On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 13:23:28 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Luis-- > > On 03/13/2012 01:03 PM, "Luis A. Morán Morales" wrote: > > > I think this article is germane to the discussion and it clearly > > illustrates one of the many reasons that we need the FreedomBox: > > Yuck, what a terrible move by the school (and depressing to hear of the > capitulation of the girl's parents, if the school is to be believed). > > But it's worth considering how a FreedomBox implementation could > actually withstand a comparable attack, given the weak legal position of > most schoolchildren (or the weak negotiating position of most > job-seekers, referenced in your later link).
One thing we could do is have a fake password that is really the command to nuke the box. The user can recover all their info later from the social backup or the cloud. But really, this one comes down to teaching children to protect themselves that they *never* have to say anything until a parent shows up. If they're not comfortable, they should say nothing more than "I want my mommy". When I was a child, I had a teacher surreptitiously record a conversation with me. She was gloriously inept at it, which is why she was unable to fool a child. Schools think they act for our kids' best interests, but sometimes a parent's perspective needs to be included.
pgpMGNcjZjUBu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
