Subject:
|
Re: Are that many people really glad about the security stuff?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 23 Jun 2001 16:07:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
492 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Peter McLoone writes:
> Well personally I'm a bit ticked.
Gee, that's too bad. I'm not, but I'm sorry you are.
> How many people are really glad about
> these new security features.
I am. I'm *really* glad about it.
> Is this really necessary?
I believe it is. Then again, I believe it is important to know with some
degree of certainty that when I read a post from Larry or Todd or Matthew
Miller or Shiri that it really is from them. Maybe you disagree.
> As far as i see
> Brad's idea was the best, keep it optional,
An optional authentication scheme? What good would that be? So I might
know that something is really from you, maybe, unless someone were spoofing
posts from you in groups you don't read so you wouldn't notice they were
there and fake? Sounds bizarre and potentially worthless to me.
> The key thing here is to make it optional, because there are so
> many out there that are probably thinking this a con, rather than a pro.
Making it optional would seem to make it irrelevant, imo.
List some of these overwhelming number of cons, please.
> So
> generally I'm trying to rally some support against this absolute pain in the
> arse.
That's obvious - how about backing up your rallying cry with something other
than whining?
> Of course in the event that you people out there decided to be too
> timid to complain,
Hrmmm - I don't know you from Adam, but if you spend a little time looking
around you'll find that a great many of us aren't too timid to complain to
Todd if we disagree with him about something.
> or actually like this, I suppose I'll have to yield, but
> don't expect me to cower down, I'm a very perserverant person. Err....
Who wants you to cower down? If you don't like it speak out, but don't
expect people to flock to your side after reading this random wandering
hard-to-read diatribe.
If I were still using a news reader, and I can see myself going back to that
at some point now that I have more time to read and post, I'd like to see
some other, less work-intensive method of authentication. Since I'm using
the web interface, I don't have a dog in this fight right now, but I
understand the concerns because I used Agent to read and post here since
before LUGNET went public.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
