GNU, security, and RMS

[carroll at s.cs.uiuc.edu]

/* Written  1:55 pm  Jun  3, 1989 by haynes at ucbarpa.Berkeley.EDU in s.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.unix.wizards */
In article <2322 at thor.acc.stolaf.edu> mike at stolaf.edu writes:
>(2) There should not be security among the users of a computer system.
Well, you have a right to your opinion; but a corollary of this belief
is that all the users of a computer system have to be mutually friendly
and responsible and trust one another.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^
/* End of text from s.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.unix.wizards */

Put with "skillful" with "responsible". I used to share a couple systems with
some associates of mine, all of whom I trusted complete to be _honest_ and
_ethical_. I certainly did _not_ trust all of them to be _skillful_. As an
example, I have a friend who I'd trust in my house while I'm gone, but I'd
_never_ loan him the keys to my car because _he doesn't know how to drive_.
Similarly, I didnt' give my some of my associates full priviledges because
_they didn't know enough to be safe_. If ever one was a wizard kernel-hacker,
then it wouldn't be a problem. But that doesn't happen in the real world.
Properly used security also prevents _accidents_. Further, I kept private
information on the system - I trusted them not to look, even with root
priviledges, if I set the permissions to exclude normal logons. Setting
everything 666 (or 777) strikes me as bogus. How are others to know what
they are welcome to look at / edit or not?

Alan M. Carroll                "And there you are
carroll at s.cs.uiuc.edu           Saying 'We have the Moon, so now the Stars...'"
CS Grad / U of Ill @ Urbana    ...{ucbvax,pur-ee,convex}!s.cs.uiuc.edu!carroll