GBOPOLY1@NUSVM.BITNET (fclim) (09/21/88)
in article <3e720dde.13422@apollo.com>, nathaniel mishkin writes: >users that might *accidently* issue the SHUT command", well, all I can >say is if enough people think that's a real problem, shout now and I'm >sure we'll do something about it. i am *shouting*. there are some people who are against restricting shut. all i can say is: (1) non-user stephen stills writes (in some non-article): >nobody's right if everybody's wrong. all those proponents of restricting shut will say the opponents are wrong and all the opponents say the proponents are wrong. so the only person who is right is stephen stills. (2) in article <15776@shemp.cs.ucla.edu>, casey leedom writes: >manner. Remember, if you have no mechanisms for security you have no >choices. If you do have some mechanisms for security, you can chose to >apply them or not. if we have some choices, then it doesn't matter whose's right and whose's wrong. the important thing is, if we have some choices, everybody will be happy. except those who are not on the list of users previleged to shut the systems. in those cases, it should be a matter of negotiations between them and the system managements. fclim --- gbopoly1 % nusvm.bitnet @ cunyvm.cuny.edu computer centre singapore polytechnic dover road singapore 0513.