[Opensim-users] Banning "bad" viewers was Re: Can this be done?

[John Ward]

The question of the impression of security vs actual security is 
interesting, and I like your analogy.  What constitutes real security?

We used to have a broken security camera in one of our public computer 
labs.  The camera sat on top of a book shelf.  It was not connected to 
anything by any cable.  It didn't take any pictures or lead to a screen 
where someone might look on.  Did this device provide any real security? 
  I suppose you could argue that we did a disservice to any who expected 
someone would call the police or come to aid if anything bad happened. 
I guess we gave those users a "false sense of security".  We had fewer 
thefts from that lab then when it didn't have the "camera" or from other 
labs with no camera.

Did we provide any real security?  I can see one saying that it did not 
provide "real security" (what ever that means) because stuff could get 
stolen just as easily as other labs.  Yup, "security by obscurity".  It 
only works when one is fooled by the decoy.  Anyone knowing the truth is 
free to go about pillaging the lab.  Was it worth doing?  Yes, it was 
quite effective at deterring crime and quite worth doing.

An expert's list on how to secure your home included placing security 
system placards and yard signs because (allegedly) homes with just the 
signs enjoyed the same reduced burglary rates as those homes with an 
actual alarm.  Are the signs protecting the home at all?  If someone 
breaks in I'm sure it's better to have an alarm go off then not.

This is getting away from OpenSim so I'll stop.

I would like to thank the core and other developers who are thinking 
about and working on, to use Sean's analogy, adding roofs, windows, 
security alarms, and locks to the OpenSim convertible.

John.


On 01/13/2010 08:20 AM, Sean Hennessee wrote:
> It seems that this discussion is about the impression of security vs
> actual security. On one side if something gives the impression of
> security, but does little or nothing to make it more secure, then it's
> better not to do it. On the other hand, every little bit helps as long
> as the users don't interpret that as making them perfectly secure. (You
> could almost say you might as well never do anything since nothing is
> really perfectly secure.)
>
> My analogy would be this. If you have a convertible car, with the top
> down, and no security alarm, (essentially the equivalent of OpenSim
> now), would it be better to leave your laptop sitting on the passenger
> seat, under the passenger seat, or in a trunk that has no lock on it?
> (My 1963 Austin Healey Sprite was such a car.)
>
> One could argue that you might as well leave it on the passenger seat
> with a sign on it saying "Take me", because it's no safer there than any
> of the other options. But if it was my laptop, I'd hide it under the
> seat or in the trunk. Does this give me a false sense of security?
> Perhaps. If it was an older laptop and I had backups, I'd be willing to
> risk it under the seat, but not on top of it.
>
> So, my suggestion would be, keep backups, inform your users that things
> really aren't all that secure yet, and use an older laptop hidden under
> the seat. :-)
>
> Peace,
> Sean