UA mandates spyware
Update: Make that a $65 fee, not $50. Not only that, it might increase to $100.
I have yet to test out UAWifi, the bigger and supposedly better campus wireless network funded by the new $50-and-increasing technology fee. Every time I try to connect, it merely rejects me.
For those who have figured it out (kind of), they don’t like it. The network apparently mandates the user to run a "policy key" program. This program supposedly ensures certain things on the computer according to the manufacturer’s website including:
And because I use Comodo instead of the supported programs, my system would theoretically be unsupported.
This isn’t just UAWifi; users in residence halls are also affected. As for now, the wireless network "UAWireless," while unsecured, is still working and is where I’m posting this from right now.
More than ninety students have joined the Facebook group "Screw Policy Key" and are working to find a workaround, calling it spyware, which is ironically one of the things the policy key is supposed to protect against. The people responsible for the change maintain that it isn’t.
Meanwhile, I think I might know a way around it, but I also don’t feel like getting sued. We’ll see whether it works once it, well, works. People ought to realize that CCIT closely monitors its network traffic in the first place, but requiring people to run intrusive software like this is quite scary.
I haven’t yet tried to log onto the new system. I liked the old network…works just great for me. And as for them being aware of teh traffic…i thought they said that students can’t play certain games on the network…and if they did, they would do something or other. Yet I havent gotten in trouble or even experienced any problems with their network when i play world of warcraft (yes…hate me). LOL
Comment by Laura Latimer — September 18, 2006 @ 7:43 pm
WORLD OF WARCRAFT?! NOOOOOOO!!!!
I thought this blog would be my permanent escape from the horror that is having three roommates, all of whom play World of Warcraft. I’m apparently wrong.
Comment by Garrett O'Hara — September 18, 2006 @ 8:55 pm