[Ach] Listing uncovered Software

Daniel Kahn Gillmor dkg at fifthhorseman.net
Fri Feb 20 16:51:15 CET 2015

On Fri 2015-02-20 04:22:56 -0500, Sebastian wrote:
> what do you think about listing software we have not covered by our
> guide but not forgotten? People searching for those would then get an
> answer why it's not there.
> Best example would be telnet, we would simply state that it shouldn't be
> used for system administration.
> Others are IRC servers, silc and LDAP, where we don't have knowledge and
> contributions, so we ask for help there. rsync should only be used via ssh.
> What do you think of such a section / what have I forgotten to list up?

I like this idea; you're saying there should be "we need help with these" and
"these are hopeless" sections for people to discover.

I'm not sure how we'd decide what gets listed in "these are hopeless" as
opposed to just not listed at all, though.  Should we list the
"hopeless" items by protocol or by implementation?  Should the threshold
be some sort of userbase size?  there are surely thousands of
network-facing applications out there that might legitimately be called
"hopeless".  Is network-facing the right cutoff?  gpg is arguably not a
network-facing application, for example.


More information about the Ach mailing list