the Forum > Harvard's Networks: Secure yet Open? |
|
|
Rotisserie Question
"There is a discussion that is just really starting to get underway of how to deal with Harvard's openness and the requirement for openness in the research university community as a tension against the security... There's information at Harvard which has privacy concerns, significant privacy concerns-significant information about students, information about subjects and experiments, information about hazardous materials and how to use them-there's lots of information at Harvard which can be either a privacy threat or a security threat, and we have to worry about how to protect that..." — Scott Bradner, Senior Technical Consultant at Harvard University and Area Director in the Transport and Sub-IP Areas of the Internet Engineering Task Force Should Harvard emphasize security or openness in its technology architecture? Or is there a viable third way, as Bradner suggests in his interview? |
| Sort By: Thread / Author | View: Rotisserie Posts and Comments / Rotisserie Posts Only |
| Expand Rounds: All / 1 / 2 / None | |
This question is really many. First, the quotation (though I am sure not Scott) conflates privacy and security threats in a way that may hide the separate questions of:
What More...
I agree completely with Scott. Openness is always the most difficult solution, yet as a research institution trying to foster innovation, it's the solution we must shoot for at Harvard. More...
This is not a technology issue, but rather an issue about resource openness.
If it were solely a technology issue, such as access to data on Harvard's servers from the More...
The use of "third way" in the question reminds me of the origins of "third world"--French sociologist Georges Balandier's "tiers monde", between the first world of the industrialized West and More...
1) suggest hypelink to Mr. Bradner's interview (I haven't read it, other than the short quote).
2) Perhaps my concerns are mundane, but I am in favor of a secure More...
I think this point about security is a very good one - there are plenty of commercial interests who would love to get ahold of information about _any_ specialized target More...
The architecture of cyberspace requires balance between open and closed space. Total openness is a dessert without shelter. Total closure is a prison. Both concepts go beyond code, yet must More...
Yes, cyberspace forces us to deal in dialectics. How do you get at a balance of balances (programming code & policy code)that reflects the spatial & temporal fluidity of institutional More...
Harvard should emphasize openness in its technology architecture, of course. (I assume 'technology architecture' refers to IT, not to door harware, etc.) Security is an added (or underlying) layer which More...
Stephen, I agree with your post entirely (and sometimes wish the rotissere format would give way to more free-form discussion; the format itself seems like an inflexible discussion manager).
The More...
I agree generally with the openness thrust of these discussions. Before I came to Harvard I spent a fair amount of time crawling through the Harvard website. In general, there More...
Security is of course important in certain contexts, but there's always a trade-off between security and convenience. Since certain members of the University community (individuals, departments, schools) do not feel More...
Agreed, security should be appropriate.
Consider the availability of information in a traditional library. There are books which can be checked out on an unlimited basis, and books that are on reserve and cannot leave More...
Because most computers at Harvard are on a shared network, a compromised system may affect more than the owner of the system. Thus, even people who do not feel a More...