Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian

This is a discussion on Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian ; At 07:51 AM 7/27/2006 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: >an elevator is a shared space. a Ur exactly right. And so too the Internet is a shared space where whatever one person does can have far reaching implications. One person doing ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Re: NEVER USE SORBS

  1. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    At 07:51 AM 7/27/2006 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    >an elevator is a shared space. a


    Ur exactly right. And so too the Internet is a shared space where whatever
    one person does can have far reaching implications. One person doing
    something lazy/wrong/boneheaded/whatever can cause grief for somebody else
    who otherwise would have nothing to do with that person. (ref: how do i
    explain ttl and rdns to the end luser) It comes down to thinking about the
    other guy.


    >mail server is private property and the owner/admin has every right to
    >restrict access using whatever criteria they like.


    Strictly true but not real world. Publicness is the defining characteristic
    of the Internet that makes it work.


    >that would be good....but it will only happen if people who think they
    >have a right to access other people's mail servers whenever they want,
    >even against the owners' wishes, will stop whining.


    The presumption of public access vs. the presumption of privacy. There is
    the presumption of permission to enter when u go to a shopping mall. There
    is the presumption of permission to go up to somebody's front door. There
    is not the presumption of permission to walk into somebody's living room.
    It goes to the publicly understood purpose. The purpose of a shopping mall
    is to sell things to the public. Nobody has to "find out" if they're
    allowed into a mall before they go. Vice versa with ur living room. The
    same principles apply to mail servers. Sure every admin has the right to
    assert non publicness. But the presumption of publicness remains. So when
    two people with different assumptions collide, it creates a problem which
    spreads out. Sure we have the right to do a lot of things. Including not
    thinking of others. It's frustrating the system.

    SORBS has the right to do whatever dumb thing it wants but they ignore the
    consequences. By putting their stuff out there they're baiting trouble.
    They know people who don't know what they're doing are going to use that and
    cause trouble. Then even more people will get involved and start flame
    wars. etc etc. SORBS is just irresponsible. That's what it all comes down
    to irrespective of rights.







    --
    REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
    "...ne cede malis"

    00000100


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 12:28:56AM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
    > At 07:51 AM 7/27/2006 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > >an elevator is a shared space. a

    >
    > Ur exactly right. And so too the Internet is a shared space where


    the internet is a shared space. a private mail server is not. it is
    private property that has a connection to the internet for the benefit
    of the owner & other authorised users.


    > one person does can have far reaching implications. One person doing
    > something lazy/wrong/boneheaded/whatever can cause grief for somebody
    > else who otherwise would have nothing to do with that person. (ref:
    > how do i explain ttl and rdns to the end luser) It comes down to
    > thinking about the other guy.


    pandering to idiots who couldn't be bothered understanding simple things
    is a complete waste of time. you can do what you want with your own
    time and energy, but don't expect others to share your priorities.
    i'm more concerned with blocking spam than i am with making sure that
    every idiot understands the rationale behind each and every anti-spam
    rule/method/technique that i use.


    > >mail server is private property and the owner/admin has every right
    > >to restrict access using whatever criteria they like.

    >
    > Strictly true but not real world.


    it is very much real world.

    > Publicness is the defining characteristic of the Internet that makes
    > it work.


    a mail server is not the internet. it is a device connected to the internet.


    > >that would be good....but it will only happen if people who think
    > >they have a right to access other people's mail servers whenever they
    > >want, even against the owners' wishes, will stop whining.

    >
    > The presumption of public access vs. the presumption of privacy.
    > There is the presumption of permission to enter when u go to a
    > shopping mall. There is the presumption of permission to go up to
    > somebody's front door. There is not the presumption of permission to
    > walk into somebody's living room.


    to put your bogus analogy in context the internet is the public street,
    and a mail server is a private residence in that street. you have a
    right to walk along that public street but, as you say, you don't have
    the right to enter the private residences on that street. you may or may
    not have a (revocable) presumptive right to knock and request entry, but
    you do not have the right to demand entry.

    if the owner of that private property ignores your knock or decides that
    s/he isn't going to let you in because s/he doesn't like the colour of
    your shoes (or any other completely arbitrary criteria) then you just
    have to accept that. it's their property.


    > It goes to the publicly understood purpose.


    no, it doesn't. 'publicly understood purpose' is bull**** you just made
    up. you can 'publicly understand' that the purpose of my front lawn is
    to be a toilet for your dog as much as you like but that doesn't change
    the fact that any unauthorised entry onto my front lawn is trespass.


    > The purpose of a shopping mall is to sell things to the public.
    > Nobody has to "find out" if they're allowed into a mall before they
    > go.


    they can, however, be refused entry or be banned from future entry for
    any arbitrary reason that the owner of the mall chooses. it's private
    property with some limited (and revocable) public access permission.

    in some jurisdictions there may be certain legal restrictions on the
    mall owner's ability to arbitrarily discriminate against particular
    protected 'classes' of people (e.g. skin colour, gender, sexual
    orientation, etc), but even there they can set entry criteria as long as
    they are universal. e.g. you can ban untidy or overly casual clothing as
    long as that applies to everyone and not just to blacks or gays or women
    or some other particular group.

    now before you try to make some stupid parallel between dynamic ip
    addresses and anti-discrimination laws, an IP address does not identify
    an individual person or entity or even a 'class' of entities.

    > Vice versa with ur living room. The
    > same principles apply to mail servers. Sure every admin has the right to
    > assert non publicness. But the presumption of publicness remains.


    no, it does not. any more than a private residence with a connection
    to the public street (i.e. the driveway) creates a presumption of
    publicness.

    > So when two people with different assumptions collide, it creates a
    > problem which spreads out.


    yes, and that is why the person with the wrong assumption should make an
    effort to correct their mistake.



    craig

    --
    craig sanders (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  3. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 12:28:56AM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
    > At 07:51 AM 7/27/2006 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > > that would be good....but it will only happen if people who think they
    > > have a right to access other people's mail servers whenever they want,
    > > even against the owners' wishes, will stop whining.

    >
    > The presumption of public access vs. the presumption of privacy. There is
    > the presumption of permission to enter when u go to a shopping mall. There
    > is the presumption of permission to go up to somebody's front door. There
    > is not the presumption of permission to walk into somebody's living room.
    > It goes to the publicly understood purpose. The purpose of a shopping mall
    > is to sell things to the public. Nobody has to "find out" if they're
    > allowed into a mall before they go. Vice versa with ur living room. The
    > same principles apply to mail servers. Sure every admin has the right to
    > assert non publicness. But the presumption of publicness remains. So when
    > two people with different assumptions collide, it creates a problem which
    > spreads out. Sure we have the right to do a lot of things. Including not
    > thinking of others. It's frustrating the system.


    And this is particularly relevant in the case where the mail server
    using SORBS is not that of a business or a private individual, but
    that of an ISP providing a service whereby members of the public can
    communicate with other members of the public using email.

    --
    Pigeon

    Be kind to pigeons
    Get my GPG key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?...rch=0x21C61F7F

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEyRr6UxADjyHGH38RAoyxAJwMLzoJzX9Sdghxlvo9xE GOS91zXgCgjGgK
    1+DOglU7rWEIORrGZZNOSEU=
    =DtkD
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  4. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    2006/7/27, Pigeon :

    > And this is particularly relevant in the case where the mail server
    > using SORBS is not that of a business or a private individual, but
    > that of an ISP providing a service whereby members of the public can
    > communicate with other members of the public using email.


    whoa!! here we have 101th post in this topic!!

    --
    Wojciech Ziniewicz | jid:zeth@chrome.pl
    http://silenceproject.org | http://zetho.wordpress.com


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread