5 ms·

Back in the 90s we were told ostentatiously to include "unauthorised access is not permitted" to the login prompt. Why? Because the login prompt said "please l

• horeszko 2y ago
  My networking instructor still suggests this today when configuring the login for routers and switches
  • sigmoid10 2y ago
    Perhaps it is useful for countries that still don't have any real computer crime laws? Because in most western nations it would be totally pointless.
    • bubblethink 2y ago
      No, the US is the main country that loves these messages. Have you seen the size of universities or the government ? It's just clerical staff doing make believe work. Go to any .gov website. They'll throw up a wall of bs before you log in (e.g., https://ttp.dhs.gov/ https://ttp.dhs.gov/ ).
      • thrw42A8N 2y ago
        Sounds like you have never been to Europe. Here they make you actually sign (as in pen and paper) this stuff before they give you access.
        • vundercind 2y ago
          I used to read an Eastern European world traveler photoblogger who’d been to damn near every country (even a lot that most folks from even semi-developed countries would consider far too dangerous or boring to be worth going out of your way to visit—he’d surely been to at least 150 countries, several more than once) and according to him the specific behavior of posting regulations and signs all over the place is practiced nowhere as much as the US, with only Australia coming sort-of close. I was a bit blind to it, being a born American, but once he pointed it out I can’t un-see it. The land of the free really does love posting regulations everywhere.
          • reaperducer 2y ago
            It's the sort of cultural blindness that comes with not being able to read the native languages in all 150 countries this person's claimed to have visited. Once you're able to read a new language, you see all kinds of new signs, especially when you visit a new country. It's like how people who only read English think of Japan as some kind of blissful artspace, when the reality is that it is far more overloaded with ads than Western countries. Your mind just processes it as abstractions because you can't read the language.
            • vundercind 2y ago
              > in all 150 countries this person's claimed to have visited. They had mountains of boring photos of traffic signs and fire hydrants and bollards and normal people on the street and in other public spaces living their lives and that kind of stuff in lots of countries, so I'm fairly sure they had been to them. :-) I don't think their take was a result of blindness to languages they don't/didn't know—we really do seem remarkably keen on posting lots of regulations and restrictions at the entrance to every-damn-place, which I've noticed since he pointed it out. Other places may have those restrictions and one may well find a variety of laws and norms enforced in any of several ways in places with less regulation-posting, should one violate them—they're just (I gather—my own limited traveling supports his take, but I've only been to a few other countries) usually not quite as obsessed with posting lots of notices about regulations on every flat surface where strictly-public spaces meet slightly-less-public or private spaces. Since having it pointed out, I've noticed that I'm (when not thinking about it) ignoring a bunch of notices akin to a click-through EULA when just entering stores, and it's not hard for me to believe that lots and lots of places get by just fine, and not necessarily with fewer de jure and de facto restrictions on behavior, with far less posting of notices about those restrictions. Clearly it's not terribly necessary since I'm pretty sure most of us hardly pay any attention to it.
      • hunter2_ 2y ago
        But it seems unnecessary given the existence of its laws. For example, CFAA makes unauthorized use of a computer system illegal regardless of whether the system communicates it. Perhaps these messages originated prior to the CFAA, in which case perhaps they were necessary back then, and nobody has dared to remove them. This is unlike trespassing in the US, however, which does require informing the person (written in a conspicuous location, or direct verbal conversation) they are unwelcome on whatever land they began accessing, and allowing them to promptly retreat, before any violation is committed. Access is generally permitted (e.g., to allow for unsolicited deliveries) prior to such communication.
        • kube-system 2y ago
          There are other legitimate reasons: 1. contractual obligations, with a lower burden of proof than criminal cases, and different remedies 2. helpful reminders
  • vasco 2y ago
    It's as useful as people that say they are not lawyers when commenting online.
    • smitelli 2y ago
      My views and opinions are, in fact, those of my employer.
      • connicpu 2y ago
        It's always true if you're self-employed!
        • Volundr 2y ago
          You underestimate my capacity for cognitive dissonance.
    • bigstrat2003 2y ago
      Or my personal favorite, people who upload videos to youtube with the disclaimer "I don't own this video". I have no idea how that meme took hold, or how those people don't realize that it makes it worse for you if you admit to knowingly infringing copyright.
      • kube-system 2y ago
        It is the mistaken belief that copyright simply protects the author's credit or attribution. Likely by people who drew their entire understanding of copyright from their schoolteachers' disapproval of plagiarism.
• ganzuul 2y ago
  It would keep lawyers out.
• sp8 2y ago
  I did a similar thing once (off my own back - I was young and naive) on a dead simple web app I wrote. I put a footer that said something like "all access is logged, unauthorised access will be investigated" with the current IP address to try to demonstrate that I had the data to do it. I didn't. And nothing of the sort was logged or investigated. I just hoped it would put people off!
• furyofantares 2y ago
  As a kid I saw a sign going into the bathroom at Sears that said "prohibited behavior not allowed". I had to ask my mom what prohibited meant and was quite surprised when she explained that it means "not allowed".
  • freedomben 2y ago
    Love it! I've seen a lot of signs like, "prohibited items are not allowed in facility." Especially TSA signs at the airport which also include guns and knives and such in big red circles with lines through them. I always wonder if those signs were made by a brilliant low-grade troll or not. I once added text that said, "Unauthorized access is not authorized" as a low-grade troll, and people liked it so it stayed
    • close04 2y ago
      You can think of “Prohibited items” as a variable which happens to be called like that for clarity. It’s a clearly defined arbitrary list and it’s referred as such in any relevant text. The prohibition starts at an arbitrary point in the building so they reference the variable when communicating this to you.
    • Dilettante_ 2y ago
      No Spitting. The Mgt.
      • mlry 2y ago
        "The Midget."
  • urxvtcd 2y ago
    Similar feeling with "No trespassing"... like, duh!
• mrweasel 2y ago
  We had a client insist that the SSH prompt be changed to include a half-page rambling about it being an "proprietary system" and "access prohibited for non-authorized users", something like that. Failing to include their specific wording, when we did their new staging setup, was a critical, must fix now bug. Their argumentation was that it was a regulatory requirement and would allow for prosecution.
  • hiatus 2y ago
    This is a regular sight when accessing a US government computer system. Even managing things like Global Entry come with such a warning.
    • amazinzay 2y ago
      These types of messages largely stem from NIST 800-171 (and related standards). Specifically NIST 800-171 has the control "Display a system use notification message with privacy and security notices consistent with applicable CUI [controlled unclassified information] rules before granting access to the system." So it is very common when dealing with companies that are government contractors or subcontractors. 800-171 also sometimes gets used as a security framework even when not dealing with the government so these requirements sometimes end up outside those contexts as well.
• Algent 2y ago
  This is like the warning in emails about "not reading it if you aren't supposed to have received it" like yeah sure how do you know it's not for you then.
  • Suppafly 2y ago
    Until someone can provide a link to an actual case where that's mattered, I refuse to believe that those have any real legal power.
  • keybored 2y ago
    I love those 12-line long warnings when someone posts to an open email list.
• ksymph 2y ago
  For anyone else who hasn't heard it before, a bush lawyer is "One who is not qualified in law yet attempts to expound on legal matters." https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/bush_lawyer https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/bush_lawyer
  • ricktdotorg 2y ago
    thankfully the negative use of bush in the context of "bush lawyer" does not extend into the use of bush in "bush pilot"
  • debo_ 2y ago
    Perhaps "bush lawyer" was the inspiration for "hedge wizard." https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/zetwkt/what_exactly_is_meant_by_hedge_wizard/ https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/zetwkt/what_exactly_is...
    • vundercind 2y ago
      The most-promising thread I’ve pulled at for this after a few searches is that this all (hedge wizard, hedge witch) derives from “hedge school”, with either “hedge witch” or “hedge wizard” being the first of this form, and later uses of those and related terms (like Martin’s “hedge knight”) deriving from these derivatives, incorporating meaning and context not necessarily intended by the original formulation, for reason of not realizing the specific original reason for labeling them “hedge” (the association with unofficial, unorthodox, and maybe illegal schooling) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_school https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_school
  • amalcon 2y ago
    TIL, this was my first time seeing the term. I just assumed that the poster had left out the second word of "bush league". That would mean something similar but subtly different, though (a lawyer not up to professional standards).
    • culi 2y ago
      I'd imagine both terms are derogatory, no? "Bush" is usually a derogitroy descriptor of aboriginal peoples as "primitive" or "unsophisticated"
• Suppafly 2y ago
  Reminds me of those signs on the interstate pass throughs that connect one side to the other, that cops often sit on. The sign says something like "authorized vehicles only" because presumably every one needing to turn around would use them to u-turn on the interstate, which is likely considered to not be safe. I used one to turn around one time and when called out by my kid, I assured him that I was authorized. I have no idea who is actually authorized to use those, outside of emergency vehicles.