Yes, there are. And HIT techs need to be HIPPA certified, which means
that I live with both the AUP and HIPPA.
-----Original Message-----
From: MSU Network Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Bosman, Don
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 3:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] AUP
After those who have to keep the machines running, citing the AUP as the
reason of course, refuse to work on those machines they don't have
permission to look at. Maybe systems people need "HIPPA" forms from
every patient?
If the AUP were to be interpreted to mean one can't look at system event
logs then every request for repair or help will have to result in a wipe
and reload. Just like the standard last result of most manufacturer help
desks. Common sense has to come in to the picture somewhere.
Does the AUP committee have any techs, who have to live with the
restrictions of the AUP, on it?
Don Bosman
Information Technologist
Michigan State University, Libraries
100 Library
East Lansing, MI 48824
517-432-6123 ex 233
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: MSU Network Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Jesse Howard
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 3:13 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] AUP
I would like to invite Mr. Hall to attend that meeting. The next NAG
meeting
would be the logical place to continue this interrogation, I mean
discussion.
Anyone know if/when the AUP revisions will be adopted?
Jesse Howard
_______________________
IT Administrator
Michigan State University Press
[log in to unmask]
www.msupress.msu.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MSU Network Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> Behalf Of Richard Wiggins
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 3:02 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] AUP
>
>
> Some discussions are hard to conduct on a mailing list. I think maybe
> this discussion would be better suited for a face-to-face meeting,
> perhaps a future NAG. We have the existing AUP, a relatively long
> document written relatively long ago, and we've got an effort to write
> a newer, hopefully more concise statement on acceptable use that
> recognizes realities of this era.
>
> Could we make this an agenda item for a future NAG meeting?
>
> /rich
>
|
