Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: A rather newbie question
From: "Ethan Vaughn" <evaughn () levithan net>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 15:44:01 -0600 (MDT)
OK. OK. But the point is *User Beware*. Just because the only thing on your computer is aunt Gracie's recipes and a couple games doesn't mean it's not important to try and secure it. The "no valuables here" might work WRT the physical world of security (don't leave your digital cam sitting on the driver's seat), but it's diff't with the Internet ... and not necessarily intuitive. It just seems to be a common argument I hear -- indeed, one I used myself way back when. Anyway. I think I'm preeching to the choir, as it were. I just thought it worth mentioning ...
While I think you have a point I also think Ethan has one too. It is important to remember that users are generally clueless and/or unconcerned with security. Of course I'm grossly generalizing but I think you get my point.Yes, I can agree with that...I do get the point. But who are the users? Say you're an admin at a law firm...if the users are supposed to be security-conscious (face it, a great many admins lack even the most rudimentary security awareness), then shouldn't the admins be required to have a law degree, also? How about a hospital...shouldn't each admin then have to have a medical degree?Keeping in mind that the weakest link can be the average user is always a good idea. And who would argue with idiot proofing any system, computer or otherwise?Within the context of the business needs of the organization...sure.So I think a little harmless joking amongst ourselves isn't necessarily all bad :-) After all, how many ID10T errors have you fixed in the last week ;-PI agree that harmless joking is fine...but I've seen instances in which that harmless joking became part of the admin's vocabulary, even in front of those same users.
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- RE: A rather newbie question, (continued)
- RE: A rather newbie question Schmidt, Michael R. (May 02)
- RE: A rather newbie question Schmidt, Michael R. (May 02)
- RE: A rather newbie question Ethan Vaughn (May 03)
- RE: A rather newbie question Ethan Vaughn (May 03)
- RE: A rather newbie question Ethan Vaughn (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question Italy Anonymous Remailer (May 02)
- Re: A rather newbie question Stephen Perciballi (May 03)
- RE: A rather newbie question Schmidt, Michael R. (May 03)
- RE: A rather newbie question Harlan Carvey (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question David Hane (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question Harlan Carvey (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question Ethan Vaughn (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question David Hane (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question Valdis . Kletnieks (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question madsaxon (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question dk (May 03)
- Re: A rather newbie question Bart . Lansing (May 04)
- Re: A rather newbie question David Hane (May 04)
- RE: A rather newbie question Harlan Carvey (May 03)