<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: AOL fixing Microsoft default settings</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Verdana"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>I’m not sure “outrage” is the appropriate way to describe this. AOL is probably looking at this from the support point of view. <BR>
<BR>
They get a certain number of support calls complaining about messenger service spam/trickery. The will get many fewer calls complaining that the messenger service has been shut off. The end result is that they save themselves a good bit of money, while helping out a large percentage of their customer base who has the bad luck of being saddled with an inferior OS – good for them! It would be a mistake to confuse AOL’s subscriber base with NANOG’s subscriber base. That which would outrage some of us is seen as a great boon to other sets of users. There is no “one size fits all” here. <BR>
<BR>
When one connects to an online service (which AOL is, rather than being just an ISP, although they do that too) or when one connects to a corporate LAN with a VPN client, they have to accept that there may be some alterations of the local environment. This is a reality of today’s security situation as it intersects with inferior desktop OS’s. There are always other solutions for those who feel that these sort of alterations are unpalatable. <BR>
<BR>
-- <BR>
Daniel Golding<BR>
Network and Telecommunications Strategies<BR>
Burton Group<BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%"><B>From: </B>Henry Linneweh <hrlinneweh@sbcglobal.net><BR>
<B>Date: </B>Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:59:12 -0800 (PST)<BR>
<B>To: </B>Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com><BR>
<B>Cc: </B>nanog@merit.edu<BR>
<B>Subject: </B>Re: AOL fixing Microsoft default settings<BR>
<BR>
I agree that changing one's computer is not the ISP or even the Corp IT departments<BR>
job, and could compromise valuable work and or personal information for the individual<BR>
user, depending on their setup, security software etc and other applications.<BR>
<BR>
I also would preceive that as a real threat to individual privacy for any individual in<BR>
any country of the world who directly purchased and owns their own computer.<BR>
<BR>
For individuals who had their machines custom built to spec with software configured<BR>
to meet a certain criterion this would be an outrage and considered hacking and <BR>
tampering.<BR>
<BR>
-Henry<BR>
<BR>
<B><I>Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com></I></B> wrote:<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Fred Baker wrote:<BR>
> Personally, I don't ask my ISP or my IT department to randomly change the<BR>
> configuration of my computer. I am very happy for them to suggest changes,<BR>
> but *if* I agree, *I* want to install them when it is convenient for *me*,<BR>
> not when it is convenient for *them*.<BR>
<BR>
There is a difference. In most cases the corporate laptop is owned by the<BR>
corporation, not the employee. Shouldn't the corporate organization be<BR>
able to change its own computers whenever it chooses, regardless of the<BR>
desire of its employees.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, the ISP does not own the customer's computer. And<BR>
despite EULA which say it not sold only licensed to the customer, most<BR>
people view their computer as their property not the ISP's.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>