Prosecutor: Nokia dug up e-mails in effort to plug information leaks in 2000-2001
Company says it only monitored suspicious volumes of mail - not content
|
|
The world’s largest mobile telephone manufacturer Nokia launched an unprecedented security operation in 2000, using means that reportedly stretched the bounds of legality. According to Vantaa District prosecutor Jukka Haavisto, the company’s security department investigated private e-mail correspondence of its personnel, and looked into large e-mail attachments more closely than usual.
Although the prosecutor suspects wrondoing on the part of Nokia, prosecution is no longer possible because of the time that has elapsed from the alleged illegal acts.
Haavisto’s findings were part of a decision not to prosecute two police officers for malfeasance, for not filing a criminal complaint over the actions of the Nokia Security Department in 2001.
Haavisto decided not to prosecute the officers - agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). He also found much to criticise in Nokia’s actions.
The decision quotes a memo drafted by Nokia’s top lawyer at the time. According to the memo, the security department drew diagrams on a large screen indicating the volume of e-mail traffic by certain company employees.
The investigation involved 1,600 e-mails that were sent by Nokia personnel, the time that they were sent, the senders, the recipients, and the size of the message. The aim was to find out if business secrets were leaking out of Nokia to the company’s main competitors.
The main suspected sources of the leaks were Nokia employees who were leaving to take other jobs. They were presented with a paper to sign, allowing Nokia to examine the full content of their computers.
The security department even considered the possibility of moving the e-mail server to Sweden or Britain, where the content of the messages themselves could have been opened legally.
The events were in the background of Haavisto’s decision concerning two investigators of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). Haavisto considered whether or not they should be prosecuted for not filing a criminal complaint on the actions of Nokia’s security department, even though they had learned of the activities already in early 2001.
The prosecutor feels that Nokia did not have the legal grounds to ascertain the senders and recipients of the e-mail, even if there were suspicions of a leak; tracing e-mails and telephone calls is the job of the police, as was noted in the decision given a year ago in the Sonera telesnooping case.
The district prosecutor feels that the police violated their official duty by not pursuing the matter when they learned about the snooping. However, Haavisto decided not to prosecute the NBI officers because the violation was seen as a minor one.
He notes that the officers themselves believed that the employees in question had consented to the investigation.
So what was it that got the global giant of mobile telephony to tremble?
The matter involved Jyrki Hallikainen, the former key figure for the Nokia mobile phone operations. Hallikainen left Nokia in 1997 with a certain amount of acrimony, and set up the electronics company Microcell in Oulu.
At first the operation was a small one, but Microcell soon began to develop mobile phones for Nokia’s competitors, including Ericsson. Hallikainen began to spend large amounts of money to lure his former colleagues at Nokia to join him. However, Nokia also had other concerns: the company’s head of security, Jaakko Häyhtiö began to suspect that corporate secrets - confidential prouduct development information - were leaking to Microcell.
Häyhtiö and his section made their enquiries about the e-mails, and approached the NBI on several occasions with requests that they investigate the matter. These included requests for reports on the company’s e-mail usage.
However, the two investigators did not feel that the reports justified suspicions of a leak of information to Microcell.
No police investigation was launched, nor was any criminal complaint filed. Haavisto says that the reason for the delay was to protect Nokia against unpleasant publicity.
Nokia continued to deny on Thursday that the e-mail messaging of any individual person had been monitored. Nokia says that the study of the volume of traffic took the form of mass analyses of information from the different departments on the Nokia e-mail server.
Although the prosecutor suspects wrondoing on the part of Nokia, prosecution is no longer possible because of the time that has elapsed from the alleged illegal acts.
Haavisto’s findings were part of a decision not to prosecute two police officers for malfeasance, for not filing a criminal complaint over the actions of the Nokia Security Department in 2001.
Haavisto decided not to prosecute the officers - agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). He also found much to criticise in Nokia’s actions.
The decision quotes a memo drafted by Nokia’s top lawyer at the time. According to the memo, the security department drew diagrams on a large screen indicating the volume of e-mail traffic by certain company employees.
The investigation involved 1,600 e-mails that were sent by Nokia personnel, the time that they were sent, the senders, the recipients, and the size of the message. The aim was to find out if business secrets were leaking out of Nokia to the company’s main competitors.
The main suspected sources of the leaks were Nokia employees who were leaving to take other jobs. They were presented with a paper to sign, allowing Nokia to examine the full content of their computers.
The security department even considered the possibility of moving the e-mail server to Sweden or Britain, where the content of the messages themselves could have been opened legally.
The events were in the background of Haavisto’s decision concerning two investigators of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). Haavisto considered whether or not they should be prosecuted for not filing a criminal complaint on the actions of Nokia’s security department, even though they had learned of the activities already in early 2001.
The prosecutor feels that Nokia did not have the legal grounds to ascertain the senders and recipients of the e-mail, even if there were suspicions of a leak; tracing e-mails and telephone calls is the job of the police, as was noted in the decision given a year ago in the Sonera telesnooping case.
The district prosecutor feels that the police violated their official duty by not pursuing the matter when they learned about the snooping. However, Haavisto decided not to prosecute the NBI officers because the violation was seen as a minor one.
He notes that the officers themselves believed that the employees in question had consented to the investigation.
So what was it that got the global giant of mobile telephony to tremble?
The matter involved Jyrki Hallikainen, the former key figure for the Nokia mobile phone operations. Hallikainen left Nokia in 1997 with a certain amount of acrimony, and set up the electronics company Microcell in Oulu.
At first the operation was a small one, but Microcell soon began to develop mobile phones for Nokia’s competitors, including Ericsson. Hallikainen began to spend large amounts of money to lure his former colleagues at Nokia to join him. However, Nokia also had other concerns: the company’s head of security, Jaakko Häyhtiö began to suspect that corporate secrets - confidential prouduct development information - were leaking to Microcell.
Häyhtiö and his section made their enquiries about the e-mails, and approached the NBI on several occasions with requests that they investigate the matter. These included requests for reports on the company’s e-mail usage.
However, the two investigators did not feel that the reports justified suspicions of a leak of information to Microcell.
No police investigation was launched, nor was any criminal complaint filed. Haavisto says that the reason for the delay was to protect Nokia against unpleasant publicity.
Nokia continued to deny on Thursday that the e-mail messaging of any individual person had been monitored. Nokia says that the study of the volume of traffic took the form of mass analyses of information from the different departments on the Nokia e-mail server.
Helsingin Sanomat