Title: Case 5
Hewlett- Packard’s Secret Surveillance of Directors and Journalist Martha E Richard
Aiken Technical College
Obtaining confidential information by posing as another person was unethical. There are other avenues that could have been assessed to get to the person who was responsible for the leakage in the cooperation to the media. Seeking a private investigation team was an extreme measure in my opinion. What is done in the darkness shall always reveal itself in the light.
Case Study Five involves Hewlett-Packard’s Secret Surveillance of Directors and Journalists. According to the article Chairwoman, Patricia Dunn became outraged with confidential board information being leaked to the media. Therefore, she hired an electronic security team to spy on existing board members and journalist personal communication records. Dunn did not mention the undercover activity. The investigations used a method referred to as Pretexting. The perpetrator would initiate an out bound call to a third party source. Upon successful authentication confidential information was shared. The surveillance uncovered the person who was responsible for the leakage. That person made a public apology. During a private meeting it was noted that the member stated, “I would have told you all about this. Why didn’t you just ask?” The person of interest was never publicized although, they resigned from their position. Thomas Perkins was not in agreement with the private investigation. He later resigned his position with Hewlett Packard.
I do not agree with the method used to obtain confidential information from the Board member of Hewlett-Packard. I personally feel that a closed meeting should have been mandated once this information had been leaked to the media and a confession should have concluded. As a Board member on that level I am certain that there are guidelines that are to be carried out by each person holding a position within that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document