NAME: JEFF CARLO GELI

1. WHAT SHOULD BE THE STEPS TAKEN TO PREVENT SIMILAR ATTACKS

IN THE FUTURE?

Before delving in to come up with a solution as to how can similar attacks

be prevented in the future, there has to be a recognition of the kind of problem
there is. As far as I am able to comprehend, the situation shows two violations,
the first one is violation of privacy with the hidden installation of the program, the
second one is the use of the picture taken from the hidden program for the
accusation of wrong-doings without the permission of the student or the parents,
plus the accused wrong doing happened outside the school premise. Plus, the
said district employees who are capable of activating the programs did not have
parents’ consent, or may not have sworn documents to legalize them as the most
appropriate persons to access data, and so possibilities of personal interest to
acquire the data may happen. It can occur without anyone from the students or
parents’ party knowing it. All these are violations even in the pretext of securing
the gadgets from theft because everyone in the land is entitled with the right to
privacy. Such right to privacy is enshrined in both international and national law
and policies such as the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
1987 Philippine Constitution and other existing law recognizing such right of
Filipinos.

To avoid this scenario to take place again, the concern towards security of
the gadgets must be first addressed since it is the root cause of all the violations.
The institution can have written agreement signed with the parents or guardians
of the students. For example, emphasis on the custody where the parents and
guardians are responsible for the provided computers, which includes its usage,
as well as security from being stolen. Both parties can agree to impose
penalization on the failure of the agreement compliance according to their terms,
with this responsibility is expected to be strengthened. With certain rules and
scope as well as the chance to be excused from it with a specified valid reason.
 However, if the need for a program such as mentioned is highly necessary
and proven to be effective, it can be done along with the first suggestion and
parents’ consent. The focus is avoiding theft, if parents are knowledgeable that
they may be subject to penalty if they fail to secure the gadget, then theft can
happen outside the family in the most probable case. The parents can report it to
the administrator and that’s when the parent would give consent to track and take
recordings through photos or videos of whoever is using the computer. Not only
is transparency and respect towards privacy is uphold but also participation of
both parties in solving the case.

2. SHOULD THE PARENTS AND STUDENTS BE INFORMED ABOUT THE

SITUATION? IF SO, IN WHAT WAY?

Yes, the parents and the students must be informed of the situation in
compliance to the stipulated rights of them to know that their personal data is
processed by an institution. Also, as an educational institution, it is expected to
uphold and respect liberty, dignity and privacy of its students and stakeholders, in
this case, the parents.
To do this without giving up its purpose of securing the gadgets, as I have
mentioned from the previous question, the institution can have written agreement
signed with the parents or guardians of the students. For example, emphasis on
the custody where the parents and guardians are responsible for the provided
computers, which includes its usage, as well as security from being stolen.
Orientation on the program itself should be given, like information on the its
ability to track the user. Both parties can agree to impose penalization on the
failure of the agreement compliance according to their terms. When a gadget is
reported to be missing, that’s when parents can provide consent to the
administrators to access the gadget through the program.