[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] Privacy vs vendor support



On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 00:06, Eric Harrison wrote:
<really big annoying snip>

> How about this:
> 
>   * the first time root logs in, have an app startup that asks something
>     like:
> 
>        It helps us a great deal if we know how many LTSP servers are
>        in use and how they are used. Please select one of the following
>        options on how much summary information about your LTSP server
>        you would to provide for the cause:
> 
>        [X] Acknowledge that this server exists, but nothing more
>        [ ] Provide basic information about this server (i.e. how many
>            terminals it supports, # CPUs, Ram)
>        [ ] Buzz off, I don't want any information revealed

good idea, but I agree with brian about showing what is going to be
revealed, regardless of the choice

Maybe also ask for an email address, NOT to send to you, but so the
sysadmin can see what IS sent (if there is no @ try using local
delivery?)

>    * have a icon on root's desktop to re-run this app, should the admin
>      change their mind later (or their boss changes their mind, etc)

The rerun thing should show current settings as well.

>    * have the app write the info in plain text to a file in /etc/sysconfig
>      named something like "k12ltsp-privacy-leak-data" or something blatantly
>      obvious like that

I think that /etc/sysconfig/k12ltsp-privacy-settings would be better
(the word leak would red flag it for me.


>    * if they select "Provide basic information", have it post some of
>      the more interesting but not-too-revealing information, such as
>      CPU info, amount of ram, # of uniq IP address that have NFS mounted
>      /opt/ltsp (or some other stat that would give an idea of how many
>      terminals are in use).
> 
> 
> This way, if the admin just takes the default, it reveals very little
> info. If they choose to do so, they can provide us with some very useful
> info about how K12LTSP is being used. There is an option to completely
> opt out. If they hit cancel, it defaults to opt-out. You can change your
> mind later. It is all in simple scripts so you don't have to worry about
> hidden code that does bad things.
> 
> Is that a more acceptable approach?
> 

Much :)

ja ne

Jason

> -- 
> ###############################################################################
> # Jason Straw -- jstraw resample com                                          #
> #   Resampling Stats, Inc. -- Systems Administratior, Web Developer           #
> #   Statistics.com         -- Web Developer                                   #
> ###############################################################################

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]