Why disable access to software features?

[Ronnie Morgan]

** Reply to note from wcj1 at cornell.edu 11/02/95  9:15pm -0800

> At 3:31 PM 11/2/95, Ilene Frank (REF) wrote: 
> >RE: Netscape.  We had a problem with patron(s?) sending anonymous postings 
> >of a virulently racist nature.  What to do?  The systems people decided to 
> >disable telnet.  This goes against the grain as Eric said, doesn't it? So 
> >does policing the use of those 14 terminals!  They are out there in 
> >the open just sitting there... 
>  
> Blue US Postal Mailboxes dot all across the country. What is to stop 
> someone from sending anonymous (no return address) racist US Mail? 

Let the US Postal service worry about that, I would be worried about someone  
doing it from a computer or terminal that *I* was in charge of.
 
> At 4:09 PM 11/2/95, 204.177.98.220 at alexia.lis.uiuc.edu wrote: 
> >Also, we found that people like to change the appearance of the machines  
to 
> >their liking, so we always had to be ready to explain the new appearance  
to 
> >a computer-illiterate person.  For obvious security reasons, we are doing 
> >whatever we can to limit access to the hard drive. 
>  
> I don't think Eric was actually asking that kind of question. Of course you 
> don't want people saving files to hard drive, that is like writing in a 
> book. But controlling settings (so they cannot be changed in a program) is 
> not the same as disabling functions (Let's rip out Chapter 5.) 

I have to disagree.  Disabling functions in a program to prevent the user  
from accessing the hard drive, prevent them from sending racist mail, prevent  
them from changing screen settings, etc...  is the same as controlling  
settings.  Disabling functions is NOT ripping out chapter 5, if chapter 5 is  
not what you are trying to prevent the user from getting to.  The information  
is still accessible...  

> At 4:49 PM 11/2/95, Mary V. Payne wrote: 
> >Think about it Eric! 
> >If your library had a bookmobile, would you worry that you weren't  
offering 
> >free and equal access if you didn't let your patrons drive it? 
>  
> I think Eric has thought about it, that's why he has asked the question. 
> You're driving the bookmobile example hints of the real nuts and bolts of 
> how a computer works, which is probably not the issue at hand. The issue, 
> in my opinion, is restricting people's access to resources. 

I don't think so.  The issue is preventing them from wasting resources.   
Computer time can be very valuable, depending on the number of computers you  
have to the number of patrons needing them.  If you have 12 computers, and 6  
people were using 6 of them to run IRC, wouldn't you think that to be a waste  
of computer time?  What kind of research could you possibly do in IRC?  

> At 5:18 PM 11/2/95, Walter Lewis wrote: 
> >What would I change in a browser? 
> >Controls for Save, Print, Mail, Open Location [even exit]; Adding  
Bookmarks 
> >that could be turned off at the institutions discretion. 
>  
> Why would you remove Open Location? That truly baffles me. So a patron gets 
> a URL out of a newspaper and they want to check it out... 

Yes, but what about that http://www.sex-r-us.com URL?  Would you allow a  
patron to open up that URL?

> >In Netscape I'd eliminate the entire "Directory" sub-menu, but others 
> >might not agree. 
>  
> I don't agree. It's part of the program and I also think Netscape has been 
> very protective about people changing it's program, as they should be. 
> (Let's rip out Appendix A.) 

Yes it is "part of the program", but, it's there for the person who has there  
own computer, and is accessing the internet using thier own means of  
connecting to the internet.  Netscape, as well as MANY other programs, are  
geared for the end-users PC, not for library network use.  It is different  
when you are the only one who will use this computer.  But when you have the  
potential of anyone walking in from the street gaining access to your  
computer, you will want to make sure that they are limited in what they can  
do with the computer.

And yes, Netscape should protect against someone rewriting/hacking their  
program.  That is why Netscape should be the one to make the changes.  I  
don't remember anyone saying otherwise either...

And, again, you are not ripping out any chapters, or appedices by restricting  
the use of certain options in a program.

> ----- 
> Many of the posts go to people tampering with the computer. Of course we 
> don't want people to tamper with the computer that is not the same 
> question. And there are ways to allow patrons to change settings and have 
> them go back to defaults after they are done. 

It is true that there are ways to make the settings go back to settings that  
I would prefer, but, if something isn't built into the program itself to  
handle something like this, everytime a new version of the program comes out,  
you will have to make sure your kludge still works with the new version.  Low  
maintenace is important too.


Ronnie Morgan
Team OS/2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Harding University Library        Internet : rmorgan at harding.edu
Systems Manager                                       
Box 2267, Searcy, AR  72149       Phone : (501) 279-4077 (voice)