The Observation Deck

Over the past several days, I have received calls from Channel 19, Channel 5 and Molly Kavanaugh of the PD concerning the library’s new registration system for the Technology Center, which uses a PIN number linked to a valid Lakewood Public Library card and VNC software that staff may use for system maintenance and observation of patron use for compliance with applicable laws and library policies. In addition someone is alleging erroneously that LPL uses key-logging software to capture personal credit information.

In order to create public consternation and media attention, someone is confusing, conflating and misrepresenting the software systems, uses and practices at LPL.

Here are the facts:

1. Notice of Acceptable Use Policy

LPL’s acceptable use policy is acknowledged by the patron before logging onto a public computer.

See: http://lkwdpl.org/about/acceptable1.htm

2. Observation and Intervention

LPL employees are authorized to bring to an individual’s attention any act which will detract from the decorum of the library or will create a hostile workplace in violation of state and federal civil rights laws.

In our “Tech Checkâ€￾ procedures staff are directed to scan the room for compliance with policies and laws every fifteen minutes.

As a public administrator, I have to duty to see that public property is not turned into criminal tools and that patrons do not create a hostile workplace.

In cases in which it is deemed necessary to enforce laws, police will be called for assistance. And we do.

3. Registration Software Requiring a Valid LPL Card and Pin Number

LPL is now using a program called PC Reservation to take appointments for public computers. This same software is used in over 6,000 libraries world-wide, and is deployed in many Ohio libraries.

Westlake Porter Public Library is the closest system in proximity to Lakewood already using it. LPL chose this software after a long evaluation of what was available on the market, as it best suited our needs. In addition LPL is using LPT1 print control software to manage the printing in the Technology Center, which automatically limits patron printing to 20 pages. Both PC Reservation and LPT1 are from a company called Envisionware (http://www.envisionware.com/).

3. VNC – Remote Viewing Software

In Main Library LPL technicians are installing an open source network management tool called Tight VNC, which allows for remote access to a computer on a network. Tight VNC has been installed at Madison Branch.

Once fully installed the VNC program may be used in two ways: one, to perform routine maintenance and upgrades remotely and, 2. to take a 1-second screenshot of a public computer if we have suspicion a patron is violating either the room rules or the Acceptable Use Policy.

Here is a copy of an e-mail I sent to Molly Kanavanagh yesterday:

Molly:

I believe this link will present the language I stated; it appears on the screen before a patron uses a library computer.

http://lkwdpl.org/about/acceptable1.htm

Any this is the language:

Lakewood Public Library utilizes VNC software for purposes of system maintenance and for assurances of accountability and compliance with all applicable laws and library policy.

Understand that VNC - in our case Tight VNC is an open source remote desktop tool used for a variety of monitoring support functions - used throughout computer networks and offices.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vnc

By the way, my manager John Guscott mentioned Euclid PL uses remote access and desktop viewing software, a commercial program we don't use.

It does also serve the purpose of software support and assistance.

Background on Euclid:

Euclid PL uses Net Support Manager for remote access and desktop viewing:

http://www.netsupportmanager.com/.
Here is a view of how the monitoring systems with thumbnail screenshot feature works: http://www.netsupportmanager.com/features.asp

My manager also mentioned Salt Lake City Public Library remote and desktop viewing software.

The letter writer conflates the registration program and VNC to create a spin that personal information is being captured, which is incorrect.

In actual point of practice, staff monitor the room walking around and scanning activity for compliance- something we've done since inception in 1993- rather than virtual scans. It is a network tool that may be used.

Best,

Ken

It’s no secret in the universe of public libraries that public computer areas can easily become magnets for criminal and unethical behavior. As the offerings of the public library expanded access to computer technology, the opportunities for criminal and unethical behavior to occur in public space have increased accordingly. Public libraries across the United States are suffering from the diffusion of criminal, indecorous and senselessly unethical behavior that erodes common goals, community interest and voter support, especially in era of limited resources and economic contraction.

Our community shares an interest in consistent and fair rule enforcement, respect for public property, responsibilities and an increased valuation of the library card itself.

I hope this provides background for understanding the administrative rationale and a lens for reading or viewing any stories from the media.

Kenneth Warren
Director
Lakewood Public Library

Kenneth Warren wrote:It’s no secret in the universe of public libraries that public computer areas can easily become magnets for criminal and unethical behavior. As the offerings of the public library expanded access to computer technology, the opportunities for criminal and unethical behavior to occur in public space have increased accordingly.

I want to thank you and your staff for you continuing efforts to make the Library safe and secure. You have a legal and moral responsibility to maintain civilized behaviour in the library. I appluad the efforts of all concerned in preserving the reputation and assets of our new library.

I never understood the periodic wars against the library but I guess it's a sign of the times.

The reality of the situation is precisely as Ken has posted. The systems in place are to assure that the LPL is not used as a base for spamming, hacking or other unacceptable uses.

I should also point out, that the public access computers are a tool for dispensing information and doing research. Per our use policy (which all users have to accept):

It is the policy of Lakewood Public Library to develop, as limited resources permit, collections, programs and services that make use of computerized technology and the Internet for educational and informational purposes

Frankly, those person doing emailing, banking, on line shopping and such other activitites in which there would be concern about passwords, are not using the center for its inteded purpose......educational and informational.

It is my understanding that the person or persons complaining were concerned about library personel "stealing banking information" which beyond being something that our software cannot do, is nevertheless, in violation of the use policy.

As a side light, I find it extremely interesting that on June 1st, when LPL held it's official opening, with world renown architect Robert A.M. Stern, a time when the public could finally see and celebrate the fruition of the project, listen to the great Garfield middle school jazz band, view the Haas murals, the Demming children's room entrance and the Burgeon Libranium that the PD, despite invitation was not present. For that matter, neither was its proxy, the Sun Post. Obviously the opening of a world class library in an inner ring suburb ain't gonna sell papers. A Big Brother spin layed on censorship and the inner ring struggle against the criminal element will not only be a better read, foster regionalism, but it will probably sell copy.

Jeff

Jeff Endress wrote:As a side light, I find it extremely interesting that on June 1st, when LPL held it's official opening, with world renown architect Robert A.M. Stern, ....... that the PD, despite invitation was not present. For that matter, neither was its proxy, the Sun Post. Obviously the opening of a world class library in an inner ring suburb ain't gonna sell papers.

There is a bigger story here but I'm not sure what it is. There seems to be a constant whispering campaign against the Library. The conspiracy theorist in me suspects jealousy. Or maybe other institutions are shamed by the library's stunning home grown success. Or maybe positive news about the City doesn't fit the County template and its plans for the future of Lakewood.

Bill Call wrote:There is a bigger story here but I'm not sure what it is. There seems to be a constant whispering campaign against the Library. The conspiracy theorist in me suspects jealousy. Or maybe other institutions are shamed by the library's stunning home grown success. Or maybe positive news about the City doesn't fit the County template and its plans for the future of Lakewood.

Bill

There are actually hundreds of stories here.

Jeff and you did a pretty good summary.

The library like the city is under siege.


.

Bill Call wrote: There seems to be a constant whispering campaign against the Library. The conspiracy theorist in me suspects jealousy. Or maybe other institutions are shamed by the library's stunning home grown success. Or maybe positive news about the City doesn't fit the County template and its plans for the future of Lakewood.

Bill, I think you called it right this time.

So let's keep banging our drum.
Thursday nights in front of the Library are the epitome of what is great and right about what's happening in our city. Ken, Kim, the Library Board, and all the staff are to be commended for making LPL the cornerstone of a revitalized cpmmunity center and partnering with LEAF to grow the outreach.

Mr. Warren

I'm curious about this new software and alternatives to the use of it .

If technology exists to surreptitiously determine what a patron is viewing, then surely there is a technology available to block troublesome web sites. If so, it would appear to be easier, more transparent, and less contentious to take that approach rather than the one that is currently in place.

You are then able to come to a determination of the appropriateness of a web site prior to the patron accessing a site and then having a library employee forced to make an immediate determination as to the suitability of a particular site. In the latter case, you are placing a great obligation on the library employee as well as introducing a certain amount of personal bias. Taking that out of the equation and having a list of banned sites (or types of banned sites), determined in advance by public agreement, would take a lot of the ambiguousness out of what constitutes an improper use of the library computer.

Grace:

surely there is a technology available to block troublesome web sites

I'll let Mr. Guscott speak on the technical aspects, but it is my understanding that the available technology comes from 2 basic directions.
1) Filtering software, which limits acessability based on words and phrases. It is not acceptable as an option simply because in order to eliminate unacceptable web sites, it also catches others which are entirely reputible. Words such as "breast" or "nipple" can trigger the filter, even though the user is researching the benefits of breast feeding or issues relating to cancer treatment.
2) Specific site blocking software is unworkable because of the number of sites on the internet, as well as the constant changes and additions. It would be an impossibility to identify enough of those sites to make it a workable solution.

Notwithstanding yet another stellar PD article, this software is absolutely no different from an emplyee circulating through the room. No one has a complaint over this measure of security, then why the complaint when that same employee does the exact same thing remotely?

Jeff

This is my first time posting here at the Observation Deck...I have chosen to make my first appearance since recent developments are extremely close to me.
I don't speak as a representative of the library...these are simply my opinions, albeit opinions from a unique perspective.

Grace, you addressed your comment to Mr. Warren, however, I hope you will not mind my providing my own take on it.

The web is like a living thing, it changes from second to second. A site here today could be gone in five minutes or last for the next 10 years. For that reason, filtering software (used to block troublesome sites) cannot and can never be absolute. Likewise, providing a list of sites would require constant updating and would prove nearly impossible to compile given the volume of websites.

As far as providing a list of types of banned sites, in a way, the library does that. When a patron is found accessing a site they should not be on, whatever that site might be, staff will give them a warning.
The library should not be required to list what, for most people, would be common sense. There are some things you just don't do in public.

Perhaps common sense is not so common anymore and it is too much to ask for. If so, that saddens me.

Finally, I would like to add that, in my own experience, use of the VNC snapshot software is almost exclusively used for patrons with a track record of violating the library's rules (I can recall several patrons that have required daily reminders about library rules) OR when another patron complained that their neighbor was doing something questionable.

-------------------

I would also like to briefly comment on Bill Call's thoughts of a "constant whispering campaign". Jealously would not the only reason. In my eyes, there is also a fear of rules enforcement and those patrons are hoping that by stretching the truth, they can generate sympathy and/or outrage in the community to get things returned to how they were.

For example, until now, the libraries 20-page printing limit has been virtually impossible to enforce, depending mostly on patrons to be honest. For the vast, vast majority of patrons, it is not and never has been an issue.
However, certain patrons, who thought they were clever, knew how to fool some of the library staff...requesting PCs far from view, printing excessively (but 5 or 10 sheets at a time) and/or hiding their large volumes of paper in bags or newspapers as they walk out. I will admit I was among those staff to be fooled until only recently.

The silent majority are those patrons that followed the rules to begin with and continue to do so. It is a vocal minority that is raising the greatest stink over the change. In this case, however, the squeaky wheel should not be given any grease. They only have as much power as we allow them to have.

-------------------

Regardless of the discussion, whether it is the VNC software, the addition of the reservation system or a fundamental rules change, everyone should keep in mind that use of the LPL's resources (books, facilities OR computers) is NOT a constitutionally protected right, it is a privilege, one that can and will be taken away if those resources are not used in an appropriate manner.
If patrons do not like the library's methods and rules, they are free to go elsewhere or, heaven forbid, spend their own money to get a book they want to read or a computer and internet access.

Wow, that turned out a lot longer than I intended...

Roy
10-year vet of the Eastern Front
AKA
LPL Madison Branch Technology

Grace O'Malley wrote:If technology exists to surreptitiously determine what a patron is viewing, then surely there is a technology available to block troublesome web sites.

You can either through filtering software, which as Jeff mentioned can be problematic, or through something like OpenDNSwhich provides filtering at the DNS level with both a pre-filtered list and/or specific policies determined by the administrator of a network.

I personally use OpenDNS at home, it's a great, free service and I'd highly recommend it for anyoe.

However, I do agree with Jeff that filtering of any sort is problematic at best regardless of which approach you take.

Roy

Thanks for your post and insight.

I think it is interesting, and bears repeating something I have pointed out before. The Library has an acceptable use policy to assure that this scarce community resource is available to all. The Public computer terminals are to used for educational and informational purposes. Everyone who signs on to use a terminal agrees to abide by this restriction.

And yet, the one person complaining in the PD article is a Cleveland resident whose use of LPL's computers is "to pay bills and check e-mails". Those who chose to ignore and/or violate the state acceptable use policy are those complaining the loudest about measures in place to assure that policy is followed.

Jeff

I have received ten unsolicited phones calls today from Lakewood residents and one Cleveland resident thanking me for the common sense approach to public computer use and urging me to stay the course.

Fox News also stopped by and will do a story.

It’s quite astounding to me that with the most significant architectural accomplishment in the Cleveland area just finished in Lakewood that the PD features “Librarians Patrolling for Pornâ€￾ as the real scoop.

For followers of the Bill Call regional conspiracy theory, I would suggest the frame that Ms. Kavanaugh’s constructs to reveal Lakewood Public Library’s divergence in a public administrative practice and VNC software application from Cuyahoga County Public Library and Cleveland Public Library is especially telling. The critical element, I believe, is that whether or not the administrator from Cuyahoga County Public Library admitted or was even asked about her institution's use of VNC software to monitor computers. I am quite certain that CCPL does have VNC software and use it at high levels of network administration and security. That little point of complexity, which I made to Ms. Kavanaugh in an e-mail, did not shine through the frame.

I supply the following e-mails to help readers to understand more completely the lens and practice and how a story can be framed by information provided by the subject but excluded by the journalist from the final cut.

On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 1:37 PM, MOLLY KAVANAUGH <MKAVANAU@plaind.com> wrote:
Ken,
A photographer will be over tomorrow, not sure what time. I told them to ask for you.
A couple follow-up questions:
1. you said yesterday that Lakewood was first library in area to offer Internet. When was that?
2. in old building did staff follow the 15-minute check and mark it on a form as they are doing now?
3. yesterday you indicated VNC would be used for monitoring patrons' computers as part of the regular check and today you said "it remains to be seen." has something changed between yesterday and today?
4. will you get a legal opinion before you use VNC for monitoring patrons' computers?

Thanks,
Molly Kavanaugh


from Ken Warren <kenwarren@lkwdpl.org>
to MOLLY KAVANAUGH <MKAVANAU@plaind.com>
date Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 11:58 AM
subject Re: Lakewood VNC
mailed-by lkwdpl.org
hide details Jun 13 (5 days ago)
Reply


Molly:
In answer to your questions:
1. LPL established the Technology Center in 1993, with dial-up access and a network of CD-ROM databases. In 1995 made graphical internet user interface available on public access PCs in the Technology Center.
2. Yes. The 15 minute Tech Check, with the fifteen minute walk-around has been standard practice at LPL.
3. When we had first spoken, I had assumed that the Tight VNC installation was complete. In follow-up to your inquiry, I spoke to my Tech Team and learned that the installation in Main Library's Technology Center had not, in fact, been completed. You heard from supervisor Dave Popeck that only five members of the staff, all management or IT administrators currently have access to the VNC application. You heard from supervisor Dave Popeck that LPL management prefers to keep staff moving about public space and engaged in face-to-face support and observation of public access computer users. Hence my answer, concerning the precise methods of deployment given these unknowns and preferences – "it remains to be seen" is apt and accurate.
4. In a public library computer center, with notice of the acceptable use policy provided and consented to before a patron makes use of the technology, I do not see any difference in the impingement on an expectation of privacy than from staff-walk-arounds with Tech Check, a practice we developed long ago in consultation with counsel of the County Prosecutor's Office.

You should know that supervisor Dave Popeck is an attorney, too, and my board President Jeffrey Endress is an attorney as well. Benefiting from their insight in discussions about practice and from the fact that John Guscott, my Electronic Services manager mentioned that Cuyahoga County Public Library (who I believe shares the same counsel as we do in the County Prosecutor Office) engages in VNC monitoring of public computers, I did not feel especially compelled to obtain a formal legal opinion.

This is our rationale:

There can only be an invasion of privacy where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

1) The expectation for privacy at a public computer is non-existent, given that your screen is viewable by anyone in the room. No reasonable expectation....no invasion. This expectation could be different for someone using WiFi on their own machine.

2) The change in monitoring from walking through and physical observation to VNC is irrelevant. Monitoring, however done, is either an invasion or not.

3) Anyone using our public terminals ascribes to our acceptable use policy.
Since you have raised the issue twice, I did call Joyce Doderill and will discuss the matter with her, when she returns my call.

If you have a formal legal opinion that declares the VNC software impinges on the expectation of privacy in a public library computer center, with notice of an acceptable use policy and the long standing practice of monitoring and policing I outlined, I would be very interested to see it.

Best,
Ken
----------


Kenneth Warren
Director
Lakewood Public Library

They Came, They Saw, They Busted?

I was thinking about this “issueâ€￾ as I watched Fox’s news coverage. And then a thought came to mind. Other libraries think that a walk through is sufficient….they generally “don’t have any issuesâ€￾ (per the County Library).
I would submit that this represents an entirely fallacious bit of logic. A self created illusion. Those libraries that rely on a walk through STILL have a problem, but the method of policing is, by design, a charade, calculated to give the appearance of oversight, while in actuality, all a walk through does is give one in violation enough of a warning to click off the screen. It’s like police cars running with their sirens 24/7. County’s and CPL ‘s lack of observing a person surfing porn sites, spamming or surfing my-space for a teenaged hookup means only that those that are doing it at their facilities are dexterous enough to know when to click on another screen so they won’t get caught. That type of “supervisionâ€￾ neither acts as deterrent nor catches violators. It only provides those charged with supervision the ability to point to a policy, a self created illusion of effective action….even if that policy is meaningless.
Those choosing to check out a porn site at LPL will not have the benefit of seeing the walk through coming. If (and when) spamming, porno surfing or my-space propositions occur at LPL, we have the ability to actually catch, remove and prosecute. To my mind, it is far better, far more effective to have a policy that is actually designed to deter, and to stop bad behavior than one designed around the proposition that since no one got caught, nothing occurred. While an effective policy may result in an upswing of incidents, that would also mean that the perpetrators will be caught, prosecuted, and no longer be welcomed at the LPL.
But, in my way of thinking, by getting the word out, maybe those who would get caught won’t bother to come to LPL. For getting that word out, a huge thank you is due to the PD.

Jeff