[Noisebridge-discuss] Access control and the DJ booth--POLICY QUESTIONS

[jim]

   Dr. j's and jake's and rubin's responses raise questions 
and tho'ts in my mind. the questions are by implication per 
statements below. i'll be grateful for any thoughtful 
responses. 

* there seems to be only rough agreement on noisebridge 
ideals and policies. seems to me policies ought to be 
guidelines that have survived the concensus process. yes? 

* each person has different requirements for storing things 
relating to their interests. a "your shelf" policy seems 
procrustean. should we be able to adjust allowed storage 
(i think so, tho' i see some problems). possible? 

* there seem to be classes of stuff that are roughly 
acknowledged: 
--- "my stuff" (on my shelf or person) 
--- "stuff to hack" (supplies, possibly in the form of gizmos
    and parts, formerly sitting on the "hack" shelves; no
    restrictions as to what anyone might do with/to these
    things.) would be nice to ensure hack shelf existence. 
--- "shared stuff" (working gizmos and tools that are 
    available for anyone to use to do whatever they want.) 
    would be nice to ensure shared shelf existence. 
--- "infrastructure stuff" (working gizmos that are not 
    available for anyone to use for any purpose, that we 
    need to keep the joint working properly.) would be nice 
    to have a dedicated place for infrastructure supplies 
    and things. 
--- "garbage" (aka "trash", in some quarters associated 
    with "hack stuff", two terms should be distinct in my 
    view.) definitely needs improved storage. 

   the fuzzy quotient of agreement seems murkier as the 
list descends. most fuzziest first: 
--- "garbage" should be well-managed with well-defined 
    policies: small labeled containers located in trios 
    around the space: food (sealed), recyclable, trash. 
--- "infrastructure stuff" such as dr. j's ambitions, 
    wireless and wired access to the network, electrical, 
    sinks and toilets and such, soap and toilet paper 
    and such, light fixtures and bulbs and electrical 
    stuff..., seems to me should be respected and not 
    hackable to the point that functionality fails. it 
    seems that open source and other open things are in 
    the spirit of noisebridge and should be preferred to 
    proprietary systems and stuff. hacking and cracking 
    proprietary systems is probably also in spirit. any 
    infrastructure work ought to be sharable among 
    members: having an owner is useful, but the owner 
    should not have any exclusive rights. 
--- "shared stuff" including the tools in the dirty 
    workshop, the cooking utensils, the photo equipment 
    and chemicals, the electronic tools and supplies..., 
    also seems should be respected, not hackable to the 
    point of wrecking functionality. 
--- "stuff to hack" includes everything currently on the 
    center of the floor and may be torn apart or thrown 
    out (either in recycled or to e-waste pickup). food 
    should be in sealed containers (and i propose grains 
    and such should be in sealed containers hanging from 
    the ceiling). 
--- "my stuff" seems clear--on one's shelf or person--but 
    it seems good to allow variety of volume depending 
    upon purpose requirements, agreement of community.... 
The set immediately above strikes me as a reasonable and 
useful set of policies for noisebridge. that there seem 
some differences among us presents some frustrations. how 
does the above strike you? 



On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 02:48 -0700, Dr. Jesus wrote:
> There was some discussion earlier tonight about putting a gate on the
> DJ booth. Although I wasn't planning on doing it anytime soon, I
> thought I'd write up my thoughts to prompt some discussion because I'm
> not sure I covered all the details earlier tonight.
> 
> Basically, I thought it would be nice if we repurposed one of the
> gates and installed it in front of an enclosed area, probably the DJ
> booth.  I don't know whether I should install a lock or not, but if I
> did it would be keyed to the same key used for the rest of the locks
> at Noisebridge.  Door access would be audited by timestamp only, so
> anonymity concerns would only apply to the same degree they did with
> noisedoor (and no one has complained to me so far.)
> 
> Locks in the space are a touchy subject, which is why I mention using
> the door keys.  This requires people who want access to the resources
> in there to participate in the existing web of trust model we use for
> access to the rest of the space.  It's not strong security by any
> means: I'm sure someone's going to program the makerbot to spit out
> keys in the near future.  Think of it more as an IQ test.  I honestly
> don't know whether the idea of installing a lock keyed to the door
> keys is offensive, so apologies in advance if it is.  The alternative
> is using an unlocked doorknob set and that's nearly as good, since the
> main thing about the gate is it provides a fixture on which a magnetic
> access sensor can be installed.
> 
> There are several justifications for doing this.  First of all, it
> allows the computers hosted there to be troubleshot more effectively
> because the door access can be correlated with system failures.
> Today, it is not possible to reliably tell the difference between a
> hardware problem and someone using the machines for self education.
> There have already been two such situations at 2169: the DSL modem
> resetting and storage problems on pony.
> 
> Second, it allows people who want to temporarily store expensive or
> medically related things at Noisebridge to have a some level of
> assurance that access to the gear is mostly limited to people included
> in the existing web of trust built out of the physical key
> distribution.  For example, when we host an event there will sometimes
> be objects present in the space which cannot comply with our general
> policy of being available for hacking.  Again, this is not so much
> about securing the gear as making sure that there's a mechanism for
> knowing -- possibly in real time -- when someone's been in there.  If
> what I heard about the last party is true, I think our average
> gathering might be pretty chaotic and it might be a good idea to have
> some island of stability where we can put things without worrying
> about drunken partygoers.
> 
> Third, I think it would be a good idea to have a backup fire
> extinguisher, flashlight, and first aid kit in an area with access
> logging just in case the ones in the space are tampered with.  Sure,
> there's no guarantee that someone's not going to screw with the
> backups too, but I think it's less likely to happen accidentally due
> to chair hockey.  I also think it would be nice if the safety critical
> controllers like the fire and flood alarms are access audited so that
> when access is logged unexpectedly someone can go check them out to
> make sure a rat didn't get in there and eat them.  Being able to trust
> the integrity of those controllers isn't just nice, it has real world
> financial consequences.  I don't want to give an adjuster an excuse to
> bone us on a claim because we don't have reliable safety equipment in
> the space.  This is doubly important if we get that laser cutter that
> was discussed recently.
> 
> Fourth, I found myself needing to have a private conversation earlier
> tonight on my netbook and I couldn't find a place at 2169 where there
> was reliable Internet, privacy, and distance from the noise being made
> on the far side of the space.  In my case the bathroom would have
> raised some uncomfortable questions since it was a video chat.  I'm
> sure other people might find it convenient to have a place to have
> less than public conversations as well.
> 
> The bottom line is, do you care and if you do, do you want the gate to
> be lockable or not?  Please vote along with your (civil) comments.  If
> this rubs you the wrong way and you'd like to tell me to eat a dick,
> let's keep that off the mailing list.  I can send you my mailing
> address for cock-related packages privately.
> 
> To preempt some points I think might come up:
> 
>  - Yes, I have been treating parts of the DJ booth as my personal
> shelf, mainly because I had to store a few bulky and easy to lose
> items I'm using for working with the locks and controllers.  Most of
> those will go away in the near future because they're going to be
> bolted to a wall somewhere.  I'm planning on continuing to keep the
> remaining items (lock rekeying set, repair kit, glassware) out of the
> way in the DJ booth and have any personal projects on a regular shelf
> elsewhere.
> 
>  - I am in no way married to the idea of enclosing the DJ booth in
> particular for satisfying the use cases above.  Any other area would
> be fine.
> 
>  - Yes, even without locking the gate, adding access logging could be
> interpreted as a lack of mutual trust between members and our guests
> and this could have a chilling effect on our interactions.  I'm not
> going to rebut this because that interpretation is an opinion.
> However, I should point out that we did basically the same thing at
> 83c on a coarser scale with noisedoor and as far as I know that
> chilling effect didn't occur.
> 
>  - Yes, I know the current staircase is mechanically incompatible with
> the available gates.
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>