[discuss] Who is responsible for security

[Roland Perry]

In message 
<h5aad9lmqrf0dcb2kfk57naf8bia08to05 at hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>, at 
13:17:19 on Tue, 14 Jan 2014, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi at gmx.net> 
writes
>>Today's Billion+ Internet users see themselves as customers of a
>>trillion-dollar platform, not as partners in a grand experiment.
>>
>>Even most small and medium sized enterprises, let alone individuals,
>>expect (and some would say deserve) to have security "thrust upon them"
>>because they weren't "born with it", and "achieving" it themselves is
>>too much of a hill to climb.
>>
>>Working out who gets the job of doing this, is what Internet Governance
>>is all about (ever since the point, around the Millenium, that
>>governments acting as the representatives of those users noticed that
>>there was something which they considered needed to be done).
>
>It seems pretty clear to me that good "Internet Governance" would ensure
>that Internet users can see themselves "partners in a grand experiment",
>as you put it. Especially in order to accomodate user "security" needs.

With 2 billion Internet Users, how many do you think have the IT skills 
to understand the issues, let alone play a part in fixing them?

About 1.990 billion of them just want it to work when they switch it on, 
and have no inclination to start experimenting with anything.

We have a saying: "why keep a dog and bark yourself", they want the 
people they are buying service from, in collaboration with suitably 
trained engineers and lawmakers, to do the safety thing.
-- 
Roland Perry