So restrictive posting rules.

[Dan Lukes]

I consider Guidelines for Posting Sensitive and Confidential Information so restrictive.

Because

Customer information ... which may impact a customer

cover almost any information related to customer's system. Including those with risk of negative impact and/or consequences of disclose so low.

Imagine I have one Cisco 2960 switch in my home network. According the new policy I'm not allowed to disclose firmware version (it may impact security of my network). In the fact I'm not allowed to disclose even the model of the switch. Nor I'm allowed to confess I have a Cisco switch at all. Even such information may impact my (e.g. customer) network security. In advance. I'm not only administrator of my home network but also network administrator of my employee network. Almost anything I will disclose about their network may impact them - including the fact he have a network.

Well, I'm overdoing, but not so much. I wish the Guideline's wording doesn't follow the purpose.

I assume it's not necessary to explain that issue analysis require disclose of some details related to affected device/network/system. It's sovereignty of system's owner to evaluate risks and gains of particular disclose. Current policy doesn't honor their sovereignty forcing them either not to use CSC to solve their issues or violate the policy.

I expect this policy will be often ignored, but such approach may harm overall community spirit (rules should be followed!). I consider it counterproductive and over-restrictive.

Under no circumstances shall users' of the Cisco Support Community post the following material:

should be replaced by something more conforming to the CSC's purpose - I mean something like

Users' of the Cisco Support Community shall not post the following material with no explicit consent of affected customer:

or so.

Also, what brain damaged lawyer ordered I shall confirm rules acceptance on every posting again and again ?

Also 2: if I'm moving thread (using moderator's power) I'm pushed to confirm there are no forbidden kind of information inside. This is something I can't decide for sure, of course. So I should not be pushed to make any claims related to it. It may be considered rather cosmetic bug, unless an mad lawyer will sue me because I claimed something untrue causing the damage to someone by it.

[Michael Deku]

Hi Dan,

We appreciate your detailed review of this policy. We are however guided by the overall governance policy of Cisco around sensitive and confidential information. I will highlight your recommendations to our management and send an update if any of the policies are able to get updated.

With regards to a moderator moving content we understand the responsibility we are placing on them and will not hold that against a moderator who has to move content.

Always appreciate your detailed review of our community.

[Dan Lukes]

Fortunately, no one take those policies seriously. It's just craven attempt of lawyer's department to move responsibility from Cisco to anyone else.

With regards to a moderator moving content we understand the responsibility we are placing on them and will not hold that against a moderator who has to move content.

Hm ...

You claimed you have no power over policies. So I assume you have even no power to give such kind of promise to me.

But I count your response as attempt to soothe me. Thank you for you care. I will follow common habit and will ignore any mad rules the Cisco will publish with no fear.

[Michael Deku]

Dan,

You should have some faith in us :)

Here is a part of my email that i sent to my management earlier today:

1. Review the current T&C to make sure it covers accurately a. confidential content. b. users who game the system c. anything else?
2. Find out process of going through legal to update T&C
3. Post new T&C and post announcement to community

We are taking all these recommendations very seriously and pushing forward with the process even where we are limited.

[Dan Lukes]

Three months has passed with no progress, policy is still in effect as published, users are accepting-then-ignoring it - everything works as anticipated.

Bad surprises doesn't apply to pessimists, but to those who faith. ;-)

[Michael Deku]

I agree with you  Dan. We have faith. The legal procedure at a big company is unfortunately slow and we can only wait and continue to push for the change.

[Dan Lukes]

While we are still waiting, CSC members have still no choice but ignore rules. Big shame for Cisco ...