University President Michael Hogan's former chief of staff Lisa Troyer sent two anonymous emails aimed at influencing faculty discussions. An investigation found browser activity, firewall logs, email headers and fragments linked the emails to Troyer's university-issued laptop. Troyer maintains her computer was hacked, but investigators found no evidence of a security breach and that a hack would have required extensive knowledge of Troyer's habits and the discussions. The investigation also found no one else, including Hogan, had knowledge of Troyer's actions. Troyer resigned in January but intends to retain her tenured faculty position, while the university will determine her future employment status.

1. Hogan’s former chief of staff sent anonymous emails to infl uence faculty discussion
BY DARSHAN PATEL
STAFF WRITER
University President Michael
Hogan’s former chief of staff
was behind the
two anonymous
emails that aimed
to infl uence fac-ulty
discussion,
with no one else
having knowledge
of the actions,
according to a
report detailing
the results of the month-long
investigation.
But Lisa Troyer, who worked
under Hogan for a span of nine
years at three universities, has
maintained throughout the inves-tigation
that her computer was
improperly accessed, and that
she “had nothing to do with these
emails.”
“I believe that in the fullness of
time, the truth behind this mat-ter
will be revealed,” Troyer said
Friday in a statement to the press.
She tendered her resignation on
Jan. 4 because she could not effec-tively
perform her duties during
the time of the allegations, she
said.
Duff & Phelps and Jones Day,
the same fi rms who assisted
the University’s recent inves-tigation
» » » » » » »
into the College of
Law, reviewed more than 3,500
emails from Troyer’s Universi-ty
email account and additional
emails from her personal Gmail
account. In addition, records of
calls to and from her cell phone
were examined.
Examination of browser activ-ity,
fi rewall logs, email headers
and email fragments all linked
Moving forward
! Lisa Troyer intends to retain
her role as a tenured faculty
position within Urbana’s psy-chology
department. But Troy-er’s
future as an employee at
the University will be deter-mined
by campus offi cials,
said Tom Hardy, University
spokesman.
! Hardy said he does not expect
this incident to have any effect
on Michael Hogan’s presiden-cy.
“This appears to be an inci-dent
where somebody acted
alone,” he said. “He was quick
to tell Troyer that she should
notify the appropriate parties
to look into what she suspect-ed
was a hacking (and) quick
to support the engagement of
external independent coun-sel
to conduct a very thorough
inquiry.”
! The University does not plan
to alter its annual ethics train-ing
as a result. “The University
has very strong policies and
procedures and a code of con-duct
regarding how we expect
employees to behave and act
on the part of the university,”
said Donna McNeely, the Uni-versity’s
ethics offi cer.
! The trustees are not expect-ed
to take any action regard-ing
the anonymous emails at
their meeting later this week.
Christopher Kennedy, Board
of Trustees chairman, called it
a “misguided attempt by one
individual to sway opinion.”
! Hardy said he does not have
an estimate on how much
the investigation will cost the
University. Outside help was
authorized by Hogan after
Troyer denied the allegations.
See TROYER, Page 3A
TROYER
More inside: To read The
Daily Illini Editorial Board’s
thoughts on Lisa Troyer’s
resignation, turn to Page 4A.
»
» » » » » » »

2. TROYER
the emails back to Troyer’s Uni-versity-
issued laptop, which she
was in possession of when the rel-evant
emails were sent, accord-ing
to the report.
Investigators found no
instance of a breach into the
University’s security system,
as Troyer claims. For the Uni-versity’s
IT system to be com-promised,
a third party would
have had to know Troyer’s work
habits, whereabouts and had to
have extensive knowledge into
the discussions surrounding
the controversial admissions
recommendations.
In addition, the hacker would
have had to gone through at
least three levels of security and
manipulate her email account, all
without leaving a single trace,
said Peggy D aley of the foren-sic
analysis fi rm Duff & Phelps,
calling it an “outside possibility.”
The investigation also con-cluded
that no one else, includ-ing
Hogan, had knowledge of
Troyer’s intentions or that she
was the writer of the emails.
Hogan was speaking with Troy-er
over the phone when she creat-ed
a “test” email account. But the
University’s ethics offi cer Donna
McNee ly said phone calls are a
typical way for the president and
the chief of staff to be briefed on
the day’s events, especially when
both are at different campuses.
Troyer was deeply loyal to
Hogan and had keen interest
in advancing his agenda with
respect to the enrollment man-agement
proposal, according to
the report. Troyer had served as
Hogan’s chief advisor for years,
considering herself a “facilitator
of his vision.”
While University offi cials are
calling this an isolated incident,
this might illustrate a bigger
problem between the faculty and
the University administration in
regards to shared governance.
“What this report shows is that
faculty governance at the Univer-sity
level has been under assault,
internally through divisions and
leaks and externally through
attempts to interfere with and
manipulate faculty decision-making
processes,” said Nicho-las
Bur bules, University Senates
Conference vice-chair and pro-fessor
of education policy at the
Urbana campus. “I have never
seen a University administration
conduct itself in this way. It is
appalling and inexcusable.”
The public report also sheds
light upon Troyer’s contacts and
actions in the days leading up to
when the anonymous emails were
sent.
Just a week before the anon-ymous
emails were sent, Troy-er
created a separate email
address on Dec. 5 to compose a
“test” email, individually criti-cizing
professors who spoke out
against Hogan’s plans during that
day’s Urbana-Champaign Senate
meeting. Senators were then dis-cussing
the proposed admissions
recommendations, many showing
disapproval to the concept of cen-tralization.
This email was sent
to her University mailbox, but to
no one else.
During that time, Tih- Fen
Ting, chair of Springfi eld’s senate
and a member of the conference,
anonymously forwarded the
University Senates Conference
report reviewing the recommen-dations
to Troyer. In addition,
she also had forwarded internal
email threads to Troyer, dat-ing
back to September when the
group fi rst began discussing the
admissions recommendations.
One of those threads was a
testy exchange between her and
Burbules that showed signs of
division within the University
Senates Conference, which was
a point of discussion in the fi rst
of the anonymous emails. Ting
told investigators that she did not
consider the emails confi dential
at that time.
Three calls were made between
Troyer and Ting on the evening
of Dec. 11, the day before the
anonymous emails were sent. The
fi rst anonymous email criticized
members for trying to force a
consensus when there is not one.
Later in the day from her home,
Troyer sent a second message
to faculty leaders defending her
decision to write anonymously.
Eight minutes later, Roy Camp-bell,
a professor of computer sci-ence
at the Urbana campus, dis-covered
that the embedded data
in the email was created on a
computer with the user account
“troyer.” He subsequently
emailed his colleagues this infor-mation,
but said that “email can
so easily be faked or copied from
another document.”
Consequently, Ting spoke to
Troyer on the phone within the
half hour of Campbell’s message
and forwarded the memo to her,
according to the report. After
receiving Campbell’s memo, there
was an effort to delete informa-tion
from Troyer’s computer, of
which she was in possession of at
that time. But according to the
report, the deletion would have
taken hours, if not days, and Troy-er
terminated the process.
Later in the night, Troyer
spoke with Hogan expressing
concern that her computer might
have been hacked and proceeded
to alert the executive chief infor-mation
offi cer, Michael Hites.
Hours later, the University began
its investigation into the source
of the anonymous emails.
FROM PAGE 1A