Talk:ICARS
From Ferrous Moon Research
Food for Thought
I propose that we rename ICARS::6 to something else, because it doesn't really belong on the scale if it's just an intrapersonal communique. ICARS::6 should actually be what ICARS::5 currently is. -- Tycho 19:11, 17 October 2006 (CDT)
- The whole "no one staffer is cleared to know what's at ICARS::6" thing is really weird too. We're not a secret society or clandestine organization. Nobody's going to be torturing us to find out about our stuff (well, hopefuly anyway. If they do they are very sad indeed.) -- Rickton 19:14, 17 October 2006 (CDT)
- I under stand your concern, but there are certain things in all associations that no one person knows all of, which includes hiring committee records (usually sealed afterward), sections to executive session (such as any investigation of legal matters or discussion of removal, these documents can be damaging to an association or individual), and highly sensitive material regarding specs for areas of security, such as the cypher I am currently developing.
- Now, I proposed that it's not open to any one person, because if it was just one person, it would be me; and I feel that I do not need to know everything at any time. However, if you feel opposing to this, I am open to discussion. This should not be something most senior staff should have access to, but perhaps three, myself, Alastair, and Steven, who is more or less my security advisor for developing systems. I'm open to hear more. -- Miah 22:07, 21 October 2006 (CDT)
- I hate to question the authority, but I think we're getting a bit too involved in this. We're a tiny company, not even that really. "Hiring Committee records" and "Sections to executive session" are beyond the scope of ICARS::6. These are private matters that shouldn't even BE on the server(s). The reasoning behind ICARS in the first place is to protect our intellectual property, a guideline for what the staff should and should not release to the public. All this craziness about encryption and other stuff doesn't seem necessary. Yes, those things might be needed at some point, but for the time being, legal data and other such should be kept private, off of this company's server.Nfreader 22:17, 21 October 2006 (CDT)
- Private matters would not be stored on such a server as Canis; however they do need storing somewhere, and this would explain the how in that matter. The encryption with mCypher would serve as a sealing of such documents.
- Nevertheless, your point is made. We can have documents about highly sensitive material at a later date, but I shall continue to use the term "ICARS::6" when I'm about to say something that shall not be uttered elsewhere.
- We can have a different system for non-product informational document, and ICARS for research and development. In this case, I am in favour of striking ICARS::6 from the offical specification document --Miah 22:42, 21 October 2006 (CDT)
- I hate to question the authority, but I think we're getting a bit too involved in this. We're a tiny company, not even that really. "Hiring Committee records" and "Sections to executive session" are beyond the scope of ICARS::6. These are private matters that shouldn't even BE on the server(s). The reasoning behind ICARS in the first place is to protect our intellectual property, a guideline for what the staff should and should not release to the public. All this craziness about encryption and other stuff doesn't seem necessary. Yes, those things might be needed at some point, but for the time being, legal data and other such should be kept private, off of this company's server.Nfreader 22:17, 21 October 2006 (CDT)
Staff ICARS levels
I'm giving all staff (non senior staff) ICARS 3 clearance for the time being.
