HP snoopers targeted mediapersons

BANGALORE: Internal dispute has become the latest controversy to hit the Palo Alto-based Hewlett-Packard.

More importantly, controversy has been raging in its boardroom because of a secret investigation by the company on one of its own directors on suspecting him of leaking information to the media. The investigators accessed the private phone records of at least nine journalists.

In a way, the controversy erupted in 2005 when media started writing stories based on HP’s boardroom meetings. HP chairman Patricia Dunn wanted an investigation to find out the person who was leaking the information. Subsequently, HP appointed an investigating agency to find out the details.

In its filing to the Security and Exchange Commission of US, HP has said that one of its board member Thomas J. Perkins, resigned in protest against the HP Board’s handling of investigations that had been conducted into leaks of confidential HP information discussed at Board of Directors meetings.

In its statement, the company has said, “HP has been the subject of multiple leaks of confidential HP information, including information concerning the internal deliberations of its Board of Directors. HP believes these leaks date back to at least 2005. In response to these leaks, outside legal counsel conducted interviews of directors in early 2005 in order to determine the source of the leaks and to obtain each director’s reaffirmation of his or her duty of confidentiality. The interview process did not yield the source of the leaks. Notwithstanding these actions, the leaks continued. As a result, the chairman of the Board, and ultimately an internal group within HP, working with a licensed outside firm specializing in investigations, conducted investigations into possible sources of the leaks of confidential information at HP.”

Meanwhile, the investigation agency, which HP had hired, accessed the phone records of nine journalists. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and CNET have reported that their journalists’ personal phone records were accessed using a controversial technique called pretexting, a sometimes-illegal method of obtaining personal records through misrepresentation of someone's identity.

These investigations resulted in a finding that Dr. George A. Keyworth II, one of HP’s directors, did, in fact, disclose Board deliberations and other confidential information obtained during Board meetings to the media without authorization. At a Board meeting on May 18, 2006, after Dr. Keyworth acknowledged that he had leaked confidential information, the Board, after deliberation, asked Dr. Keyworth to resign his position as a director, which he declined to do.

“It is at that meeting that Perkins resigned from the Board after expressing personal frustration with the chairman of the Board relating to the handling of the matter with the Board. He stated that he objected to the matter being brought before the full Board and that he believed the chairman had agreed that he and she would handle the matter privately. The chairman disputed Perkins’ assertion, explaining that she was complying with advice from outside counsel on the appropriate handling of the matter. “

Meanwhile, Perkins sought information from HP concerning the methods used to conduct HP’s investigations into the leaks, asserted that phone and e-mail communications had been improperly recorded as part of the investigation, and informed HP that he had recently consulted with counsel regarding that assertion. In response, HP informed that no recording or eavesdropping had occurred, but admitted that some form of “pretexting” for phone record information, a technique used by investigators to obtain information by disguising their identity, had been used.

On the other hand, Attorney General of the State of California sought information from HP on the processes employed in the investigations into the leaks.

© CyberMedia News