Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Microsoft Outlook Bug may have erased Enron Email evidence

  • Subject: Re: Microsoft Outlook Bug may have erased Enron Email evidence
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:27:06 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / ISBE, Manchester University / ITS
  • References: <1155721335.863919.19340@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <pan.2006.08.16.20.33.24.993879@invalidadd.com> <1155816628.461982.242880@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1155883743.065056.73440@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] on Friday 18 August 2006 07:49 \__

> 
> nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> > If I were to start a small company today, I would definitely run MS IIS,
>> > Exchange and Outlook for all web and email services.  That would give us
>> > an out to reply to any important supoena that "despite our best efforts,
>> > we have been unable to recover our email and records."
>> >
>> > There would be available any required number of experts to testify to
>> > the judge that this is a common occurence.
>> >
>> > Of course, I might wind up in the slammer if the judge had any technical
>> > expertise at all since he would know that nobody in their right mind
>> > would trust company communications to the likes of Exchange.
>> >
>> > JH
>>
>> Hard to believe that Enron was that conniving, but it certainly served
>> their interests well.
>>
>> Which reminds me, I heard a while back that Microsoft decided to delete
>> all internal emails after a period of time.   This was in response to
>> the DOJ case.   However, I've also had the impression that this was
>> illegal.  Any one who could clarify this question, I'd be interested to
>> know.
> 
> I found this---internal discussion of retaining email and other
> documents at Microsoft.  Makes you wonder what they've got to hide.
> 
>
http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2006/08/niall-sez-microsoft-is-too-big-and.html#c115526616083647157


Oh, dear. How did you find this in Mini Microsoft? S/he makes some valid
points.

,----[ Quote ]
| On the subject of "too big and bloated", has anyone else gotten emails
| about this "managed Exchange folders" bullshit? They're going to
| automatically delete our email unless we drop it into a special "keep
| for one year" folder - and if you want it longer that one yet, you have
| to put it in a "non-work related" folder or "critical business impact"
| folder.
`----

At a previous job I had, it was useful to refer back to old troublesheeting
threads. In fact, I kept local copies of the mail at home (IMAP server).


,----[ Quote ]
| This makes me so furious, I'm actually incandescent with rage. Email is
| our lifeblood. How the fuck does this help us compete? Precisely which
| customers are we delighting while we babysit our inboxes to prevent
| losing 6-month old email? And what the crap do you do when your product
| cycle spans more than three years? The new policy makes it impossible
| to legitimately retain work-related documents older than three years.
`----

When Mark Pilgrim moved from Mac OS to Ubuntu he was furious enough to find
that his mail was stored in proprietary format/s. "It's my whole life in
there", her said (not exact quote). But truthfully, E-mail can serve as
somewhat of a life stories, to those who live digitally/electronically.
Blogs/newsgroups/forums likewise. You know, I still have some of my material
from school, going back to 1st grade. Even if I'm unlikely to look at it, I
want it by my side. Electronic data takes far less space, so there is greed
for high retention thresholds.


,----[ Quote ]
| And if you go read up on the policy, it doesn't apply to just email. It's
| any document, stored anywhere! I hope you never need to take a look at
| a three year old spec, design document, or TDS, because that's going to
| be a violation of company policy. Hope the guys working on EU
| documentation compliance keep this in mind - hey, maybe that's the
| new plan for Operation Stonewall...
`----


And that's the company that's supposed to deliver communication specification
for its servers. What has it got which is worth hiding? Is it shredding
evidence? If so, let's dig it and expose reality. Maybe Microsoft can
foresee a situation where, 5 years down the line, someone raids Redmond and
robs Microsoft (and its wealthy leaders) of all that fortune (tainted gold).
Gates ought to hurry and give that money away to charity... at least he can
get some credit and recognition.

This reminds me of a story that shows up in  the news these days. It talks
about a spammer who made millions and allegedly had it converted to gold and
buried the gold/platinum at his parents' house. AOL is going to turn that
house upside-down soon.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index