[LINK] Perspective on security! [was: Security efforts hindered by untrained users]

[Stephen Wilson]

Craig Sanders wrote:

>> [Steve Wilson wrote:] In many ways, commodity computing today mirrors the state of the automobile 
>> industry c. 1900s.  You had to be a technical wizard to get the most out of 
>> a car, to operate it safely, to maintain it.  The supply chain was still 
>> very complicated, no one-stop-shops back then.  And no traffic rules 
>> either, or driver licenses, or road worthy certificates. The "business 
>> case" to buy an car instead of a horse was shaky.  But I digress ...
> 
> ummm, hate to break it to you but you're describing computing in the the
> 1970s and early 1980s. that was about 25+ years ago.  the field has come
> a very long way since then.

Really?  Bugger all has changed fundamentally.  The recent Link thread 
about software as a profession versus software as a craft proves how far 
we still have to go.  The very fact that security and user training 
provokes so much discussion also suggests that the IT sector is still 
embryonic.  These are complex issues that have yet to play out.  The 
Microsoft versus Open Source debate may run for years to come, and its 
outcome may utterly change the landscape.  You would want it to!


Moving along, I'm fascinated that on the one hand Craig Sanders said:
> Treacherous Computing[1] has been rejected by the mass market ... 
But on the other hand:
> the bulk of the problem is that the software that most people use (MS
> Windows) is complete and utter crap.

Spot the inconsistencies?  You cannot bemoan the market's infatuation 
with Microsoft but then give it credit for 'rejecting' Trusted Computing 
[which was itself rejected by big bad Microsoft for quite a while]. 
Surely it's way too early to rush to judge Trusted Computing.

In any case, blaming Microsoft is really blaming users, to follow the 
logic of many on the List who seem to think that if only users knew 
better, they would surely choose Unix.

Cheers,

Steve Wilson.