Re: Quick Poll: Would you trust system software from an anonymous source?

Well, then, it seems you aren't very credible as a responsible,
trustworthy IT person.  Its ridiculous to think that you have any
credible opinion on the matter.

Can all the black-hats and other freaks just chill?  You can't win, and
its just a waste time to try to attack me.

		--Dean

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Chris Pugh wrote:

> On 10 March 2010 18:35, Dean Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Results of the poll:
> 
> Really?  Hearsay, and thus inadmissible evidence ( of anything ).
> Case dismissed!
> 
> C.
> 
> > I conducted the poll on the DJBDNS list and the BBLISA list. The BBLISA
> > list is made of Boston Large Scale System Administrators. No one on the
> > BBLISA list deviated from:
> >
> > 1. No, Absolutely not.
> > 2. Decrease.
> > 3. Decrease.
> > 4. Yes.  Bad, professional negligence
> > 5. No.  But a severe warning. Depends on seniority, too.
> > 6. Yes.  Yes.
> >
> > One person mentioned whether there was a policy against installing
> > malware, and whether there were warnings and repeated offenses. This
> > might be a good point, but I'm not sure. Most companies don't have a
> > policy on installing malware, and most malware doesn't destroy data, but
> > steals data. Of course, they don't have usualy have a policy against
> > theft and embezzelment, either. Nor a lot of other things that appear to
> > be contrary to common sense or "crimes mala prohibita" (things we
> > obviously don't permit)
> >
> > On the DJBDNS list, things were markedly different. A number of the
> > "expected people" (trolls) responded as well, asserting almost uniformly
> > that there was nothing wrong with installing untrusted software, and
> > that expecting system administrators to inquire about trust and
> > accountability was somehow unreasonable.
> >
> >                --Dean
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, Dean Anderson wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> By anonymous, I mean a source that traces only to an email address with
> >> no phone number, no address, no anything.  Not even a significant
> >> history of email from that account.  This source has no accountability,
> >> because they are anonymous.
> >>
> >> By 'System software' I mean software whose integrity a company relies on
> >> to perform its functions. If the software were remotely exploitable, it
> >> could potentially result in remote access being obtained, and/or
> >> confidential information being exposed, firewall being circumvented, etc
> >>
> >> Here are the specific questions:
> >>
> >> 1. Would you trust (meaning use) system software from an anonymous
> >> source?
> >>
> >> 2. Would the fact that the software is a derivative of well known
> >> software, but with apparently gratuitous "security fixes": would that
> >> increase or decrease your willingness to trust the software?
> >>
> >> 3. Would the fact that source implements a variation of discredited
> >> changes advocated by gray-hat or black-hat hackers increase or decrease
> >> your willingness to trust the software?
> >>
> >> 4. Would you consider it a bad judgment to use such software knowing (1)
> >> for sure, and perhaps (2) and (3)?  How serious is the bad judgment?
> >>
> >> 5. Would it be reasonable to fire the admin responsible if they knew of
> >> (1), and perhaps (2),and (3), but used it anyway?
> >>
> >> 6. Does the reasonableness of termination depend on actually knowing
> >> (1)? That is, supposing the admin didn't know (1), should the admin have
> >> made an effort to find out if the software was from a dependable (or at
> >> least accountable) source?
> >>
> >>
> >> Please reply off list.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >>               --Dean
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
> > www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
> > 617 256 5494
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 

-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 256 5494