I¹m not sure ³outrage² is the appropriate way to describe this. AOL is probably looking at this from the support point of view. They get a certain number of support calls complaining about messenger service spam/trickery. The will get many fewer calls complaining that the messenger service has been shut off. The end result is that they save themselves a good bit of money, while helping out a large percentage of their customer base who has the bad luck of being saddled with an inferior OS ­ good for them! It would be a mistake to confuse AOL¹s subscriber base with NANOG¹s subscriber base. That which would outrage some of us is seen as a great boon to other sets of users. There is no ³one size fits all² here. When one connects to an online service (which AOL is, rather than being just an ISP, although they do that too) or when one connects to a corporate LAN with a VPN client, they have to accept that there may be some alterations of the local environment. This is a reality of today¹s security situation as it intersects with inferior desktop OS¹s. There are always other solutions for those who feel that these sort of alterations are unpalatable. -- Daniel Golding Network and Telecommunications Strategies Burton Group From: Henry Linneweh <hrlinneweh@sbcglobal.net> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:59:12 -0800 (PST) To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: AOL fixing Microsoft default settings I agree that changing one's computer is not the ISP or even the Corp IT departments job, and could compromise valuable work and or personal information for the individual user, depending on their setup, security software etc and other applications. I also would preceive that as a real threat to individual privacy for any individual in any country of the world who directly purchased and owns their own computer. For individuals who had their machines custom built to spec with software configured to meet a certain criterion this would be an outrage and considered hacking and tampering. -Henry Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com> wrote:

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Fred Baker wrote:

...

...

Personally, I don't ask my ISP or my IT department to randomly change the configuration of my computer. I am very happy for them to suggest changes, but *if* I agree, *I* want to install them when it is convenient for *me*, not when it is convenient for *them*.

There is a difference. In most cases the corporate laptop is owned by the corporation, not the employee. Shouldn't the corporate organization be able to change its own computers whenever it chooses, regardless of the desire of its employees.

On the other hand, the ISP does not own the customer's computer. And despite EULA which say it not sold only licensed to the customer, most people view their computer as their property not the ISP's.