RE: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] CyberInsecurity: The cost of Mo nopoly

From: Michael Smith (mike_at_sane.com)
Date: 09/30/03

  • Next message: Stormwalker: "[Full-Disclosure] More on Dan Geer" 
    To: <full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:53:46 -0400

    >> Do you really think you could convince the average user that they need to
    >> know this much about security? I mean, most users see their computers
    >>(and
    >> the network, servers, phones, faxes, etc...) as a tool to do business
    >>with.
    >> Nothing else. The computers are there to do a job, or help get a job
    done,
    >> and nothing else. It is not so much that they don't know, it is that they
    >> don't need to know.
    >
    >This argument is a total crock. Most people manage to drive cars that
    >remain operational, because they either learn how to do the maintenance
    >themselves, or they outsource it to a guy called a "mechanic".
    >

    I think the point is that most people expect their cars to be operational
    and do NOT do the maintenance themselves... they DO outsource it to a
    mechanic. The average user has A LOT less control over their car than their
    computer. A car is basically a single function unit, point A to point B.
    Computers never have been nor ever will be that one dimensional. At the
    most, I think we could hope for users who learn to know better than to try
    to do the 'maintenance' on their computers themselves.

    >Here.. let's do a s/computer/cars/ on that paragraph:
    >
    >> Do you really think you could convince the average person that they need
    >>to
    >> know this much about fuel injectors? I mean, most people see their cars
    >>(and
    >> the network, servers, phones, faxes, etc...) as a tool to do business
    >>with.
    >> Nothing else. The cars are there to do a job, or help get a job done,
    >> and nothing else. It is not so much that they don't know, it is that they
    >> don't need to know.

    >I'll point out that the average car no longer comes with a crank to start
    >it, or a manual choke button that you have to remember to push back in.
    >The average car no longer needs major maintenance every few hundred miles.
    >
    >So why are we tolerating computers that have cranks and choke buttons and
    >need major maintenance every few hundred hours?

    Let's see.... cars have been available to the general public for about,
    what, (at least) 75 years? And computers? Maybe 25? I think if you look
    at the progression the computer industry has made in that time, it FAR
    outweighs the manual choke or crank start...

    I think your paragraph above proves the point perfectly.... You'll NEVER
    convince the average person that they need to know about fuel injectors.
    I'll bet 5$ right now that half the people don't even know if their car HAS
    fuel injectors or not.

    ~mike

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

  • Next message: Stormwalker: "[Full-Disclosure] More on Dan Geer"
    • Quantcast