[OLPC Security] A mom's worries

[James Newman]

Something I think we need to consider is that Betty's letter reveals
that we have not made a clear and convincing public statement of XO's
security.

A lot of the responses on the list reference group knowledge that is
not public knowledge. We need a publicly digestible document
explaining the decisions that have been made. It needs to not be
condescending to Windows users and Television watchers, because they
are the majority of the buy two get one clients.

People who watch a lot of television think that there are pedophiles
wardriving around elementary schools -- it isn't enough to say that
that is inaccurate and unreasonable -- the fear needs to be countered
with facts.

James D. Newman

On Nov 29, 2007 2:02 PM, Jim Gettys <jg at laptop.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 13:34 -0800, Seth Woodworth wrote:
> >
> >         > Viruses will be contained, and thus quite harmless.
> >
> >         Wow, looks like the antivirus industry is out of business.
> >
> >         For the past year, OLPC developers have been brushing aside
> >         issues
> >         surrounding viruses, spyware and user/parent awareness of
> >         security by
> >         suggesting that the XO model and code are invulnerable. This
> >         is
> >         completely unrealistic.
> >
> > Yes, because there is such a thriving anti-virus industry for linux
> > systems.
> >
>
> The industry for anti-virus on Linux exists primarily since Linux
> systems are often used as servers for Windows machines, and therefore
> virus scanning is needed to protect those Windows clients, rather than
> needing to protect the Linux systems themselves...
>                             - Jim
>
>
> --
> Jim Gettys
> One Laptop Per Child
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Security mailing list
> Security at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/security
>