Subj : Re: Computer Kits
To   : deon
From : boraxman
Date : Sat Jan 29 2022 19:32:43

 de> So I think it's actually easy to make BBSing a little more private, that
 de> would make it difficult (perhaps impossible) for search engines, and the
 de> general public from seeing your site.
 de> 
 de> The technology that can make that happen is something like zerotier -
 de> where every BBS in a "network" sets up zerotier before setting up their
 de> BBS. In fact, applying to join a network could be the trigger to "add
 de> you" to the zerotier network, where you provide your zerotier ID on the
 de> application. (I've actually have this functionality in clrghouz,
 de> although its not fully complete.)
 de> 
 de> Zerotier provides two types of private networks - public/private, and
 de> while public is not really "public", it just means folks can join
 de> themselves and cannot be removed. (private networks on the otherhand
 de> require somebody to approve your access - and they can reject it later).
 de> 
 de> I've bought this up in the past, and some didnt like the "governing"
 de> control of the zerotier admin removing folks - but if it was linked to
 de> being a member of the FTN network, if you were removed from the network,
 de> that would be the only time the "ZC" would logically remove you from
 de> zerotier as well.
 de> 
 de> Personally, I would prefer it - and TQW has run zerotier successfully
 de> for a year or two between the hubs, so we know it works well.
 de> Firewalling could also be implemented "in the network" that would
 de> provide "some" confidence that members of the network didnt hack your
 de> own network (but obviously you could add additional firewall rules if
 de> you wanted).
 de> 
 de> The other plus with zerotier, is everybody can be assigned a "static"
 de> address, so even if you have a dynamic public IPv4 address, your
 de> zerotier address remains static.
 de> 
 de> I run it on hub 3 (and soon clrghouz), so if anybody wants to play with
 de> it, let me know.
 de> 
 de> 

I don't really know why this needs to be available to a search engine, and indexed and stored by other parties.  Search engines would find published web pages. 

I find the idea of stuff on a BBS ending up on Google, troubling.  Yes, if you write a web page, or a blog, then the intent is that it is public information.  But BBS's are meant for its users, why should anyone be able to search?  Why would they?  To just add another ton or stuff for search engines to try and index?

The Internet was never meant to be automatically public.  It's a network.  The WWW was public, but e-mail isn't, VPN's aren't, dial BBS's were limited to those who signed up.  The data you store on the "cloud" isn't public.  That is still using the Internet.

The Internet is really just a tool for one machine to be able to send to another, on a single, world-wide network.  It doesn't follow that everything has to be as accessible as possible.  I access my companies applications over the internet, they certainly aren't public.

It's almost like we've been conditioned to think we have to get as many eyeballs on us as possible.  I think we need to reverse that, and start thinking the other way, how can we make sure that people who having nothing to do with what we're doing, stay out.

I think a good paradigm is this, we should aim for an "Internet" where you know, and explicitly know, who your audience is.  If you post on a web forum, its obvious, but some social media site, a BBS?  Not as obvious.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/11/06 (Linux/64)
 * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (21:1/101)

.