RE: [dvd-discuss] Hang the RIAA in their own noose.

[Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>]

> > You can also password protect information on the web server
> > running on port 80 (which would actually be better than attempting
> > to hide it on a non-standard port anyway...)
> 
> Close, I have access restrictions to certain IP's. The intent of those
> restrictions is that only I can use them. But, there may be a mistake.
> 
> > I am not.  I am claiming that certain ports are "well known".  Which
> > is to say that certain services are assigned certain ports by a central
> > governing body (IANA, I think).  If you are running those services on
> > those ports, you can _expect_ access by all and sundry.  If you want
> > privacy, you take steps.
> 
> I have taken steps that are intended to restrict access.
> 
> Your claim that if a computer is offering a port implies that that access
> should presume to be granted is not correct, unless you assume that every
> computer has perfect configuration.
 
Well, we kind-of have to assume for legal purposes that the computer is
configured how you woule like it to be.  Just like if I leave my door open
and someone walks in, it's not breaking and entering, regardless of
weather I _MEANT_ to leave the door open.  what I meant to do is rather
irrelevant because the person walking in the door can't see that.

> > Again, we can only judge intent by configuration.  (Or perhaps by
> > a posted disclaimer ...)   If you are running a standard service
> > on a standard port, the best presumption of intent is that you
> > are intending to provide that service.

I tend to agree.  If I have my NFS port open, I am intending to provide
NFS access to _someone_.  If I am not, then I don't have a clue how to set
up my computer.  

 -- noah silva