F21 Self Contained Change: Security Policy In The Installer

[Vratislav Podzimek]

On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 14:52 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 13:10 +0100, Vratislav Podzimek wrote:
> 
> > And to sum it up a bit -- I think this feature doesn't complicate things
> > for users who want to ignore it or who don't understand it. If you think
> > it does, please tell me about it and I'll do my best to fix it. On the
> > other hand, if somebody wants to care about security policies, they have
> > an easy and comfortable choice.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't think this is quite right.
> 
> As I understand it, it's fairly well established that if people see a UI
> element, they - or, at least, an appreciable amount of them - will want
> to interact with it, or at least understand it. *Some* people may follow
> this thought process:
> 
> Path 1
> ------
> 
> "Oh, hey, there's this thing here."
> "Hum. I don't understand it at all."
> "Well, I guess I'll just ignore it and carry on."
> 
> which is what you're assuming, and would give an okay outcome. However,
> I think it's fairly well known that quite a lot of people will follow
> this one:
> 
> Path 2
> ------
> 
> "Oh, hey, there's this thing here."
> "Hum. I don't understand it at all."
> "Well, crap. I'm installing an OS. That's a pretty major operation. I
> think I'd better understand everything that's going on before I carry
> on."
> <clickety>
> "Huh. content...policy...profile? What is all this stuff about? What
> does it mean? What should I do?"
> 
> This one goes one of about three ways. If we're really lucky:
> 
> "Well, I guess I'd better go read the docs."
> <reads docs>
> "That was a clear, short and cogent explanation! I learned something, an
> now I can continue!"
> 
> If we're less lucky:
> 
> "I guess I'll go Google around and see if I find something useful. Jeez,
> why does this have to be so complicated?"
> 
> If we're less lucky:
> 
> "Man, screw this crap, if I have to go read an encyclopaedia just to get
> it installed, I'll go do something else".
> 
> And finally, some people will probably follow this one:
> 
> Path 3
> ------
> 
> "Oh, hey, there's this thing here."
> "Hum. I don't understand it at all."
> "Well, what the hell, I'm a smart cookie, I'll just power through."
> <clickety>
> "Hum. Content...policy...profile? I don't really know what any of those
> things are. But reading is hard. I'll just make some sensible-looking
> guesses!"
> <clickety>
> 
> I suspect you can figure out the possible outcomes of path 3. ;)
Well, I still believe that if we had good content in the SSG,
"sensible-looking guesses" and the addon was able to show rules defined
by profiles (which is a planned feature for the next release), it would
be quite an easy choice for the user.

-- 
Vratislav Podzimek

Anaconda Rider | Red Hat, Inc. | Brno - Czech Republic