Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: spidey07
The days of just plugging in are over. Nowadays you must be authenticated, scanned and ensure that you are patched, up-to-date virus pattern and firewall installed with their policy.
I applaud your university for doing what they should.
We can no longer afford to have virus/worm laden machines bringing the network to a stand still.
I fail to see how that in any way relates to the subject matter at hand, really.
The software makes sure the computer has the latest patches. It authenticates the user. It makes sure basic security measures are taken. All things that are necessary on real networks. You might come into contact with one when you get out of your parents' basement.
I guess you missed the point - I don't disagree with any of those measures. However,
they have nothing to do with what is being discussed here. (Which is exactly what I said before, and you intentionally chose to overlook, specifically to insult me. I hope you enjoyed it, because the allegation is untrue.)
What is being discussed here, is, apparently, the (planned?) forced installation of software onto students machines, in an apparent violation of their legal rights, in order to help uphold an (illegal) monopoly on music/media-distribution, at the behest of some powerful corporations.
Let's look at this plainly - look at the analog of a residental telephone installation. The "network", as such, extends right to the edge of the customer's premesis. Yet the telco
does not have the right to intrude into the customer's home, for any reason.
In the same vein, the school has a right to control the packets flowing over their network, and to disconnect the user if they so choose, from that network. That is their right. but they have
no right to forcibly install software onto a student's private machine, much less software with intentionally malicious capability.
What's next? Forced spyware/adware onto student's machines, because the university has a contract with some major advertising company, and they feel that their students are a captive audience that they can force to view ads? Utterly ridiculous.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: spidey07
especially allowing peer-2-peer and bit torrent. That crap needs to be outlawed. If a machine is running that crap network access needs to be removed. Permantently.
You're right. Why risk insecurity, from peer-to-peer networks. Might as well not even offer any sort of network access at all,
especially in a place like an education institution. Heaven forbid that someone, someday, might discover this thing called the "internet", and use it to learn something.
Here's a clue - the internet itself is a peer-to-peer network. Therefore, obviously, you are for banning internet-access outright, I assume.
It is not the p2p network that the masses will think of when you say "peer to peer." p2p is as derogatory as the term "hacker" is these days, no matter what traditionalists want.
I think that what he meant to say was, "file-sharing network", but really, that's basically what the internet was built for in the first place too. But the statements be made were very clearly anti-technology, and not against a user's malicious or illegal mis-use of technology. That's what was most disturbing about them. I could easily turn around and argue that network-based backup software equated to a "peer to peer file-sharing network", and should likewise be made illegal. Certainly, that would be a ludicrous statement - but then again, so is
spidey07's statement that such technology should be outlawed.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Originally posted by: spidey07
Thank goodness there is finally technology to enforce this kind of good network policy.
Why not just cut the cables, wouldn't that be easiest? Or go on room-to-room searches in the dorms, for contraband items like "computers". I mean, they could use them to access that big peer-to-peer network called the internet, using a dial-up connection over the telephone lines! Scary! Maybe you should cut their phone lines too.
Why not take care of your computer? It's the simplest method, but some people are too ignorant to do so. Do a search on this forum, see how many people say they don't care if they get hacked because they don't keep anything "important" on their machines.
I'm sorry that you equate using a (relatively new) internet file-transfer protocol to download GPL'ed software, with a poorly-maintained, virus-infected machine (generally a Win32 machine). Ironically, perhaps he was in the process of downloading a Linux ISO with the specific intent to improve the security and "cleanliness" of his machine, by running something other than the usually leaky sieve that is 'Windows'.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
It amazes me sometimes, how many anti-technology people, post on technology-oriented forums, using the exact same tools that they want banned. Frightning, really, when you consider that they might actually be in a position of power to enforce those constraints on others. Generally it stems from fear, which itself stems from ignorance. Too bad, really.
Yeah, Spidey07 is one of those "security n00bs" that thinks he knows something. :roll:
Did I call him a "n00b"? No I did not. Please
do not put words into my mouth, thank you.
I will plainly and willingly call him "ignorant" though, based on his apparent attitude towards new network technology, along with his strange affection for NAT, which effectively will lead to the breakdown of the internet as we know it. I feel that the anti-technology comment is therefore quite accurate.
