DD facing suspension. Please Help.

[VoldemortsNipple]

Sorry if this is drip fed. I have only been informed this evening of this situation and most of my information is coming from DD.

DD is 16 and is in the sixth form attached to the school she has attended since she was 11. Throughout this time she has never been in more trouble than not turning up for band practice. She has represented the school on many occassions and was hoping to be chosen to go to Philadelphia next year on a student exchange programme.

It has transpired that on Wednesday morning a computer virus has attacked the school system. Apparently this virus could have caused thousands of pounds worth of damage and could have entered the school computer systems throughout the whole city.

At 10am this morning, dd was removed from lessons and taken to one of the offices and questioned by three senior members of staff. The virus has been traced back to a computer which DD was logged on to. DD admits that she was on this computer but denies that she had anything to do with uploading any malious software. She admits to using Tumblr to show her friend some pictures but says that she had no problem gaining access to the site. She certainly didnt click on any pop up links.

Now I am the first to support the school if they have any concerns and I understand that DD would have to be questioned about this incident as it has been traced back to her computer. However I am seriously concerned in the way my dd has been treated.

She was questioned by the 3 staff members about what she was doing on the computer and she admitted to using Tumblr. They informed her that this wasnt the kind of virus that you get from clicking on something and you would know what you were doing. It sounds like they then changed tactics and asked who else she had given her password to.

The head teacher then began to ask DD if she understood the seriousness of the situation. He told her that the company who provide the computer security want to see action taken against who is responsible. He told DD that this is a serious criminal offence in which she could face 6 months in prison. He said he would have to suspend her for two days to show the company he was taking action. They seemed to come back and forth throughout the day asking her questions.

DD was placed in isolation and was asked to write a statement while they went verify her statement with people she had been with. She was offered to go and get lunch by the teacher she was in isolation with but was frightened to go incase she was accused of asking people to back up her story.

DD was offered nobody to represent her or offer pastorial support. I dont mean a lawyer, but at the very least she should have been offered a teacher to give her some support and ask questions on her behaif. It wasnt until 3pm that they phoned her dad to inform him of the situation and tell him she was facing a two day suspension.

As I didn't know what tumbler was I decided to take a look. My virus software informed me it was unsafe and detected a virus attack. I hadn't actually entered the site and said no when asked if I wanted to proceed. If it is that dangerous it shouldn't be accessible from school systems. Do you know if it is blocked?

Does your child have the computing expertise to deliberately upload a virus? I know that mine would not have the skill to do this and would be furious at any school taking the sort of action you describe. They should have telephoned when she was isolated and invited you to be present during the interview. They should also have ensured that she had lunch, even if it was brought to her. I don't know your legal rights but google suggests that had your daughter been arrested the police would have had to phone you before interview www.civilrightsmovement.co.uk/rights-if-your-child-arrested.html

On Monday I would telephone the school requesting an urgent appointment to discuss the way this was being handled. I would ask for copies of all the information they had which led them to believe that this was anything other than an external attack on the system.

Although a suspension may now go on her school reference you should ensure you see her school reference before it is submitted. It may not refer to the suspension but could be inadequate.

"He told her that the company who provide the computer security want to see action taken against who is responsible."

Since when have external companies with nothing to do with dealing with schools and students, had a say in who may or may not be suspended or "have serious action taken against them?"

The password thing is a serious breach of security. The virus thing is not, except it highlights breaches in the schools own security.

Actually the password thing shows that the school has been inadequate in its own ICT teaching, it is the kind of thing that can get employees dismissed, so students ought to realise how bad it is, and your DD should have changed her password if others knew it.

hamishbear she has admitted to the school she accessed tumblr and she was logged on to that computer. She knows that the school can check what sites she has accessed so it would be pointless to try and hide something. Yes she went on tumblr but it was not blocked so therefore she didn't see it as a breach.

I know from working in another school that security is tight and there are many sites that are restricted including the social media types.

DD has said that she has given her password out to two other girls a while ago. She was asked about this and has admitted it. However I think as she has admitted to being on the computer in question at that time, it is a seperate issue.

edithweston thanks, I'll go and find out if I can view the policy on the school website.

I think you need to stay calm and look at the facts.

1. the school can talk to your daughter without another adult present
2. your daughter has admitted going on tumblr using schools access.
3. the time she went onto tumblr is the time that there was a virus attack attempted on the computer system.
4. has admitted giving her password to two other girls.

The question then becomes what does the school policy say about what pupils can access on the IT system of the school. The bottom line is if it says, no social networks should be accessed then, you daughter has transgressed and a 2 day fixed term exclusion would not be unrealistic, given what subsequently happened. The fact that the system did not stop her going to the site is irrelevant, she should have known the rules and not done it.

Giving her password out to two other girls is relevant but I disagree with mummytime as to its severity. I would bet most of the school population know at least one of their friend's passwords. Maybe however the school will see it differently from me.

By now you should also hopefully have had a letter from the head teacher which confirms the two day exclusion and you need to look at that and see exactly what it says that your daughter is being fixed term exclude for. I would suggest that as your daughter is in the 6th form the biggest danger is not what might get on to the UCOS form etc but actually that the school asks your daughter to leave the school all together. That might be worth remembering before you go into school, they have no legal duty to educate your child in the 6th form. I suspect the best option is to work with the school, accepting your daughter has done wrong for which she is completely sorry, but that you need to understand what the school is going to do to stop this happening again - they do have faults in their system and there is clearly a learning issue with the pupils, if not the staff.

I don't think this warrants an exclusion but she would be dealt with severely by most schools for accessing a social media site and sharing her password. I would put her into a senior staff after school detention for one hour and remove her computer access within school for at least two weeks, perhaps longer.

Admission I have no problem with the school talking to my DD without an adult present if they had done it in the correct manner. If I had been accused of a similar offence in work, I would have been asked if I wanted union representation. Also I strongly disagree with the way the teachers handled the matter, trying to frighten her into confessing by mentioning prison sentences and criminal charges. And you don't think that she needed an adult present. She spent most of the day in tears and had no support.

Yes she went on Tumblr. You say she should have known it was banned. How do you suggest that she should have known this? The computers automatically block sites which are prohibited. This was not the case with tumblr therefore she didn't think there was a problem. I don't think that is unreasonable for a 16 year old to assume.

I disagree that giving her password to two others is relevent to this case as she has already said it was her on the computer. It is an isolated incident, therefore sharing her password with others needs to be treated as a seperate incident. The time that she gave her password to a friend, she was helping out at open night. Her accout was open to show visitors examples of her work. She was asked to show somebody around the school, so she shared her password with a trusted friend incase the computer timed out before she got back.

The thing that saddens me most is that she is now likely to miss out on some fantastic opportunities. Throughout her time in the school, she has taken part in concerts, overseas projects, sang at funerals, volunteered at open nights etc.. She works hard and isn't a trouble maker. But she will probably miss out on a student exchange trip to America that she's been looking forward to for years.

I have just read through the e-safety policy.

In a nutshell, DD should only use the internet for educational purposes and should therefore be punished for this offence.

She should also be punished for sharing her password, although I personally feel that the school should admit that this particular breach was not connected to the incident.

Quoted from the policy.

"senior staff are responsible for checking that filtering and monitoring is appropriate, effective and reasonable"

"DUE TO THE INTERNATIONAL SCALE AND CONNECTED NATURE OF INTERNET CONTENT, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO GUARANTEE THAT UNSUITABLE MATERIAL WILL NEVER APPEAR ON A SCHOOL COMPUTER OR NETWORK."

It seems that restricted access for a period of time should be the likely punishment for the offences DD has made. The policy states that a more servere punishment could be issued if the head teacher thinks its warranted. I can't see how he could come to this decision as she hasn't gone out to deliberately cause harm.

alreadytaken
"Does your child have the computing expertise to deliberately upload a virus? I know that mine would not have the skill to do this and would be furious at any school taking the sort of action you describe."

It doesn't take a great deal of knowledge to put a USB stick in the mchine and click on the .exe file.

OP there are so many questions that are created by your post, leaving too many ifs and buts.

You need to talk to the HT about this and find out exactly what is going on.

Before anyone on here can talk about the "hacking"/"Virus" situation we would need to know what type of system the school runs.

Is the system virtual and run from a main server or do the machines have their own operating system?

I agree there are so many questions that are created by this post. I was looking for something else on mumsnet but I came across this and I am not surprised by the strength of feeling over this mishandled, clumsy intimidating situation created by the school.

Firstly 3 members of staff questionning your DD was unnecessary and intimidating.

I would like to know - How would they know and what proof did they have that this was not the type of virus that you get from clicking on something? some of the worst trojans and virus's are obtained by doing just that or just by logging on to something. The staff made accusations and assumptions that she knew what she was doing. I agree that if she went against school policy by accessing social networking sites then it is punishable but their system should have preventions in place from doing just that.

As for the seriousness of the situation, okay, if she went against policy she should have a telling off (how much education are they giving these kids about protecting themselves against all things bad on the Internet?) but I find it laughable that the security company have the audacity to want to see action against the person, when it is they have should have action brought against them for leaving the system vulnerable to attack. This company has an obligation to protect the system and its users and should have processes in place to ensure that all AV is up to date and they should question their own system if a trojan/virus gets through. I have worked in IT for a long time and sometimes the signatures of a virus are not always recognised straightaway and it could be hours or a few days for the protection to be put in place. This is why you protect your users and networks agains access to some sites which have shown to be less than secure like Tumblr!

We have had isolated cases in business where a trojan has got through and it was not the users' fault. Our AV was dynamically updated but it just means that the IT departments have to constantly review its policies and procedures to protect the business and its users.

In my opinion the school and in particular the headteacher is taking an uneducated and gut reaction to something that they know little about and I would be apoplectic if that had happened to my daughter when she was at school.

Final thought, did your DD log on to her Tumblr account, it is possible that her account has been hacked, just by logging on to it could have opened a port to let a trojan be downloaded, in which case check your computers at home and as a safety precaution make sure all your DDs passwords are changed immediately (and tell her not to tell anyone what they are, she needs to understand how important it is to protect her identity). Either way, it is not her fault, poor girl, after an exemplary school record you would think they would take this into account before dropping a ton of bricks on her.

Would be interested to know how things go?

If this system is a non virtual system it is possible that the virus could have been dormant with in the OS or BIOS and could have been there for sometime.

admission a two day suspension would be completely over the top for a pupil who has accessed Tumbler from a school computer and has an otherwise good record of behaviour. A 2 day suspension was the punishment meted out at DDs school to the serial offender who walked out of school in plain sight of everyone at 11am, after a previous 2 day suspension for "borrowing" my daughter's tracksuit bottoms, with watch in pocket when she was absent from school. As the injured party I thought that punishment fitted the crime of a girl who had serious behaviour problems (and I do not anticipate her suspensions will appear on her UCAS reference, though you would hope there would be some hint) . She certainly wasn't barred from future priviledges, indeed was given a prize for "effort" at the end of the year A warning and denying access to the computer system would be more fitting.

The issue here though is that the punishment, and the way in which OPs DD was treated, appears to be based on the assumption that OPs DD is guilty of malevolently downloading a dangerous virus which could have caused £000s of damage . An assumption based on the say so of the company employed to protect the school's systems from viruses, which they manifestly failed to do. As others have posted it seems unlikely that they could provide absolute proof DD did that. I would also expect my DDs school to take into account DDs behaviour record and personality and provide appropriate support in that context pending having absolute proof of guilt, well behaved pupils don't normally embark on a spree of deliberate vandalism, especially if they have standard teenage computer skills, rather than being a Gary Mckinnon.

I think OP is quite right to suspect that the school has been very heavy handed and owes her a full explanation.

The teachers put themselves in the wrong by the way they handled this. 'They informed her that this wasnt the kind of virus that you get from clicking on something and you would know what you were doing.' Very likely bollocks meant to intimidate - I'd call them in this. It is very probably a downright lie.

'He told DD that this is a serious criminal offence in which she could face 6 months in prison.' That is a blatant, deliberate lie.

'He told her that the company who provide the computer security want to see action taken against who is responsible.' Very probably not the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth. I doubt the company jumps to the assumption that an attack = a child has deliberately done something dangerous and wrong and I doubt they insist children are suspended. And it's not in their power to insist anyway.

So out of the people involved in this situation, I'd say whatever your dd got up to may well have been a breach of their policy, but is probably minor compared to adults in a position of authority knowingly lying repeatedly, bullying and intimidating.

Agree with Copthall and Edam. This thread has made me really angry and I don't even know you/your DD OP. I'd be in there tomorrow requiring answers.

I hope your DD is ok-she must have had an awful weekend.

BBJ OK my child could upload a virus - but they wouldn't know how to create one or where to get one in a way that wouldn't damage their own computer. To create a virus that causes havoc in a school system requires a degree of knowledge that the OP's child may not possess. That is what I meant to say.

If she does possess that degree of knowledge then the school should perhaps scrap their contract with the security firm and employ the 16 year old.

The OP said the school don't ban Tumblr - since I didn't get onto the site I don't know if she could have had some legitimate educational reason for being there. Even if she didn't suggesting to a child that she has committed a serious criminal offence and interviewing them about that without a parent present is not acceptable. Asking them to explain what had happened would be acceptable but not accusing them of a crime.

At work, sites like Tumblr, Facebook etc. are blocked. It is not possible to get on. The school should have implemented a similar system - end of.

Apart from that, I agree with everyone who says the school have been unreasonable and heavy handed.

Agree with Edam and Copthall. In my own experience as a teacher in two different schools the punishment for accessing a site when you aren't supposed to would be removal of IT privileges for a couple of days. But most teachers would only do that if the child ignored a warning to stop. Certainly not suspension.
OP the school have handled this very, very badly.

OP - How is your DD today? Have you been intouch with the school and made any progress in getting this matter resolved?

Hi OP, any joy with the school?

Hope that you and your DD are feeling better.

Quick update.

I finally got in touch with the head of 6th form for 5 minutes today, between my break and the teacher being available.

DD is suspended for two days. They had already made that decision and were not going to back down in a brief conversation with me. I have however got a meeting on Thursday.

I did ask what the suspension was for. She said for uploading a virus onto the system. She did say that they don't believe it was done maliciously otherwise she would have been permanently excluded.

Any advice on what approach I should take would be helpful. The questions I want to ask are about the way DD was dealt with and the heavy handed approach the school took, especially as DD cooperated with the school.

Why was the website not blocked in the first place and what is the normal punishment for students found to be using restricted sites. I have actually still been able to access Tumblr from school today. So from what I presume is the same network, this highly dangerous site is still available for anybody to stumble accross and upload viruses. Also DD has witnessed other students browsing shopping sites today. Ok not social networks but also not for educational reasons either.

Mainly though, I want to know how it will affect DD for the remaining time in school.

Tumblr isn't a dangerous site, and wouldn't automatically come under social media so wouldn't be blocked as default - however if it went against their usage policy they should have it blocked- VERY easy to do. Put the onus on them for that one

Also - she has been suspended for uploading viruses... how?! If she clicked a link by mistake then I'm sorry but BOLLOX to being suspended for that, if they think she plugged in a USB or something with it on that should be easy to prove or not as the virus scan log would show if it scanned a usb disk (or external disk)

I would be absolutely fuming tbh and no way would I put up with my daughter being excluded for accidentally clicking a link FFS. As I said previously I work in IT , I have seen people who should have known better do far worse - I mean jesus, mistakes happen and the WHOLE point is that they are dressed up to look like something else!

At that point I would be going back all guns blazing and I don't care if that makes me over the top mum, its fecking stupid! You would not believe how many viruses are stopped day in day out, its the whole fucking point of AV software - I am seething on your behalf here

I'm with oohmrdarcy, the way your daughter has been treated is outrageous and I'd be furious. Appears to be a bizarre combination of IT illiteracy, general stupidity, arrogance and fear on their part- fear they have screwed up somehow so your dd is a convenient scapegoat.

Personally I'd use the things I picked out and challenge them as obvious lies. But that's probably because I picked 'em out, other people may have better ideas!