Exam 312-49 topic 1 question 107 discussion

Actual exam question from ECCouncil's 312-49

Question #: 107
Topic #: 1

You are working as Computer Forensics investigator and are called by the owner of an accounting firm to investigate possible computer abuse by one of the firm's employees. You meet with the owner of the firm and discover that the company has never published a policy stating that they reserve the right to inspect their computing assets at will. What do you do?

A. Inform the owner that conducting an investigation without a policy is not a problem because the company is privately owned
B. Inform the owner that conducting an investigation without a policy is a violation of the 4th amendment
C. Inform the owner that conducting an investigation without a policy is a violation of the employee's expectation of privacy
D. Inform the owner that conducting an investigation without a policy is not a problem because a policy is only necessary for government agencies

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: C 🗳️

by apetro76 at Dec. 24, 2020, 6:49 p.m.

Comments

Submit Cancel

apetro76

2 years, 1 month ago

violation of employees expectation of privacy is also a violation of 4th amendment.

upvoted 1 times

Ariel235788

1 year, 1 month ago

but its not an unreasonable search if its a company owned device. thats why corps need to push policies like AUPs etc. Also why headers of 'no expectation of privacy on corp devices' need to be pushed as well. I side more with C just for the fact that employees do not own corporate devices and therefore cannot be violated of their 4th amendment. Now if the company was trying to search their personal device that was being used for corporate communications, then yes you would be pushing for violation of 4th amendment

upvoted 1 times

...