Businesses, entities, and infrastructure are all at risk of hacking or other types of terrorism because of the free flow of electronic information. Critical infrastructure is then particularly important in terms of adequate protection, as this refers to essential services and structures upon which the stability and security of a country is built (Abbas 2006: 234)
, Sweden's draconian surveillance laws, and the UK's tendency towards governmental secrecy to understand the gravity of the issue. Governments appear to apply different laws to themselves than to others (Blunn 2005: 14)
Standards have for example been implemented by means of contracts with the appropriate service providers, which stipulate elements such as the specific costs to be carried by all the involved parties. An important element is the exemption process and how this is streamlined (Boucher 1999: 4)
When viewed from this perspective, it is perhaps not surprising that many Western governments have taken extreme measures to prevent the use of telecommunications for covert terrorist planning. However, an increasing number of critics have begun to question the validity of this approach, especially as it concerns human rights (Breyer 2005)
This compares well with Australia's legislation and governmental attitude, in that it infringes significantly upon the rights and freedoms of Americans, while the government is of the opinion that such measures are necessary to curb further terrorist threats. Instead, some authors are concerned that the most significant accomplishment has been criminalizing innocent members of the public only for belonging to a certain ethnic or religious group (Bronitt 2003: 5)
An added element is the secrecy under which the Echelon system has been implemented by the United States National Security Agency (NSA). The system encompasses global surveillance via a system that was more than 50 years old at the time of writing (Campbell 2000)
The costs in terms of personal and business privacy should not however be significant in this regard. Law enforcement and government officials should implement their security measures only in terms of the general constitution of the country involved (Carne 2006: 3)
To counter this, Carnivore is installed on a computer network -- generally those of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to capture and store information running through these networks. Significantly, the system has been in existence since 1997, but only became known to the public in 2000 (Horn 2002: 2235)
Instead, it is becoming an international concern even as information technology and access to electronic communication increases exponentially as fast as on a daily basis. The United States implemented warrantless surveillance legislation under the Bush administration and later attempted to expand this by means of the 2007 Protect America Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008 (Irion, 2009: 26)
While some argue for the sanctity of workplace privacy, even as privacy should be respected in the home, others argue that the workplace is public space, which is the domain of the employer. Hence, workers forfeit the right to send private information via channels provided free of charge by the employer (Kierkegaard 2005)
The question remains however to what extent such legislation should be allowed to restrict constitutionally guaranteed human rights. One such important legislative issue is for example the extent to which police should be able to track wireless calls (Lee, 2003)
The various national responses to the terrorism issue is a further complicating factor. The international policy confrontations regarding privacy protection for citizens ultimately resulted in prolonged international negotiation, and finally in a compromise known as the "Safe Harbor" agreement (Long and Quek 2002: 326)
According to the author, "In the United States, the sale of personal information alone was estimated at $1.5 billion in 1997" (Reidenberg 2000:1318)
It is important to measure these costs carefully against the potential benefit of protecting the company or the country. Employers who do use surveillance technology should do so only after asking themselves how much the technology truly benefits them, and how much potential harm is being done to employees (Reidy and Wen 2010)
Hence, even if a person being held under suspicion is innocent, his or her rights receive only minimal attention. The controversy surrounding this is founded upon two assumptions (Rix 2008: 42); the first that national security is to protect citizens from criminal and violent acts; and second that the Rule of Law protects the individual from excessive state measures, while also protecting the freedom and security of the state as a whole
Indeed, it would seriously hamper the government's ability to protect its people from national security breaches. Finding a balance between the privacy concerns of government and citizens respectively has been an issue of considerable controversy since the late 18th century (Soma et al
Employees who are aware of being monitored will be more likely to comply with stated rules and policies than those who do not have such awareness. Hence it makes more sense from a human relations and employee turnover point-of-view to inform employees not only of Internet usage policy, but also of how such policies will be enforced (Stahl 2008)
The next crucial step is to always focus on the benefits that telecommuting can deliver to the company, rather than the traffic jams that employees will be able to avoid. By doing the suggested process, Exelon nuclear and its employees will see the benefits of having a telecommuting program quickly, which would be a great asset to this company (Ross)
After that, Exelon nuclear must determine that against the work being performed at home. This will present management with a tool to compare productivity (Smith, 2010)
In a medical emergency, the first step is to take charge of the situation. This is because people react favorably to direction and decisive leadership in such a situation (Martin)