[KLUG Members] Link on OS security problems

[Rusty Yonkers]

> I suspect that this fought "every step of the way" is actually the
> amplified vocalizations of a small percentage of the population.  I
> was
> late teens / early twenties when seat-belt laws came into bieng and
> heard about this ALOT.  But most people I knew were in the "Well,
> Duh?"
> camp.  

There are those of us that still believe that it is government
misplaced to try to legislate away stupidity.  I have always wore my
seatbelt but I chaff royally against some schmuck in congress that
thinks we need to force something down people because congress thinks
it is right and smart.  I have less problems with laws requiring
seatbelts be a standard part of cars (although there is a point where
government has overstepped boundrys again).  I also feel the same
about helmet laws.  We should not try to legislate behaviour when it
does not directly affect the health or saftey of another.  

> The anti-seat belt contingent also tended to coincide with
> the
> contingent that felt there was no "real" evidence cirgerette
> smoking was
> bad for you.  

Hmmm smoking is a really interesting one.  If it is soooo bad then
why do we first subsidize the growing of tobacco and then second not
make it just totally illegal.  And if the non-smoking types want
smoke-free bars why do they not take the risk of thier money to open
one up.  Why should they be allowed to force another person to run a
business the way they want it run.  This would be akin to forcing all
computer companies to carry Apple computers as part of thier stock so
that the Mac user could go to any store to get a Mac.  If you think
Mac's are great and profitable items then open your own store.

> My best example (being painfully familiar with it) is LDAP schema. 
> To
> create LDAP schema you have to acquire an OID number from IANA (a
> central authority for such things).  It is free, as in costs

This item is not a good point simply because you are talking about a
system that, by its very nature, is meant for corporate (meaning
interpersonal not business nessisarily) interoperability.  This is
the same as electrical systems or roadways.  Since many people must
be able to use it co-operativly then there needs to be standards that
are centrally enforced.  This is not the same as security on a
network system.  I do not have to have locks on my doors at home that
function the same as my neighbors for my locks to work.  Nor will
dissimilar locks affect the operation of his doors.  

Just because an idea comes from "government" does not mean it is
going to be the best idea.  We should limit government involvement to
where it needs to be only.  There should not be government dictates
in most areas of life.  We do not immunize our children for most
diseses simply because the risk of the side-effects of the disese are
greater than the possibility of them even getting the disese let
alone having life altering consequenses of the disese.  I rue the day
that government would dictate those choices on us.  

Many in government posistions have a significant power hungry bent
that concerns me when it comes to having to much control of my
computer or any other item of mine for security or any other area
that would be sensitive.  Power abuse is all to common a trend in the
history of mankind to "trust" people that much.  


> > Interesting point, and I wonder of there is a parellel to be
> drawn here.
> > Of course, combat air training highlighted the risk of flying
> against the
> > enemy, and the crew was also trained to trust themselves, each
> oterh, and
> > their airplanes. It is interesting that many aircrews customized
> their own 
> > planes in various ways, but were very resistant to others doing
> so.
> 
> And if my life depended over-and-over on some machine I'd feel the
> exact
> same way.  

I get the same way about my computers simply because I do not trust
most people to get it right.  If I screw it up then it is just my
fault.  I have known too many idiots in my life to trust others. 
Just look at how many people use M$ Windows for everything!!!

Yes there are many that will not pay much attention to computer
security.  I guess those are the ones that will have the struggles
and either learn from the mistakes or be taken out of the race
because of stupidity.  That is one of the reasons our econmic method
works so well is because the stupidest do not survive (notice I did
not say the best always win - although even though they may have been
best in technology they obviously sucked at something).


=====
Rusty Yonkers
CNE, MCP, A+, CCNA, Linux+, Server+, Network+ certified
-----------------------------------------
An Atomic Supergeek with an attitude!
-----------------------------------------
Currently using SuSE 8.2, Mac OS X, and WinXP (would love to get rid of last one)

...............looking for penguin domination.....................

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus