Not that I think doing this type of stuff on employees is a good idea I've been in positions where it was needed. By making the HR policy and have midlevel managers reinforce its existence in meetings you've done a good part of warning. Then by *allowing* the application's default behavior you can monitor usage. With monitored usage contacting folks personally with a "hey we know what you're doing and it's braking company policy" message; this can be a great task for NOC personnel in the downtime.
The final step is using those managers which have surely exposed themselves as supporters of this policy. Make the list of violators available as a matter of record and they'll do all the dirty work for you. Word of these examples will spread and usage tends to all but stop. I've found this much easier and more rapid than outright prevention which is a very difficult war to win in today's corporate networks which don't depend upon proxies and bastions to interact with the outside world. nrf wrote: > > It's not a case of choosing something that works all the time. It's more a > case of turning it from a technical problem to an HR problem. > > Because let's face it. Even if you do manage to find a way to block out > messenger for most people in your office you're always going to have one > employee who knows a lot about computers, and will figure out a way to > circumvent whatever roadblocks you've put in his way. For example, he'll > set up a proxy at his home computer and get to messenger that way. Then of > course that employee will inevitably tell others how to do it, and you'll > pretty much wind up with the same situation as before. Then you'll have a > grand old time trying to find and ban all the proxies, and whenever you ban > one, another one will inevitably pop up. It becomes like the amusement-park > game of Cisco "whack-a-mole", with the difference being that there's no > teddy bear if you win. > > ""Jarmoc, Jeff"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > But truly the best way is to simply have company policy that bans > > messenger. > > > > Because we all know that always works, right? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=30989&t=30891 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
