 |
 |
Erin, Would you be willing to get SEC4LIB aggregated to something else, given the difficulties of extracting a list's archives if you choose to move eventually? Thanks! Mark On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Erin Germ <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > The responses I had and am still having are overwhelming. Sorta like being > spammed - in a good way though. I honestly didn't think that many people > would be interested in security for libraries. > > Rather than individually add the over 100 responses to an email > distribution list, I want to send out an invite to a Google discussion > group - SEC4LIB. Here we can discuss security for libraries and also > determine how to proceed in organizing the SEC4LIB group. This Google group > may only be a temporary home until the group decides how best to move > forward, communicate and share ideas: > > http://groups.google.com/group/sec4lib > > I want to clarify a few things as the SEC4LIB discussions move forward. As > of now, this is an informal group to discuss and investigate existing > security features and shortcomings of library services, applications, > products, and solutions.This would include documenting, researching, > investigating, and pen-testing library applications, services, products, > and solutions. > > - Bring attention to the security aspect and concerns of library > software, applications, services, products, and solutions > - Address the concerns that as more enhancements to existing library > applications, services, products, and solutions are implemented, securing > those enhancements or new applications, services, products, and solutions > are equally important > - Work with vendors and providers to address security concerns in the > products, services, applications, and solutions we depend on > - Discuss general security practices and policies for library operations > - Conduct research, investigations, and dialog in a professional manner > > Feel free to share this with colleagues and interested parties. > > V/R > > Erin Germ