 | | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Not to put to fine a point on it...hogwash. That's the same logic as "Anything in a store is for sale, that's what a store is FOR." James (URL) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) That's a false analogy. Obviously, not everything on the web server itself is public. For example, www.lego.com runs on Microsoft IIS on top of NT 4 -- obviously the system software is not publicly viewable. But everything in the "documents to (...) (25 years ago, 17-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I agree. If I can see by normal means (no serious hacking) using a normal URL and a normal web browser some information that Lego doesn't want me to see, then the fault lies with the webmaster of that site, not me. "We put all this info here (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Yeah, this whole thought of calling it "snooping" seems ridiculous to me. How many times have you had to manually edit URLs you've come across because they just didn't plain work until you "hacked" away at them? If it's world-readable and (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Nope, it's not. It's a very close analogy to what Jasper posted: "Yes, it is. Anything on an unsecured webserver is being published." Which you refute much more logically below. (...) Yes, but we're disagreeing on what consitutes "documents (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) All right. You have this artist friend. She paints things. She invites you and fifty other people over for a housewarming party. Great party, lots of fun, lots of neat things going on. She's got a couple of her latest paintings up on display, (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) False analogy. Your conditions don't match Lego's, at least in my estimation. If you stated that the artist's display was on the street, in public, and has the other works uncovered in an inconspicuous but equally public location, then we have (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I don't see how this corresponds. 1. She didn't invite people over specifically to see her paintings, she invited them to housewarming which happened to display a few paintings. On the other hand, the entire purpose of Lego's web site is to (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Aha. Flawed analogy. There were NO SHEETS. It was not only out in the open, it was in the main room of the party. Jasper (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Hmm, maybe that's the heart of the controversy right there! I dunno about the net population at large, but I'd certainly experience guilt feelings if I summoned up an image to which there was no readily- obvious hyperlink, because I'd assume (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Anything in a store _is_ for sale. Anything that isn't for sale isn't _in_ the store, it's _a part of_ the store. That's the only way for the analogy of the web to a store even to remotely work. (...) No he doesn't. He agrees with me in every (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I'm coming to think so too. To me, this is fundamentally why we have a URLs -- Uniform Resource Locators. The ability to identify and access resources directly is a basic design decision underlying what makes the WWW what it is. If the intent (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Probably. (...) Maybe you haven't spent much time on personal homepages. Misspelled links in the source are more common than correct ones, it sometimes seems. Oh, and of course all webdevelopment gets done on case-insenstive FAT16/32. And then (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I didn't mean it quite that literally. Correcting an obvious typo or fixing broken \'s to /'s is something I think anyone could do without feeling guilt! :) I meant things like trying to guess names of files from partial information, or if (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) You mean you go back and see what you should have felt guilty about, in retrospect? I think that's going a bit overboard! (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Heh heh. No no, I mean when you find some directory with 755 permissions (instead of 711 permissions) and it's got no index.html file, but it's got a home.html file linked to from elsewhere, and home.html contains links to 5 images in its (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
Reply-To: mattdm@mattdm.org Message-Id: <slrn85lsvu.1dq.matt...ia.bu.edu> User-Agent: slrn/0.9.5.7 (UNIX) (...) *shrug* It's snooping in stuff that they've made publicly available. Walking down the public alley behind a store because you're curious (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
On my site, I assume that ANYTHING on my site will be viewed by someone sooner or later. If I don't want it viewed, I remove it. The most I do for "security" is put index.html files in directories that I might consider sensitive. But then again, I (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I may revisit this tomorrow after all the spirits are flushed out of my system, but on the surface this is a bogus analogy. Front window/back window. Signs pointing HERE - Look at this! No signs pointing to other areas, but stuff still there (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) That's silly. Those two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Brad even specifically mentioned something about "by accident or by intent". So you're telling me that if you accidentally mistype a character in a URL and end up seeing an (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Wow, I've been quite reasonable AND made an excellent point today. I'm on a roll. ;) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) No, you're defining webserver differently. I'm not going to bother quibbling semantics with you. (...) No. "in a place public can get to" != publically available != published. The three of them often co-incide, but do not necessarily do so. (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) What two? (...) Heh heh...no, that's not what I meant by "summoned up"; I was referring to snooping or URL trolling. If I summoned up an image by accident, I'd be surprised more than anything else. --Todd (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Interesting side-issue: what about going through the garbage in the alley? I could see it either way - people don't generally leave sensitive information in the dumpster, unless they're idiots, but legally, is acquiring, say, hardware (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Gee. That's rather a cop-out, isn't it? (...) Yes, it does. (...) This is not about courtesy. At all. This is about a claim Brad made that it was _legally_ so. I am not saying it isn't impolite (though I don't agree..), I am saying it isn't (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) If you insist. But no amount of sniping is going to convince me that "webserver"=public. What about firewalls? They're on an unsecured webserver, too - does that make them "public?" (...) And I am saying I don't care about the legalities. I (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Bringing up a world-readable image on a publicly accessible webserver (by any means - either mistyping or experimenting with urls) and invading someone's privacy by going through their medicine cabinets. I don't think you were try to imply (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) No. Refuse, once released to an ordinary refuse collection service, is no longer the property of the originator. If you don't want people viewing your secret plans, shred them and contract with a secure document service which retains control (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) Uhm, excuse me, exactly what did I saw that was wrong about the law? --Todd (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) What do you mean "firewalls are on an unsecured webserver"? I think you need some more grounding in the terminology, cause I can't make head nor tail of what you're trying to say. If it should happen to be be "otherwise unsecured webserver (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
<385C70D7.568E345D@voyager.net> <FMzorw.GrH@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Well I did some digging to find examples but not as much as I could have. While I'd love to devote the time (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) HERE! HERE! I agree 100%, well put Lar. :-) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I don't think it's normally illegal, no, although I would be surprised if there weren't at least a few gray or semi-gray areas lurking there vis-a-vis publishing links to unannounced products. Mostly I meant wrong in the sensibilities sense, (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
<snipped .admin.general - this is getting obviously into the realm of just (...) A firewall must exist (at least in part) on a machine that serves the internet at large. Like I said before, a couple posts ago: "you're defining webserver differently. (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) A firewall is generally a machine on the internet at large, yes. The things protected by it aren't, in the sense that some things are filtered out by said firewall. A firewall is logically, and usually physically, not a webserver, or a (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jasper Janssen writes: <snipped Q&D explanation of firewalls & so forth> (...) I will bow to your expertise. Yes, I did (instinctively) take your reference to webserver to mean a physical box - that's probably because if (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Policy clarification regarding catalogs
|
|
(...) I should have realised it sooner. However, it's best to remember, that when discussing theory, it's best to think in "theoretical" boxes rather than actual ones. (...) Heh. (...) They're quite possibly fairly irrelevant on Lugnet, what with it (...) (25 years ago, 22-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
