[OT] Richard Stallman: Cloud computing is "careless computing"
Craig
welcomed reminder so, here's a recent Stallmanism on cloud computing:
> I suppose many people will continue moving towards careless
> computing, because there's a sucker born every minute. The US
> government may try to encourage people to place their data where the
> US government can seize it without showing them a search warrant,
> rather than in their own property. However, as long as enough of us
> continue keeping our data under our own control, we can still do so.
> And we had better do so, or the option may disappear.
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/dec/14/chrome-os-richard-stallman-warning
--
-Craig
Ubuntu 10.04/Windows 7
dusty
+1 to Stallman's concerns. He's spot on. Cloud computing = Brave New
World.
Ron May
wrote:
Stallman either knows very little about US law, hasn't completely thought
it through, or is engaging in sophistry by spreading FUD. I tend to think
it's the last one.
There are any number of excellent reasons for keeping your personal and/or
sensitive data off the cloud, but thinking that doing so will keep your
business and other information out of US government hands without a search
warrant is pure ignorance. Every time you use a debit or credit card, hop
a plane, pay a utility bill, make a mortgage or car payment, make a phone
call, walk or drive past a security camera monitored by a business,
residence or public agency, surf the web, send an email, post to Usenet or
engage in any one of hundreds of commonplace activities, you leave an
electronic trail that is reachable for legitimate purposes via issuing a
summons to any third party holding the information, which is usually fairly
trivial and does not require a judge's signature. In some instances, the
target has the right to file a petition to quash, but in others, would not
even be aware of the inquiry until after the information has already been
turned over.
The biggest security threat to using the "cloud" for sensitive data comes
from non-governmental private sources who would use it for questionable
purposes. The answer lies not in avoiding the cloud entirely, but in
understanding the risks and using it intelligently.
--
Ron M.
Registered Linux User #511161
Ubuntu/Vista Dual Boot
Bear Bottoms
news:ie893r$puc$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
I wonder what kind of data such are so fearful of. Anyone putting data
anywhere on a computer or the cloud which is so sensitive to cause fear
or possible harm to themselves likely deserve what they get.
If the government has reason to seize your online documents, you think
your home computer is safe? Give me a fucking break from this illogical
balderdash. You don't know anything about how any of this works.
--
Bear Bottoms
Owner of Freeware website: http://bearware.info
Bear Bottoms
news:Y_NNo.12923$YC1....@newsfe04.iad:
LOL...as if your computer is any safer.
Bear Bottoms
news:ggcfg6panfhglpgcv...@4ax.com:
At least someone in this group has a clue.
Spamblk
> The biggest security threat to using the "cloud" for sensitive data
comes
> from non-governmental private sources who would use it for questionable
> purposes. The answer lies not in avoiding the cloud entirely, but in
> understanding the risks and using it intelligently.
>
I thought Stallman was making the point that when you place data on the
cloud, you do not have the level of control of that data that you might
have if the same data is only stored on your local drive. It is also
arguable that not all Government held data is benign. I read on WikiPedia
that the religious data held by Governments in Europe before they were
occupied during World War II turned out to be a disaster for some
citizens. The ethnic identity information held on ID cards in Rwanda is
said to have been an instant death warrant for some. So any particularly
personal data, especially if held forever, should be a definite cause of
at least some concern. That being so even if the idea of using the cloud
for backups has merit which I accept it has.
Craig
> I wonder what kind of data such are so fearful of.
Faux Bear is getting kinda whiny.
M.L.
>The biggest security threat to using the "cloud" for sensitive data comes
>from non-governmental private sources who would use it for questionable
>purposes. The answer lies not in avoiding the cloud entirely, but in
>understanding the risks and using it intelligently.
How would private sources know who is storing all your cloud data?
Most clouds identify users by username and password, not personal
info.
Ron May
<Ron M.>
Let me answer it this way: Would you trust "the cloud" with your most
sensitive data? If you ran a business of any kind, would you trust your
clients' information to the cloud? I wouldn't, but I would (and do) use it
for things that wouldn't bother me if they somehow wound up on Facebook.
I'm not accusing those who provide online storage of of having sinister
motives or deliberately engaging in data mining, but security is only as
good as the least trustworthy employee who has access to the data. If what
I store in the "cloud" has no value to anyone else, and I would suffer no
significant loss if an online service disappeared overnight without
warning, then there's no risk to using the cloud. Everyone needs to think
it through in an intelligent fashion, weigh the convenience against the
risk (and maybe cost) and make a common sense decision for themselves on
whether or how to use the cloud.
Peter J. Ross
> Would you trust "the cloud" with your most
> sensitive data? If you ran a business of any kind, would you trust your
> clients' information to the cloud?
Such as the value of the home of one of your clients who entrust the
same data with you and are exposed to public scrutiny through the
Multiple Listing Service?
<http://www.c21bowman.com/ib/agents/index.rsp?_action=profile&id=0520163>
The location, amenities and interior pictures of their valuables?
I'll follow your lead, YES if you do, I will!
> I wouldn't,
Huh? Wait, I'm confused.
> but I would (and do) use it for things that wouldn't bother me if
> they somehow wound up on Facebook.
OK, I'm with you!
> I'm not accusing those who provide online storage of of having sinister
> motives or deliberately engaging in data mining, but security is only as
> good as the least trustworthy employee who has access to the data.
But everyone has access to this extremely sensitive information about
my home, information you supplied to the MLS service.
I'm confused again.
> If what I store in the "cloud" has no value to anyone else, and I
> would suffer no significant loss if an online service disappeared
> overnight without warning, then there's no risk to using the cloud.
OK, I'm with you!
> Everyone needs to think it through in an intelligent fashion, weigh
> the convenience against the risk (and maybe cost) and make a common
> sense decision for themselves on whether or how to use the cloud.
I trust you!
--
PJR :-)
M.L.
>> >The biggest security threat to using the "cloud" for sensitive data comes
>> >from non-governmental private sources who would use it for questionable
>> >purposes. The answer lies not in avoiding the cloud entirely, but in
>> >understanding the risks and using it intelligently.
>>
>> How would private sources know who is storing all your cloud data?
>> Most clouds identify users by username and password, not personal
>> info.
>
>Let me answer it this way: Would you trust "the cloud" with your most
>sensitive data? If you ran a business of any kind, would you trust your
>clients' information to the cloud? I wouldn't, but I would (and do) use it
>for things that wouldn't bother me if they somehow wound up on Facebook.
My response was to the argument that emphasized outside cloud
infiltration. There are many reasons for concern regarding storing
your data in a cloud, but outside infiltration is not on the top of my
list. I'd be more concerned about the cloud:
a.) losing my account credentials
b.) changing the Terms of $ervice to something I wouldn't agree to
c.) going out of business
Ron May
Then we pretty much agree.