[Noisebridge-discuss] Access control and the DJ booth

aestetix aestetix aestetix at gmail.com
Wed Sep 30 21:16:01 UTC 2009


I had a fairly long chat with Dr. Jesus about this. I'm pretty sure this
stemmed from the 5MoF afterparty, of which I have to assume full
responsibility. So here's my response:

   - Nobody is being deliberately reckless or harmful about the space. Aside
   from a few minor incidents and rumors, nothing has happened which would
   seriously jeopardize equipment.
   - We are a community of geeks and burners. Personally, I have volunteered
   my time to DanceSafe and other nonprofits for over five years. If there is a
   relevant incident, we're almost guaranteed someone will be able to handle
   it.
   - I am opposed locks on anything besides members shelves without some
   serious justification. Having a lock on a specific area (like the DJ booth)
   which is the same as the door lock is potential justification. I don't like
   the idea of a physical barrier, but I think it is worth discussion.
   - As far as lockers are concerned, every member has shelf space, and they
   can use it however they want. If someone wants to put a locker or safe on
   their shelf with a lock only they can open, they are free to. However, they
   cannot put the same safe on someone else's shelf.
   - I think it's harmful and dangerous to view Noisebridge as an amalgamous
   mob that will eat, destroy, and shit out anything you give it. This isn't
   Lord of the Flies, it is a community of self-empowered folks who work on
   cool projects. The most important thing to remember is *trust*, which is why
   I completely disagree with Jason Dusek's argument. If you do not trust
   others to treat your things well, why are you here?


On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Dr. Jesus <j at hug.gs> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20090930/ab5b1e13/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list