| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | Do translation agencies have the right to scan translators' computers? Thread poster: Vickie Dimitriadou (X)
|
|---|
Adam Łobatiuk 
Poland
Local time: 02:01
Member (2009)
English to Polish
+ ...
What you're missing is that you'd be allowing strangers to search your home, unless you have a separate office outside: "We reserve the right to carry out an onsite check of your information technology systems, physical and information security processes and measures" — the latter could mean anything. Also, why would they believe you that you don't have the company's data anywhere else than on the dedicated computer?
| | | | Liviu-Lee Roth
United States
Local time: 20:01
Romanian to English
+ ...
| it is a matter of trust between the agency and the translator | Dec 29, 2014 |
Or when you fly on an aeroplane, you are not entitled to go and personally inspect the mechanics of the aeroplane just before take off.[/quote]
OTOH, there are controlling authorities who do just that - health inspectors and flight safety inspectors carry out checks in those areas, and nobody complains (apart from those who contravene safety ). And if we're working in very security-sensitive sectors (which most of us aren't, ... See more Or when you fly on an aeroplane, you are not entitled to go and personally inspect the mechanics of the aeroplane just before take off.[/quote]
OTOH, there are controlling authorities who do just that - health inspectors and flight safety inspectors carry out checks in those areas, and nobody complains (apart from those who contravene safety). And if we're working in very security-sensitive sectors (which most of us aren't, most of the time) then we must expect to be checked, too. BUT, it would be the competent authority (e.g. a government, military or police body) who should order and oversee the checks. NOT a translation agency, for goodness' sake!
Let's not forget that agencies are not just our clients. They are also, and in a very real way, our competitors. And they have a lot to gain from access to the information we hold. [/quote]
I work with an agency that has a contract with the DOJ (FBI & USSS included) and I receive sensitive documents to translate. Every trimester the agency asks me to delete the files I worked on and sign a document that states that. In eight years I never had my computer scanned or on-site visits.
It is a matter of trust!
Lee ▲ Collapse
| | | | Paul Lambert
Sweden
Local time: 02:01
Member (2006)
Swedish to English
+ ...
Interesting. It is even worse than I thought.
So no, I don't think I could agree to something like that at all.
| | | | | I find it enlightening (to say the very least)... | Dec 29, 2014 |
... to observe that those* who profess to being the most ‘cool’ about the matter of invasion of their professional and personal privacy appear to be living in the so-called “Land of the Free”.
* No names named – you’ll recognise yourselves in an instant!
| | |
|
|
|
Liviu-Lee Roth
United States
Local time: 20:01
Romanian to English
+ ...
| @ Robin ... it depends ... | Dec 30, 2014 |
after living more than half of my life (I am 63) in a communist country under the most brutal dictatorship (Ceausescu) I developed self-preservation skills that most of the other people born and raised in the „Land of the Free” lack. Therefore, I see most of these „problems” from a different perspective, but I can understand most of your concerns.
Lee
| | | | | No, they don't. | Dec 30, 2014 |
Though translation agencies are obligated to ensure privacy & confidentiality, the ground reality is that privacy & confidentiality cannot be ensured in an effective manner, even with the enforcement of their own CAT Tool software.
There can be dubious intention also, behind enforcing it as a right to scan the translators' computers, and arguably, the freelance translators run the risk of their valuable data - either personal or professional - being stolen by the installation of tr... See more Though translation agencies are obligated to ensure privacy & confidentiality, the ground reality is that privacy & confidentiality cannot be ensured in an effective manner, even with the enforcement of their own CAT Tool software.
There can be dubious intention also, behind enforcing it as a right to scan the translators' computers, and arguably, the freelance translators run the risk of their valuable data - either personal or professional - being stolen by the installation of translation agencies' own CAT Tool software, which can be possibly designed with malicious intent / virus.
In case, the freelancer has little choice but to accept the translation agency's condition, then, it is the privilege of the freelancer to seek a declaration from the translation agency that the CAT Tool software designed by them is only for the purpose of 'Privacy & Confidentiality' and that it contain no malicious virus / program that may amount to data theft or any other forms of cyber crime.
Appointment of in-house translator is a good option, in this context, but this option also has its own advantages and disadvantages, and is certainly ruled out for small volume / Tight Turn Around projects.
Regards
Gopinath Jambulingam ▲ Collapse
| | | | Adam Łobatiuk
Poland
Local time: 02:01
Member (2009)
English to Polish
+ ...
| And the CAT tool... | Dec 30, 2014 |
Gopinath Jambulingam wrote:
There can be dubious intention also, behind enforcing it as a right to scan the translators' computers, and arguably, the freelance translators run the risk of their valuable data - either personal or professional - being stolen by the installation of translation agencies' own CAT Tool software, which can be possibly designed with malicious intent / virus.
Please note that some prioprietary CAT software won't even let you copy the source content, not to mention the TM, so you can only trust the analysis it provides. We all know how different analyses from various CAT tools can be, so effectively a translator could be paid less (or more, but that's unlikely) without changing his or her rates (or having them changed as the case may be).
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:01
Member (2008)
Italian to English
| Only if it's their computer | Dec 30, 2014 |
This would only be legitimate if
- the agency provided you with a computer;
- you only used it to do work specifically for them and for nobody else;
- you did not use the computer for any other purpose;
- the computer isn't a Mac with or without a PC emulator (Macs do not require virus protection. I've used Macs since 1995 and never had a virus. Installing antivirus software on a Mac slows down the operating system and may even damage it).
[Edited at 2014-1... See more This would only be legitimate if
- the agency provided you with a computer;
- you only used it to do work specifically for them and for nobody else;
- you did not use the computer for any other purpose;
- the computer isn't a Mac with or without a PC emulator (Macs do not require virus protection. I've used Macs since 1995 and never had a virus. Installing antivirus software on a Mac slows down the operating system and may even damage it).
[Edited at 2014-12-30 13:22 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Shai Navé
Israel
Local time: 03:01
English to Hebrew
+ ...
| This is nothing like safety/health inspections | Dec 30, 2014 |
Putting aside all the other ridiculous/abusive aspects of this request, it has nothing in common with safety and health inspections. Safety and health inspections are made by authorized authorities, there are very clear and strict codes and regulations to meet, and they are required by law.
An agency is not an authorized authority on pretty much anything (often including the profession they claim to [mis]represent), and having an up-to-date anti-virus is a very generic and vague req... See more Putting aside all the other ridiculous/abusive aspects of this request, it has nothing in common with safety and health inspections. Safety and health inspections are made by authorized authorities, there are very clear and strict codes and regulations to meet, and they are required by law.
An agency is not an authorized authority on pretty much anything (often including the profession they claim to [mis]represent), and having an up-to-date anti-virus is a very generic and vague requirement that has very little to do with data protection. Anti-viruses are almost irrelevant in fighting data protection risks.
Moreover, this request is even more ludicrous because it is quite likely that the agency will follow all these "data protection" concerns by transmitting the documents via an insecure channel such as unencrypted email, which makes their concerns and requirements moot.
Secondly, when being subjected to a safety/health inspection only certain aspects are being audited and verified; it is not a free license to get access to all business areas, both physical and digital.
And above all, whenever something is not required by law, common sense should be always exercised.
I'm afraid that those who find this request logical and acceptable have bigger problems to worry about than a possible digital and/or onsite "inspection".
[Edited at 2014-12-30 13:43 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Happy New Year!
Having been a victim of online fraud, I let no-one outside my immediate family and a couple of lifelong trusted friends use my computer, or other Internet-ready devices, unsupervised. So to echo the vast majority of comments, I would not let some faceless, never-met person or company representative do this. I'm generally a trusting person, am not privacy-obsessed and do not have paranoia issues in the slightest, but this is the one exception.
You'... See more Happy New Year!
Having been a victim of online fraud, I let no-one outside my immediate family and a couple of lifelong trusted friends use my computer, or other Internet-ready devices, unsupervised. So to echo the vast majority of comments, I would not let some faceless, never-met person or company representative do this. I'm generally a trusting person, am not privacy-obsessed and do not have paranoia issues in the slightest, but this is the one exception.
You're not an employee, and the computer is yours, not the company's. Personally I would cease collaborating with an outsourcer who imposed these terms. Demanding that you have an anti-virus installed is fair, but saying they can check on your computer whenever they like - that's akin to police being able to do that to online sex offenders (which is justified), but these two situations are are world apart! ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:01
Serbian to English
+ ...
| they want it both ways | Jan 1, 2015 |
the want the security offered by an in-house translator (in-house to the user of the translations, not in-house to the translation agency), but without any of the costs attached. Why not, if there's enough mugs available ...
If an organisation wants that level of security, it should provide a workplace for the translator in their own offices, so that the translator can to do all the work most literately "in-house". [I know of cases where is was done exactly that way]. Anything else ... See more the want the security offered by an in-house translator (in-house to the user of the translations, not in-house to the translation agency), but without any of the costs attached. Why not, if there's enough mugs available ...
If an organisation wants that level of security, it should provide a workplace for the translator in their own offices, so that the translator can to do all the work most literately "in-house". [I know of cases where is was done exactly that way]. Anything else is pointless harassing of the translator in order to achieve only an illusion of security.
As a side note, given the specifics of some texts, it shouldn't be surprising that in some cases end-users want to have effective and real control over the translation process - I don't see anything wrong with that in principle.
As usual, the devil is in the details. Whatever is done/imposed on the translator should be "fit for purpose" and the costs (in time and money) should be included in the total price, not just dumped on the translator. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Ethical codes | Jan 1, 2015 |
If you want to draw the parallel with hygiene inspections by health authorities, then the agency could work with translators who are members of professional associations and have signed codes of conduct.
The big problem here is that a lot of professional translators would not go anywhere near this agency - we have enough work from clients who trust us and pay better rates.
I happily sign reasonable NDAs for most of my clients, and I abide by them. Which is why, apart f... See more If you want to draw the parallel with hygiene inspections by health authorities, then the agency could work with translators who are members of professional associations and have signed codes of conduct.
The big problem here is that a lot of professional translators would not go anywhere near this agency - we have enough work from clients who trust us and pay better rates.
I happily sign reasonable NDAs for most of my clients, and I abide by them. Which is why, apart from myself, only my trusted computer expert has access to my computer. In the same way, I would never eat at a restaurant that allowed all the other guests to poke about the kitchen bringing dust and germs with them...
Happy New Year everyone! ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Sery Media (X)
South Korea
Local time: 02:01
Korean to English
+ ...
| I knew I'd seen this before | Feb 8, 2015 |
"We reserve the right to carry out an onsite check of your information technology systems, physical and information security processes and measures to ensure best practice and compliance with clauses 6.15 and 6.16 up to twice a year throughout the duration of this agreement upon reasonable prior written notice, except in case of an emergency."
While reading through a contract with a potential client, I read this and something ticked at the back of my head... All that time perusing t... See more "We reserve the right to carry out an onsite check of your information technology systems, physical and information security processes and measures to ensure best practice and compliance with clauses 6.15 and 6.16 up to twice a year throughout the duration of this agreement upon reasonable prior written notice, except in case of an emergency."
While reading through a contract with a potential client, I read this and something ticked at the back of my head... All that time perusing through the forum paid off!
I regret that I had to decline their offer. Other things aside, this clearly violates confidentiality of other clients. Thank you to the posters here!
[Edited at 2015-02-09 11:06 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Do translation agencies have the right to scan translators' computers? | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
