Neil Schneider wrote:
Paul G. Allen wrote:
Bob is the one that fsck'd up, not me. He is the one that had enough
knowledge to install an AP. Apparently he does not have enough knowledge
to lock it down. Not my fault, his. Not my fault my computer connected
to it, his. He has the burden to make sure it's secure, just as I have
the burden of making sure my stuff is secure (whether tangible or
intangible property). No one will do it for me, unless I ask them to.
Being Joe Dumb User, I'm probably not smart enough to know it should be
secured, but that's my fault for getting into something before I know
anything about it.
So you are saying that the other guy's ignorance is inexcusable buy yours is
not? Nice.
I wasn't going to reply, but then I thought that maybe I wasn't totally
clear.
I am thinking of the uneducated, naive, Joe Dumb User that knows next to
nothing about the technology he's using. Unfortunately this is most
users. Sure Mr. User is guilty of not learning how to use the
technology. He may even be guilty of not RTFM. Is he to be held
accountable for how easy his computer connects to any available AP? Who
should be considered more responsible, the guy that has enough knowledge
to setup an AP in the first place, or the guy that doesn't even know
what an AP is, let alone how to set it up? Who should bear the burden of
responsibility, the guy setting up the AP and not wanting anyone to
connect to it, or the guy that knows nothing and simply want s to
connect to the Interweb, do some of that cool e-mail stuff, and, what do
they call it, "Browse the web"?
I say the guy that set up the AP. If someone uses it because it's open
and gives no indication that it's not for public use, then that's his
tough luck. It should not be the burden of Mr. User to try and figure
out if he's doing something wrong, especially when he doesn't even know
how the thing in front of him works in the first place. It should be
Bob's burden to provide reasonable care that his AP is not used in a way
he does wish or that may be against his ISP's AUP (whether it's used
purposely against his will or accidentally).
Since when are we talking about the ethics of stupid users? Is it ok for you
to send child pornography out someone else's AP, because they left it open? Is
it ethical for you to use it for sending SPAM, since he left it open? At what
point do you consider the use of someone's open AP a violation of ethics?
Boy, we suddenly jumped way over a line there. It's considered common
knowledge that the above two examples are not only ethically bad, but
illegal (in the US, in other countries, YMMV).
By the way, if there's one thing my ethics classes taught me, it's that
ethics are rather subjective. While something may be considered by some
to be good or bad ethics, change the group (perhaps using people from a
different cultural environment) and the view may change entirely.
PGA
--
Paul G. Allen, BSIT/SE
Owner, Sr. Engineer
Random Logic Consulting Services
www.randomlogic.com
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
