Nov

30

Maybe There’s a Good Idea Lurking in Tom Fox’s Stealth Advertorial


Posted by at 4:44 pm on November 30, 2016
Category: BISCivil PenaltiesCompliance Programs and ProceduresCriminal PenaltiesDDTCFCPAOFAC

Internet Email by twitter.com/mattwi1s0n [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Flickr https://flic.kr/p/75rLY [cropped and processed]

Over at the excellent FCPA Compliance & Ethics Blog, Tom Fox has a plug for email monitoring software disguised as a blog post.  He’s even doing a “webinar” with the software developers — completely free, of course —  presumably to push the sales of this product.

Notwithstanding what might not be his completely objective take on this software product, Fox raises a good issue that might warrant consideration for incorporation into your export compliance program.  I assume everyone reading my blog and this post is acutely aware that a robust compliance plan is the best insurance against getting taken to the cleaners by the DoJ and the export agencies after it is discovered that an employee in your Hamburg office has been shipping  your U.S. origin night vision to Iran.  But what does your compliance program do proactively to ferret out such problems?  Fox suggests that companies should consider periodic email sweeps for keywords

The concept is straightforward; at regular intervals you can sweep through your company email database for identified key words that can be flagged for further investigation, if required.

So, should you consider sweeping all emails for keywords such as “Iran” or “Syria”? What other keywords might help pinpoint export compliance problems? “Jail”? “Orange Jumpsuit”? “Export License,” as in “let’s avoid fussing with that stupid export license requirement”? Are there keywords that can identify times when employees say something like “Call me, since we shouldn’t put this in writing”?

While I think such an approach is a nice shiny bauble that can be dangled in front of prosecutors and enforcement agencies and therefore is worth considering, I also wonder whether such sweeps will actually be effective in detecting violations. First, in my experience, most of the problems come from sales employees outside the United States who don’t think U.S. laws should interfere with their commissions. Foreign privacy laws, particularly in the E.U., often pose barriers to rifling through foreign employees’ emails. Second, in my experience, employees, particularly those with mischief in their hearts, are much too savvy to talk openly in emails about their transshipment schemes. They almost always use code of some kind to conceal what they are up to. These employees and their code words are normally not clever enough to fool prosecutors, but those code words — like “the country we discussed” or “Middle Earth” — will easily evade keyword email sweeps.

Any thoughts on this? Share your experiences (anonymously if you wish) in the comments section.

Photo Credit: Internet Email by twitter.com/mattwi1s0n [CC-BY-SA-2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Flickr https://flic.kr/p/75rLY [cropped and processed]. Copyright 2003 twitter.com/mattwi1s0n

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2016 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


5 Comments:


In addition to the false negatives – the unknown unknowns you mention, I foresee more false positives than a restricted party screening.

Comment by Jim Dickeson on November 30th, 2016 @ 6:26 pm

A friend (no really) worked at a large IC manufacturer who had this kind of software that swept across their servers looking for key words. They found, as you note, that what was discovered was innocuous. Like how they’re child bombed at the recital…

Comment by LDM on November 30th, 2016 @ 7:35 pm

I once worked as an export administrator for an African Tobacco company. To ensure that negotiations conducted mainly by telephone were not overheard by Customs officials, a code book was used with substitution words for names of people, places and commodities. Unsurprisingly, I didn’t stay for more than a few weeks and you’ll not find reference to that job on my resume.

Comment by Anonymous on December 1st, 2016 @ 5:25 am

Interesting that you mention Hamburg…I think, checking must be done – if for keywords – not only in English, but in other languages as well (Germans tend to communicate in German with each other). Searching for article names and numbers might be more helpful as these are usually mentioned. However, it is indeed illegal to screen business e-mail without explicit permission of the employee in Germany.
I would suggest to take up information in article text like “US-origin – not to be shipped to….”.

I, however, prefer regular training and information as well as supervision of my co-workers.

Comment by Martin on December 1st, 2016 @ 5:54 am

    Good point about the language issue. And, of course, the ban on sweeping emails in many countries is, as I said, probably a deal killer.

    Comment by Clif Burns on December 1st, 2016 @ 7:41 am