Information Security The discussion below provides answers to questions raised with regard to a case at Greenwood Company

A forensic plan of readiness comes with several advantages. If there arises a situation that forces a company to be engaged in litigation, and there is need for digital evidence, e-discovery is of central importance. The laws and rules that govern the e-discovery, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Practice 31B Direction of the UK call for the presentation of electronic evidence fast; and that such evidence must be in sound state, forensically (Sule). The Electronic Discovery Reference Model is reputed as the standard model for processing e-discovery, and is compliant with FRCP.10 Information management procedures require that electronic evidence should be collected and stored appropriately. Such evidence should be readily available when it is needed. E-discovery information management procedures include incident response, data retention, and discovery of disaster and business continuity policies. All the procedures are bound by the plan for forensic policy readiness. The monitoring usage of endpoints that is acceptable, the process may uncover malware infiltration in the system, and tracing the sources of the malware. These moves will help prevent future attacks of similar nature. The explanation given here is a single example of how an incident still in potential phase can be prevented from evolving into an actual security incident, hence causing serious concerns (Sule). Moreover, cyber threats of higher magnitude can be unearthed, their roots tracked and stopped. Examples in this regard include intellectual property theft, harassment, extortion and fraud. Overall, information security is enhanced. The main three requirements for a business in the private sector would be identifying scenarios that would need such a plan, defining the evidence type and instituting the necessary legal action to handle the situation.

2. Indeed, searching the locker is appropriate....

Employers in the private sector have a right to inspect and search their employee's locker; if there is a policy that allows such action within the organization. Such a policy should inform the employees of their limited privacy at their places of work. It should also inform them that they should expect their lockers and desks may be searched for genuine reasons (Johnson). In this case, Mr. Jenkins is uneasy with the theft of source code for product X. Mcbride is a suspect.
3. There would be no need for searching an employee's locker or desk in an ideal working arrangement. However, there is an urgent need by most employers to keep the place of work free of drugs, alcohol and potential thieving tendencies by employees. Most employees believe that they should be shielded from acts of intrusive privacy intrusion by employers. The courts on their part have been faced with this difficult scenario. They have sought to grant each party its fair share of justice by striking a balance to fulfill each party's interests (Workplace Searches - Workplace Fairness). Cases that involve invasion of privacy at the work place include a lot of facts and are judges each case's merit of evidence. Employees in the public sector expect a greater level of protection of their privacy as spelled out in the constitution of the US.

Although the protection of privacy is captured in the constitution, nine states in the US, including Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Alaska, South Carolina, California, Montana and Washington have granted employees in the private sector similar protection at their work places. Most states to not explicitly outline the dos and don'ts that employers should abide by when conducting searches at the work place (Workplace Searches - Workplace Fairness).

Employers are allowed by law to search an employee's clothes, locker or desk to establish whether an employee has stolen an item that belongs to the organization/company. It is, therefore expected that employees will be searched…