Management: email facility" had been installed,
> and that Internet email traffic was actively being monitored.
>  
> They did so again and again.
>  
> I think they sent out a memo to everyone too.
>  
> Security incidents NEVER stopped.
>  
> Major violations occurred again and again and again and again...
>  
> I have come to realize that the number of security incidents a firm
> has is not related to how often they warn their employees not to send
> proprietary/confidential information out via email.
>  
> The number of security incidents is a function of the number of employees.
>  
> If you are a big computer-based firm (banks, brokerage, in