Discussion topic
Steven J. Greenwald · 1998
If we are to have new computer security paradigms, then we need to have at least one clearly defined old security paradigm.The reasons for having an old paradigm are several.First, we can't know that any "new" paradigms that we create are truly new without something to compare against.Second, rigor requires that we define our terms clearly, and without a clearly defined old paradigm, any work toward rigor is going to be more difficult.Third, old paradigms are still at work, and sometimes present in "new" paradigm systems.Fourth, old paradigms can serve as useful pedagogical tools.Fifth, the preservation of knowledge and history is a worthwhile goal.Sixth, the mistakes made in the past can serve as a useful guide.This paper is an attempt to ferret out the old computer security paradigm that existed (and still exists) prior to the current age.There is a startling lack of documentation regarding much of the early information processing security systems, and often information is fragmentary.This is literally "an attempt at a start" at defining the old computer security paradigm.There seems to be a tacit status quo idea that we cart have a new computer security paradigm without having a clearly defined old one.This paper constructively challenges that notion by introducing a new (informal) model of the old paradigm, termed "PIA" (Privacy,