diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn')
| -rw-r--r-- | ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn | 406 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 406 deletions
diff --git a/ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn b/ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn deleted file mode 100644 index 5224ec7..0000000 --- a/ideology/fscons-2010.mdwn +++ /dev/null @@ -1,406 +0,0 @@ -Syndicated E-mail Service Against Software as a Service -======================================================= - -Denna sida innehåller dels allmänna anteckningar om Friposts bidrag -till FSCONS 2010 genom Gustav Eek och Stefan Kangas, och dels -innehåller en slutgiltig artikeltext. Rekommendationen är att direkt -läsa artikeltexten. - -This page contains general notes that has to do with the preparation -to Fripost's contribution to FSCONS 2010 through Gustav Eek and Stefan -Kangas. It also contains a final article text. The recommendation is -to directly read the article text. - -[[!toc levels=2]] - -Anteckningar om föreningens bidrag till konferensen FSCONS 2010 -=============================================================== - - * *Authors* - Gustav Eek and Stefan Kangas - * *Contact email* - skangas@skangas.se - * *Preferred timeslot* - 30 min - * *Proposal title* - Olika förslag... - * "[Syndicated](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/syndicate) E-mail - Service Against Software as a Service" - * "Serve our self the server service" - * "Servicing our own software as a service" - * "Defeating SaaS by socializing email services" - * "Collaborative email servers against SaaS" - - -Proposal summary ----------------- - -It is becoming increasingly common for persons and organizations to -hire external services for e-mail handling, and even for the use of -spreadsheets and word processing. This phenomenon, known as *Software -as a Service* (SaaS), implies restrictions in the users freedom that -is not only tangential. - -In our ambition to counteract this tendency, we would like to present -a project of constructing an independent and autonomous e-mail hosting -service, run by a syndicate, *The Free E-mail Association*, for the -associations members. The syndicate is driven by a simple framework -that guarantees that it is - - * of independent means, - * democratically structured, - * built on trust between its members, and - * ready to be far-reaching with regards to avoiding traffic logging and - to protect the members privacy. - -The service that we are hoping to create is a full featured e-mail -solution with high reliability and accessibility. - -This project exemplifies that the creation of a freedom preserving -network service is possible, and it is also an example of what that -can look like. - -The obvious question to raise is whether this service actually is not -just another SaaS? Obviously, all individual members can not at all -times reach absolute freedom and computational control. However, these -limitations must be weighed against that investments in a more -reliable technical infrastructure are possible only through -collaboration. Also, we believe that the association's democratic -structure and numerical and geographical boundaries are enough to -mitigate the limitations; the limited user participation is still -sufficient for the service to bee regarded as free. - -We hope that this project can raise curiosity enough to tantalise -users away from private suppliers of e-mail and other services, to -either join our association or even better start more similar -projects. - - -Other information ------------------ - -It is preferred from our point of view that the talk is scheduled in -an early stage of the conference. This since the hope is to raise -questions for further discussion during the conference. - - -Antagen till konferensen -======================== - -Den 24 juli blev föredraget "Syndicated E-mail Service Against -Software as a Service" antagen till temat "Infrastructure" på FSCONS -2010. Jeremiah Foster är koordinator för temat som har beskrivningen - -> Wikipedia defines infrastructure as "the basic physical and -> organizational structures needed for the operation of a society." -> The theme focuses on the infrastructure needs for tomorrows future -> society, as well as the basic need for privacy and secure -> communication, together with monitoring, both as a threat and as a -> tool to manage our ever increasing networks. - -Det är ett antal saker som vi från Jonas Öberg blivit ombedda att -utföra och återkomma till Jonas och Jeremiah angående. - - 1. Granska den föreslagna sammanfattningen av föredraget och revidera - det med det övergripande temat i åtanke och om något tillkommit i - föredraget. - 2. Om vi har några begränsningar vad gäller schemaläggningen. - 3. Frågan om när vi kommer till Göteborg och om vi ska vara med på de - sociala tillställningarna. - -Frågan är också om konferensen vill ha någon längre artikel för -föredraget. I så fall vore det bra att sätta igång med det nu, -snart. En idé skulle vara att översätta principförklaringen om den kan -skrivas på ett tillräckligt vetenskapligt sätt. - - -Second article for the conference -================================= - -This is the second proposal, which is longer and more adjusted to the -infrastructure theme description. The proposal follows declaration of -principals. - - -Introduction ------------- - -User freedom is the most important property of tomorrows -infrastructure. This property is necessary to safeguard the relative -freedom of speech provided by the Internet against increasingly -aggressive attacks by preying commercial and opportune state -interests. - -In this abstract of a talk on FSCONS 2010 we first try to define -freedom in computer work. Then the problem of increased centralization -of the Internet is discussed and a number of ongoing threats to this -freedom are identified. We then present the *Free Email Association*, -what built up infrastructure we have, and our principles. Finally we -try to sketch what we think the future paths might look like. - - -Background ----------- - -The centralisation of influence and rectification of decision-making -is not unique for the Internet. This is written in a wider context of -general social criticism of economic and cultural globalisation and -the current forms of the globalisation of information flows. Many -decisions are made in multi-lateral arenas where the democratic -control is limited.[^1] A decreasing number of transnational operators, -not only controls the means of production and the production of goods, -but also have great influence in markets demands. - -The Internet is, or will soon be, the most important communication -medium in the majority of the industrialized world. The story of its -development from its conception as a highly distributed network -through the establishment of the free and open web, towards the -increasingly privatized web we see today is indeed saddening for those -who takes user freedom seriously. A few strong parties control major -segments of important infrastructure that millions of users depend on -every day. Those who control the technology and its infrastructure -also have power over its users. - -[^1]: Good, recent examples are the European Unions IPRED directive or - the ACTA agreement. - - -Computing, computer labour, and power over the infrastructure -------------------------------------------------------------- - -The *Free Software Foundation* suggest definition of *free software* -consisting of four requirements: the "freedom to run, copy, -distribute, study, change and improve the software". (Free Software -Foundation "The Free Software Definition") As a complement to those we -define the more general *freedom with regard to own computer labour* -[^2] as requiring that - - 1. the work is performed exclusively with free software, - 2. the work is performed with computer hardware that entirely is at - one's possession and control, - 3. the information worked with is information that one possess, and - 4. the result from the computer work also is at one's possession and - control. - -We here use "information" to denote data and documents that are the -object to computer work. In this context *computer labour* is all use -of computers, and *own computer labour* is computer work performed for -one's own part.[^3] - -[^2]: Stallman (Stallman 2010) uses *your own computing* to denote what - we call *one's own computer labour*. We use the latter because of - its broader associations. -[^3]: Stallman (Stallman 2010) points out that work performed as - employee in some company or in a cooperation project as Wikipedia - is not one's own computer work, but a part of that company's or - project's work. In that case it is not one's own freedom that is - threatened, but the company's or project's. - - -Internet and its servers ------------------------- - -The *Internet* seen as an infrastructure scheme was constructed as a -distributed *peer-to-peer* non-hierarchical network of independent and -self-determined parts.[^4] Despite this immanent property, the Internet -today, seen from a regular user's point of view, is structured in a -hierarchical manner around a decreasing number of server clouds, which -are continuously growing in size and power. Historically the meaning -of *servers* was to gather and publish information provided from its -clients. However, in many applications today, publishing is not -performed as a separate process, and the clients are no longer always -independent. For example social networking sites, like Facebook, often -require their users to perform their work directly on the company's -servers. (Moglen 2010) - -[^4]: Technically the parts of a network are *nodes*, which in the case - of Internet are servers, switches, and personal computers, and - *edges*, which are interconnecting wires. - - -Software as a service ---------------------- - -A concept introduced in the spirit of centralisation is *Software as a -Service* (SaaS). Shortly SaaS is that users are invited to perform -their computer work on or through a network server on Internet or a -local network. The main purpose of SaaS is to separate *possession* -and *ownership* of software from its *usage*. This software is said to -be *licenced on demand*. (Turner 2003) - -In this text *Software as a Service* is used in a more narrow sense in -accordance with Stallman (Stallman 2010), to mean one's own computer -work on hardware that the user do not control. Popular Internet -services that are examples of SaaS are Google Docs and Facebook, but -the concept is widely used. Computer work performed with this software -is non-free in a double sense; using SaaS also leads to *vendor -lock-in*. However, the complex of lock-in problems reach far outside -SaaS. - - -The infrastructure of email ---------------------------- - -The email infrastructure is not an exception from the tendency towards -centralisation and rectification of Internet's services and usage. We -now see even large institutions being lured in by the economic -benefits offered by these large scale solutions. - -Email communication through the Internet involves several computers -and servers, among those a *mail user agent*, a computer program -controlled by the sending person; several *mail transfer agents*, -Internet servers responsible for getting the mail though using the -SMTP protocol; *domain name system servers*, servers keeping track of -the addresses to all those servers; and finally another *mail user -agent*, used by the receiving person to read the emails. It is also -common to make use of extra inbox handling services like *IMAP access* -or *webmail*, which usually involve separate servers. - -What about email and freedom? We here need to distinguish what part of -emailing that is one's own computer labour. Editing email definitely -is, along with all sort of contact management. The transfer process, -however, is not. Whether the email arrives is of course of great -concern to the sender, but there is generally no human activity -(directly) involved and thus no actual work performed. In principle -the same holds also for the process of receiving email. However, most -popular email services are not content with that. Stallman writes, - -> Some sites whose main service is publication and communication extend -> it with *contact management*: keeping track of people you have -> relationships with. Sending mail to those people for you is not SaaS, -> but keeping track of your dealings with them, if substantial, is SaaS. -> (Stallman 2010) - -And using SaaS is not free computer labour. Furthermore, whether hiring -a company for handling one's email imply usage of SaaS or non-free -computer labour might not be the only matter of importance. - - -Privacy and survelliance ------------------------- - -With large clientele comes a lot of power. Google is currently not the -largest email service provider; both Windows Live Hotmail and Yahoo -Mail has more customers. (Brownlow 2010) We nonetheless believe it is -important to single Google out as a company, because of how -effectively they utilize privacy invading schemes that are integrated -between their services. Together with Google's e-mail service one also -get services that probably was not asked for: advertisement, semantic -analyses of email contents, and spying. (Moglen 2010) The data -resulting from Google's analysis and espionage is later used -indirectly in marketing campaigns with Googles customers or sold -directly to third party. Google is profiting on their email users with -the means of the users private information provided by themselves. - -Google link that data to individuals' surf activities using Google's -search engine, Google accounts and cookies. Additionally, many -websites utilize Google's JavaScript APIs, web site statistics or -reCAPTCHA service, which indirectly exposes individuals to Google's -supervision. - - -Organisation for a change -------------------------- - -Technology has never been neutral. Behind technology changes and -innovations today lies commercial interests and social factors. On the -one hand, the ownership structure of technology companies and their -endeavour for profit ensures that usage of their services for work and -communication will never be free. On the other hand, only a fraction -of the everyday Internet users have knowledge and resources enough to -create free alternatives on his or hers own hand. The question is also -what we can reasonably expect from an average user in terms of -engagement in their privacy and freedom. - -Our idea is to form an association and together take back a small but -important part of our Internet life, namely the email communication -infrastructure. We gather around several servers that receives and -stores the members' email. The purpose of the association is to render -it possible for individuals to bring their computer usage under their -own control. And to show that user freedom is possible, even if only -through active, prolonged and collective struggle. - -In more detail, we start with five or six servers spread out in Sweden -and Europe connected through the Internet: at the very least two mail -exchange and one IMAP server, separate backup and log servers, and -hopefully a webmail server. In the beginning we will not have an SMTP -send mail service, and we will hire the DNS service from third -party. Though we will have tight economic boundaries, our focus on -reliability and stability forces us to try hard to maintain a -sufficiently high level of redundancy. - -The email service provided through the Free Email Association is free -as in free speech, not as in free beer. This because of the democratic -structure and of non-profit and commonly owned organisations like the -Free Email Association. The free email association promises to - - 1. work hard to receive email for the sake of its members in a reliable manner - 2. protect its member's integrity, that is to never - * read or analyse its members emails, either manually or - automatically, (possibly with exception for voluntary spam - filter services and alike) - * gather statistics about or analyse member's traffic through the association's servers, and - * under no circumstances hand out information about members, their - emailing and other activities, or any other information to third - party, and - 3. provide for transparency regarding administration, economy and the - decision-making process. - -Transparency and continuous information about the work of the board is -of cause extra important, and the democratic regime requires constant -attention. A declaration of principles serve as a founding document -for the association, but still a high level of trust is laid on the -elected officers. - - -On the long term ----------------- - -We recommend and encourage everyone to perform their computer labour -with free software at machines that are in their own possession. But -many solutions on Internet servers, like Google Docs and Facebook, are -quite usable and practical and adopted to a modern way to meet and -work computer-aided. The Free Software Community has a great challenge -in the creation of free and distributed alternatives, where free means -that their usage imply only free computing. - -Despite this, we must not deceive ourselves into thinking that the -final and greatest challenge is about building physical infrastructure -or programming advanced distributed social networking solutions. The -real challenge is to get people engaged in the issue of the Internet's -power structures and in their own freedom and privacy. - -No one in their right mind would put their blind trust in a government -that was dabbling in surveillance on a scale anywhere near what Google -is doing. But when it comes to Google, their marketing strategy has -been so successful that many people need no additional guarantees that -Google will behave - people are willing to take Google's word -for it. - -The reasons behind the described changeover of the Internet are -structural. The structural tendency, as described, is that already -powerful operators get even more power when computer labour is -generally becoming less free. Structural problems need structural -change, but projects like the Free Email Association serve as an -alternative to structural change for those who are eager to establish -free alternatives. In the long-term, however, we realize that a larger -social change on a structural level is necessary. The best we can hope -for is to give a small contribution to bringing about that change. - -References ----------- - - 1. Turner, M. et.al. (2003). "Turning Software into a Service", Computer - vol. 36, IEEE Computer Society 2003. - 2. Stallman, R. M (2010). "Who does that server realy serve?", - Boston review, only web version - [[https://bostonreview.net/BR35.2/stallman.php]]. Revised version på - [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/who-does-that-server-really-serve.html]]. Fetched - 2010-08-30. - 3. Moglen E. (2010). "Freedom in the Cloud", talk given to the New - York chapter of ISOC February 2nd 2010. Video available at - [[http://new.law.columbia.edu/isoc/eben_moglen_freedom_in_the_cloud.ogv]], - and transcription at - [[https://www.softwarefreedom.org/events/2010/isoc-ny/FreedomInTheCloud-transcript.html]]. Checked - 2010-09-10. - 4. Free Software Foundation. "The Free Software Definition", - [[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html]]. Fetched 2010-08-30. - 5. Brownlow M. (2010). "Email and webmail statistics", - [[http://www.email-marketing-reports.com/metrics/email-statistics.htm]]. Updated - May 2010. First published April 2008. Fetched 2010-09-21. |