Re: E-mail clean-up, aisle three (June 9)

That is an excellent article and well written. I wonder, is this going to have any effect on the new privacy bill effective Jan. 2004? Will

it be in conflict with European privacy which would prohibit the sharing of private information with any country that does not have equal privacy protection for the individual?

Matt McGrath

Re: E-mail clean-up, aisle three (June 9)

Good article. One thing which will affect situations like these of course is the new privacy act coming into effect Jan. 1, 2004. There is a federal act (PIPEDA) and then each province may have something slightly different. Therefore firms could be facing several problems on issues like these especially if they operate over several provinces.

Jim Bannon


Re: Good malware, bad malware (June 6)

Just want to echo your points and add a couple.

In the real world we need people who understand virus and worm technology and how to prevent them from negatively impacting production environments. To do that effectively you need to understand how these work, where they come from and what they exploit. We teach engineers to build better cars by having them wreck them in tests. Isn’t this just the same thing?

As a computer professional, who studied the then nascent technology of phone hacks in university so I could better protect the networks I designed, I for one applaud Calgary for teaching an important course, coupled with the ethics and legal obligations that go with it. Would we rather students learn this from other sources who have only destructive objectives?

Thanks for bring an important position and understanding forward and voicing an opinion shared by many of us who are out there in the trenches.

David C. Woelfle
Enterprise architect
EDS Canada


Re: Gun registry backfires after system exceeds capacity (June 5)

Why do you use a pistol for the illustration, when the registry is for long guns? Looks like one more example of misinformation on this subject. The author did not appear to consider that all of the complaints and opposition to this potentially draconian system might mean there are some legitimate reasons for not doing it, in addition to the tremendous costs with extremely low potential benefit, from my perspective.

Larry Duncan

Re: Gun registry backfires after system exceeds capacity (June 5)

On an otherwise good story, you totally destroyed any credibility you had with the photograph accompanying the article and fed the fallacy that this gun control legislation is to register potentially dangerous handguns. But then, perhaps that is what people in Eastern Canada and metropolitan areas think of when they think of “”guns”” — Saturday night specials; easily-concealable weapons used mainly by criminals, etc. Sorry, handguns have been controlled in Canada for many years. This legislation is about controlling the firearms used by farmers to rid themselves of animals that prey on their livestock and firearms used by hunters; in other words, long-barrelled rifles, shotguns, etc. A shotgun or a hunting rifle would have been a much better choice. But then, those firearms do not convey the same dangerous image as does a handgun, does it? That picture of a handgun for this article is like showing a picture of a laptop with an article on mainframe computers.

Karl P. Marten

Editor’s Note: While the gun registry is designed to handle all manner of firearms, the graphic accompanying the story was changed from a pistol to a rifle to better reflect its intent.


Letters to the editor must include the writer’s name and company name along with an e-mail address or other contact information. All letters become the property of ITBusiness.ca. Editors reserve the right to edit submissions for length and content.

Share on LinkedIn Share with Google+