[discuss] Who is responsible for security

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Wed Jan 15 19:41:18 UTC 2014

On 16/01/2014 07:40, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <20140114225417.GC20300 at mx1.yitter.info>, at 17:54:17 on Tue,
> 14 Jan 2014, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> writes
>>> And do you think motor car suppliers should provide the facilities
>>> to train all drivers be able to perform the 10,000 mile service?
>> To follow your analogy, no; but I _do_ expect my dealer to charge me
>> when I go in for the service, or else to bury it somehow in the price
>> of the car.
> And why should someone paying a few tens of hundred dollars a year for
> their Internet connectivity not expect some of that to be spent on "user
> security"?

IMHO what is important is that the ISP's sales literature and small
print should be accurate in describing what they do or don't do in
terms of end-user security, and in describing what users are left
to do for themselves.

Again, there's a car analogy. Car makers are in fact pretty good
at this now (in countries where I've bought a car) but they
weren't very good at it fifty years ago.

When society started to look at it as a consumer protection issue,
and not as a "Car governance" issue, we got the right answer.


More information about the discuss mailing list