glc@akgua.UUCP (G.L. Cleveland [Lindsay]) (01/09/84)
The responses to my article have tapered off. Here is a summary
of what has transpired and I thank all those who took the trouble
to respond.
Out of all this, there seem to have emerged two major items:
1. Disapproval of someone supplying information on
other employees, especially without either their approval or
corporate approval.
2. The extra "personal information" requested.
Other subsidiary issues:
1. The "credentials" of Rick Kiessig.
2. Desirability of having a directory of all USENET readers.
3. Possible mis-use of said Directory.
"Non-issues":
1. Site "idi" not allowing other sites to call in.
2. Paranoia on my part!
I shall address each of these, supply some excerpts from responses
I have received, and supply a wrap-up.
DISAPPROVAL:
Those who work for smaller firms perhaps are not aware of the
realities faced by those who are employed by large corporations,
especially those with entire departments and staffs of lawyers
who set corporate policy. These firms have to deal with
unions, state laws, federal laws, and often local community action
groups. Because they present such a large target, they have to be
*very* careful to always appear "pure". Such corporations insist
that their employees abide by corporate guidelines and policies.
Most often such policies and rules are in writing so no employee
can say "I didn't know!" However, we often forget or are not aware
that some actions on our part can potentially bring down the "wrath
from above" and jeopardize our careers. This possible danger
prompted my "warning" to those in our far-flung locations to think
twice before supplying the information requested by Kiessig.
Another consequence might easily be that some high-level
management person could decree that the very existence of USENET
into our sites is a "security leak" and that we must terminate our
participation immediately! This is not an unwarranted concern, for
as regular readers of the net are aware, that has already happened
once. As valuable as I find USENET, I certainly don't want
anything to happen which would remove us from it!
EXTRA "PERSONAL INFORMATION" REQUESTED:
This, together with the request to provide "...a list of as many
names as you can of other people on your machine, and their uucp
addresses" rang an alarm bell with me! As the USENET administrator
for our system, I've already supplied the appropriate information
to net.news.map and feel that is sufficient. However, the "fink on
your friends" aspect as well as the "Something about yourself" and
the "If you can provide any of the above information for them as
well as yourself" (I am quoting here from the original net article
from Kiessig) prompted my "1984/Big Brother" response. While that
may have been more flame than substance, I still feel that this
moved into some areas which have not been properly thought through
by the requester.
THE "CREDENTIALS" OF RICK KIESSIG:
Since posting my "warning" article, I have received four
responses from others on the net who inform me that Kiessig is a
bona fide person whose motives are not sinister. I accept that
without any question, especially since I respect and admire those
who supplied me that information. Secondly, I was also forwarded
the "net.newsite" information which had not reached my site at the
time I posted my article. On the other hand, I *did* diligently
seek through net.newsite and net.news.map to find a reference to
site "idi" without success. Since Kiessig gave no background or
explanation in his request article, nor in the "direct mailings" he
has sent to me and to others on our system, it could be argued that
the burden of supplying credentials fell upon him and he did not do
so. This gives one the impression that he felt it was not
important.
However, I have received telephone calls from some of our people
who received Kiessig's "direct mail request" asking me what this
was all about!
DESIRABILITY OF HAVING A DIRECTORY OF ALL USENET READERS:
This topic has long been mentioned on the net, both pro and con.
I certainly don't want to even *try* to summarize the debate here!
However, those who want such seem to have reservations about the
extra information requested. Those who are not so certain seem to
feel that mis-use and lack of currency/accuracy may outweigh its
benefits.
POSSIBLE MIS-USE OF SAID DIRECTORY:
The respondents seem to feel that potential mis-users of such a
Directory already have access to most of the information from other
sources. Anyone who has ever attended a USENIX Conference is probably
already on their data-base.
SITE "IDI" NOT ALLOWING OTHER SITES TO CALL IN:
I stand greatly corrected! I have been informed that a site
which volunteers to link to me without me having to foot the
telephone bill is one of the "good guys". So my interpretation of
site "idi" should be reversed.
Actually, Kiessig and I have had many messages back and forth
during the past week and have set up a two-way uucp link. I have
listed "idi" as a site for us to poll once each day when his
"call-out" line is set for "call-in". Additionally, I have
encouraged him to define our site as one of his major links for
mail.
PARANOIA ON MY PART:
This has been the "fun" topic! I've had respondents say that I
was the only one "awake" out here. But the others seem to feel
that I must be truly paranoid! So I bow to the majority and make
my apologies for thinking that someone out there is "out to get me"
(see comment below).
SELECTED COMMENTS FROM OTHERS:
The following are excerpts from mail sent to me or posted on the
net. In all cases I sent back a request for the person's
permission to quote them in my summary. Only those who authorized
me to do so are quoted below.
inmet!tower (Len Tower)
I worry about the phone bills at each site, when this directory
is distributed via USENET. Not to mention the line printer paper
used up when each user at each site gets his own copy?
I think this idea needs a lot of discussion. I, for one, need to
be convinced this is worth the resources. I believe the occasional
queries in net.wanted, et. al. are much more cost effective.
druxt!mcq (Bob McQueer)
I mostly question the difficulty of maintaining this directory
comprehensively enough to allow me to use it for its legitimate
purposes, such as contacting Joe Blow whom I ran into at a
conference a couple years back, etc.
(requested to be anonymous)
I have been a little upset, because it turns out someone ELSE
sent my name in to Kiessig...I didn't turn in [my information]
either - something rubs me the wrong way about it.
amd70!phil (Phil Ngai)
If you are so afraid of headhunters I hope you don't go to any
conferences.
hou3c!ka (Kenneth Almquest)
Rick Kiessig may have been making an innocent request, but I agree
that information about individuals should not be given out. The
only valid reason I can see for giving out names is to make it possible
to mail to a person if you have forgotten their login name. Ihnp4
is already working on doing this for AT&T, and will probably do a
much better job of keeping up to date than a list maintained by
volunteer efforts. So I, at least, think your warning was justified
and useful.
allegra!jdd (John DeTreville)
I think you're being amazingly paranoid...The part about dial-in
ports was really off the wall.
burdvax!hdj (Herb Jellinek)
While I don't know you personally, your note strikes me as a bit
paranoid in tone. While Kiessig's plan may be ill-conceived, I do
not think it is quite the plot to take over the world that you make
it out to be. It appears that he is trying to come up with some sort
of paper simulacrum of a name server. I see nothing wrong with
this...Clearly, some kind of network directory is called for.
Kiessig had nothing more sinister than this in mind, I'm sure. He
just asked for more information than it makes sense to.
cubsvax!peters (Peter Shenkin)
I think your concerns are well-founded; either this person is very
innocent and naive, or else up to no-good. Although I must admit that
when I first read his posting, your points, though obvious now, did not
occur to me... it just seemed like more trouble than it was worth to
send all this stuff. It did strike me as unusual that he asked people
to send him information about other people in their organizations.
It also seems to me insidious that he is otherwise unknown (as a person
or as a site!) to the net.
clyde!lda (Larry Auton)
Bravo! Lindsay. You may have just saved thousands of dupes from
giving their marbles away. If it were me, I'd get idi's address,
phone number, and Dun & Bradstreet summary before I did anything.
I'm not naturally suspicious, but I've been burned enough to watch
out for pleas like this. I would tell the idi folks to "call me
WHEN I can call you and not before."
WRAP-UP:
I also received a comment from Kiessig saying that I should have
sent him my net item before posting it to the net. Well, he didn't
ask me to approve his item before he posted it, so why should I?
The net is a public forum. When I posted my article, I was fully
aware that all sorts of responses might come back. But that's the
great strength of this medium!
And finally, I received one response which told me I had better
quickly post a retraction of my derogatory comments about Kiessig
or he would do it for me! And I wouldn't like it, either! I
immediately wrote back to him thanking him for his spirited defense
of Kiessig and requested permission to quote him in my summary. He
refused!
So if you are still reading at this point, you are probably
taking another look at your opinions on these topics. That is
really what this summary is for; not to argue my point of view but
to give you more food for thought in order to make a better decision.
Respectfully submitted,
Lindsay Cleveland (...{ihnp4|mhux?|clyde}!akgua!glc)
AT&T Technologies/Bell Laboratories ... Atlanta, Ga
(404) 447-3909 ... Cornet 583-3909jj@rabbit.UUCP (01/09/84)
I don't see what the point of this whole argument is, anyhow, I looked at the info he asked for <after finding out that it WAS legitimate>, and mailed him, trying, in sequence, all of his suggested paths. (I did but an MYOB in some of the fields, including the "other people" one.) To date, I've gotten nothing by rejections by confused mailers, so he doesn't have the info. If he doesn't get the info, who CARES??? Has anyone (RK, are you there?) gotten through? ==================== If I can't tell him, he'll never know, rabbit!jj