A few professors at UC Berkeley have objected publicly to digital monitoring that the administration claims is for security reasons after a hacking breach was discovered in the computer network of the UCLA medical center last summer in July 2015.

The attack potentially threatened the confidential information of 4.5 million patients.

The monitoring system was initiated by Janet Napolitano, the president of the University of California. The system consisted of hardware and software in the university's data centers that would monitor data traffic like websites visited, and attempt to discover intruders to the system.

Ms Napolitano has also been the former secretary of Homeland Security for the Obama administration.

The security program was put in place with little consultation with the faculty and staff, a fact that does not sit well with some professors at UC Berkeley.

The dissatisfaction of faculty over this privacy issue might be particularly poignant because of where it is happening: aside from being a top producer of computer science talent, Berkeley has a history as significant structure of the free speech movement that took place in the 1960s.

While it may be a commonly known truth that Corporations monitor employees' digital activity, American universities do it differently. Jeffrey MacKie-Mason, the university librarian at Berkeley thinks it is a "pretty settled point that universities go out of their way not to monitor students, faculty and staff." While he admits that security can sometimes overtake privacy, he still thinks an informed discussion is necessary.

And he is not the only one: other professors have publicly denounced the method in which this security was carried out initially, particularly citing the lack of transparency. They are protesting specifically to the lack of shared governance and lack of information about, for example, what data is being collected.

The professors are worried that the stored private data could lead to traffic logs, that were previously being deleted, to be subpoenaed in court. It could also place restrictions on freedom of academic research on topics that some might consider controversial, like Satan worship.

The office of the administration believes that privacy can take second place to security concerns. In a Jan. 19 letter from Rachael Nava, chief operating officer of University of California system to the entire Berkeley faculty and others, Ms Nava stressed the seriousness of the threat they are facing. She also regretted not being able to reveal certain details that would clear up misunderstandings, because the lawsuits regarding the security breach last summer prevents the president's office from disclosing those details.