At 09:24 10/11/00 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
> > I guess a third party within the network should be useful for
> everybody, for
> > instance, to filter viruses.
> >
> > The issue is to define what role is acceptable and legitimate for that
> > party.
>
>imho, no amount of filtering is acceptable or legitimate for a third party,
>unless such filtering is both authorized by, and under the control of,
>either the provider or the consumer.
Define consumer :)
I seem to recall you having made some comments about this elsewhere...
> this gets back to predictable operation.
Right.
>what if the consumer has a legitimate need to access something that just
>happens to look to the virus filter like it contains a virus?
>what if the filter doesn't just check for viruses, but also things that
>look (to it) like porn?
Those examples are problematic as they demonstrate situations where there
could be a valid reason for having filters on the network border. In those
cases you can argue that the consumer isn't the user sat in front of her
browser, but the guy that decides who can use the network and what they can
use it for.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:29 MST