[Mimedefang] OS wars... [was Viruses: Bounce or Discard?]

[Keith Dowell]

Ok the post I made before WAS in fact sarcasm, but this discussion has got
me thinking... especially when I heard someone's analogy to an automobile.

So let's go with that. Now who's responsible for viruses traveling along the
internet highways.

Now I would equate Microsoft to the automobile manufacturer.

The consumer (driving the vehicle) would be the end user.

Now that makes the ISP the DOT (Department of transportation)

Now pollution (smoke coming out of the car "clogging", or cars that
excessively leak oil, etc etc) would be our virus.

Now lets say that evil gas companies with water in the tanks, and shade tree
mechanics that improperly fix cars are the distributors of the virii.

Now we have (innocent user) joe blow driving with a vehicle polluting the
highway . It is now polluting the highway with smoke (spreading a virus)
because he recently had his car worked on by shade tree mechanic. Now shade
tree mechanic (our virus author) has packed up shop and left town to
willywompaland and can't be found.

Now are the people who made the car responsible?

Are the people who pave our highways?

Is joe blow?

Well if you take the analogy literally, and compare it to actual real
life... Had you got your car worked on by a bad mechanic (caught a virus)
and started spreading pollution (spreading the virus), you would be
ultimately held responsible to take the car into a "certified" mechanic and
get it fixed! Not the DOT (your ISP), and not the auto manufacturer
(Microsoft).

So even though my first response on this subject a few days ago was just
meant as a sarcastic comment because I was bored at work one day...

The more I think about it though, the more I think that the USER is
ultimately responsible for maintaining their PC (automobile). It should be
part of the responsibility of owning it. Yes microsoft has bugs and holes,
they also come out with patches. I'm by no means at all any sort of
microsloth fan but it should be the USERS responsibility to update their
computer. Just as it would be if an auto manufacturer made a recall on
faulty tires to be replaced. Once they've done that (announced a patch), if
the user doesn't "take it in" to get fixed, they have assumed responsibility
of anything bad that happens.

You know, we didn't hear this kind of crap year ago when people were just
running around bbs's. They downloaded a virus, it was their own fault. No
one said microsoft should pay. No one blamed the bbs. If some one buys a pc
and refuses to keep their virus protection updated, and download the latest
patches for their operating system then it's their own damn fault for not
doing it. It's the same thing as not replacing the tires on your car when
all the treads worn off. Can't blame the highway department for bad roads,
or for friction causing wear on your tires. And you can't blame the auto
manufacturer for not giving you tires that lasted for infinity.

People keep saying the isp should do this, the isp should pay that, they
should be responsible.... Um what? Look - they provide a means of transport.
It is NOT their responsibility in any way what so ever to keep you notified,
keep you educated, or keep you safe. Just like it is not gm's and the dot's
responsibility to personally check that you wear your saftey-belt everytime
you get in your car, or that you put gas in it, or that you perform normal
maintenance on it.

A computer is not a damn home stereo, or tv, or entertainment center, just
as a car is not a bicycle. So again, although my first post was offhanded
sarcasm... now that I think more about it... it SHOULD be the user who is
responsible, fined, etc for viruses being on their computer. If they are
going to have a complicated piece of equipment they need to realize that it
will take maintenance and patches, and require protection.

Just like putting a car alarm reduces (although does not guarantee) the
chances of auto theft. Putting their (also optional, just like a car alarm
is) virii protection on is THEIR responsibility... not bills, not their
ISP's.

If you're going to fine or blame anyone for viruses spreading... blame the
user. I'm sick of hearing "I didn't know". If any moron has watched the news
in the last 2 years (local and national) there have been countless stories
about viruses and the internet. This is like saying I wasn't responsible for
my car leaving oil streaks down the road because gm makes cars that seem to
break down eventually (especially after I did that ad hoc engine repair
myself), and we should fine the highway department for not protecting me
from myself, and should fine gm for making a car that requires maintenance.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Smoogen" <smoogen at lanl.gov>
To: <mimedefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Mimedefang] OS wars... [was Viruses: Bounce or Discard?]


> On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 17:22, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> >
> > I was intrigued by David's ISP based idea, but I agree that it won't
work
> > for exactly the reasons you say.  I had been trying to come up with
> > structures that would change the incentives for ISPs, but I can't come
up
> > with anything plausible or which would stand up to the slightest bit of
> > scrutiny.  Still, I liked David's initial idea, so I was activily
engaging
> > in this discussion to see both the strengths and weaknesses of it.
>
> I have one... criminal/civil liability for allowing virii from their
> networks. In the end, laws are supposed to be created to fill in where
> natural incentives fail to induce enough social/individual change.
>
>
> -- 
> Stephen John Smoogen smoogen at lanl.gov
> Los Alamos National Lab  CCN-5 Sched 5/40  PH: 4-0645
> Ta-03 SM-1498 MailStop B255 DP 10S  Los Alamos, NM 87545
> -- So shines a good deed in a weary world. = Willy Wonka --
>
> _______________________________________________
> MIMEDefang mailing list
> MIMEDefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com
> http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang