On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 09:22:30AM -0700, Bart Schaefer wrote:
} We're not discussing third-party intervention here: we're talking
} about people exercising control over their own resources.
We're *not* talking about that: we're talking about a third party
who provides advice about what control to exercise over resources.
That third party has the power to intervene; the only difference is
who gave said power to the third party. The consequence to at least
one, if not both, of the other two parties, is indistinguishable when
that power is asserted, no matter where the power came from.
If I delegate authority over my well to Fred and authorize him to act on
my behalf to decide who will be generously granted access to it and who
won't, then I am _still_ exercising my authority over my own property
and resources. I've just delegated part of that authority, and of course
it's my right to do that as I see fit (and to un-delegate it as well,
if it turns out Fred isn't doing what I think he should be doing).
None of this changes the fact that it's still my property. None of
this changes the fact any privileges I grant to anyone are a positive
for them, and that any privileges I don't grant aren't a negative.
(Try parsing that! ;-) )
Hypothetical follows, "you" is "generic you":
If you want to argue otherwise, then be prepared for my claim that you
have "damaged" me because you haven't honored my request for root-level
ssh access to every system you own. After all, you have granted that
access to some people: why not to me? Why are you damaging me by refusing
to give me the same privileges as others?
The answer of course is that you haven't. You, as the owner of those
systems, get to decide who gets ssh/root privileges. I don't get a vote,
I don't get to complain, I don't get anything. And I'm not damaged.
Mail is no different. And just because your SMTP policy (unlike your
root ssh policy) may be default-permit instead of default-deny doesn't
change that. You haven't surrendered any part of your control over
your own resources just because you've been generous with them. And
anyone who has benefitted from your magnanimity has no claim of "damage"
merely because you've (perhaps) decided to stop being so generous.
---Rsk
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg