- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: How much longer..
by Scott Francis 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 04:09:05PM -0700, dr(a)kyx.net said: > These kinds of inflated damages estimates are dubious at best. > If you've lost that much productivity, odds are you should be pointing > fingers at inapropriate redundancy and planning/procedures in your > computing facilities and not blaming some toy programs written by kids > with too much time. This kind of financial loss hype/fear-mongering is best > left to politicians, and not technical discussions. indeed - and yet companies claim these kind of damages, at least publicly, whenever these worms come along (every month or two, it seems). Two questions spring to mind: 1) where are these figures coming from, and 2) if they're accurate, why in the world would a company make the same mistake that cost them a million bucks last month, again next month? That's the kind of stuff that gets executives fired (you'd think) ... (note: the figures I posted were just gathered from publicly available news sources. We all know how accurate reporters tend to be when covering technical issues, so take them with a grain of salt. The point of the post was, there are a great many companies out there throwing good money after bad, month after month, without seeming to realize it.) -- Scott Francis || darkuncle (at) darkuncle (dot) net illum oportet crescere me autem minui

1 0

Re: Microsoft to ship new versions with firewall enabled
by Steven M. Bellovin 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

In message <9BF6F06C4BC90746ADD6806746492A332AED57(a)msmmail01.msmgmt.com>, "McBu rnett, Jim" writes: > > >From: Scott McGrath [mailto:mcgrath@fas.harvard.edu] >>No answer on that one, However Mac OS X also includes a built in firewall. > >>On the configuration angle, the Microsoft ICF (Internet Connection >>Firewall) blocks everything by default. > > I just worked on a friends computer last night. >The XP ICF firewall was on, and it did not stop >the bug.. >I want to test that in a lab environment though... > The Wall Street Journal noted that Microsoft is testing a variety of other security products, including one from Tiny Software because (according to Microsoft itself) "it's more advanced". --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb

1 0

Re: [Microsoft to ship new versions with firewall enabled]
by Joshua Sahala 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

Sean Donelan <sean(a)donelan.com> wrote: > > John Markoff reports in the New York Times that Microsoft plans to change > how it ships Windows XP due to the worm. In the future Microsoft will > ship both business and consumer verisons of Windows XP with the included > firewall enabled by default. > while i think many of us will welcome this, i am skeptical of what the firewall will be 'enabled' to block, and how easy it will be for the user to set-up rules (and hopefully there will be a sanity check included so that 'permit in any' is not a valid option, but then 'permit out any' should not be one either) but still, it is a step... my $0.02 "Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence." - Stephen Hawking -

3 2

RE: [Microsoft to ship new versions with firewall enabled]
by Vachon, Scott 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

> while i think many of us will welcome this, i am skeptical of what > the firewall will be 'enabled' to block, and how easy it will be > for the user to set-up rules (and hopefully there will be a sanity > check included so that 'permit in any' is not a valid option, but > then 'permit out any' should not be one either) > but still, it is a step... Perhaps the better idea would be to ship a stripped down, basic OS for about $25.00 a license. Then offer up all the bells and whistles on a pay per download option. I think this one simple step alone would aid in reducing security issues on the OS. I would hazard a guess that a majority of users will NEVER use (or need) all the built in functionality currently included with the OS. ~S~ Disclaimer: My own two cents. Learn more about Paymentech's payment processing services at www.paymentech.com THIS MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL. This e-mail message and any attachments are proprietary and confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not print, distribute, or copy this message or any attachments. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and any attachments from your computer.

1 0

RE: Microsoft to ship new versions with firewall enabled
by McBurnett, Jim 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

From: Scott McGrath [mailto:mcgrath@fas.harvard.edu] >No answer on that one, However Mac OS X also includes a built in firewall. >On the configuration angle, the Microsoft ICF (Internet Connection >Firewall) blocks everything by default. I just worked on a friends computer last night. The XP ICF firewall was on, and it did not stop the bug.. I want to test that in a lab environment though...

1 0

RE: How much longer..
by St. Clair, James 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

>Users, both corporate and at home, need to be taught that there is no >such thing as plug and play. For as much as I agree with the philosophy here, we must realize it is the wrong approach. Cars did not become more popular because owners had to learn how to swap more parts. Wireless phones don't require a contract and setting up your own frequency band. Computers are becoming a utility, and with greater sophistication more and more embedded. Back to cars, remember when a mechanic could fix a problem in a day? How many cars do we all own that now start a service check with a CPU diagnostic? This is not a trend that will be reversed. The emphasis must be placed on other market forces to correct things, like liability for failure and greater R&D for secure systems. Forcing the consumer to learn more has never worked in the market before, and won't here. Jim

4 3

RE: How much longer..
by Drew Weaver 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

I've been considering lobbying for the imposition of an Internet license for years now. I could think of a few people that need theirs yanked. -Bob ----- Even if you are kidding -- which I hope you are, then the Internet would turn into a pretty meaningless endeavor the entire point of the Internet is that anyone can use it, from anywhere in the world. Who would enforce these licenses? The US? What about the people in Korea, do they need to come to the US to receive an Internet license? This idea made my stomach turn ;-) -Drew

1 0

RE: How much longer..
by Pendergrass, Greg 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

I don't know if you've driven in the East End of London recently, but I assure you there those rules don't always apply! The computers as cars metaphor is perfectly correct in many aspects: 1. You don't have to know how a car works to drive it: If everyone had to be a qualified mechanic in order to drive safely then there'd be very few drivers. Also, if everyone had to study car mechanics to drive nobody would be able to study anything else. For the majority of people computers need to be simple enough that anyone can use it without advanced knowledge. The thought of teaching my mother to use a linux system makes me shudder. 2. Computers, like cars, need regular maintenance in order to function properly: Cars need oil changes, computers need regular updates. With cars there is a maintenance infrastructure to maintain them and, more importantly, there is a basic understanding throughout the population about what a car needs in order to function. When you have a problem with a car, there's no shortage of people who have at least a basic understanding of what to do. Plus everyone knows you can call a mechanic. Computers don't have this infrastructure or basic permeated understanding yet, to most people they are a magic box that flashes things on the screen-thingy. Most have no idea that windows-update exists and wouldn't understand what it does, and just as important doesn't know anyone who can tell them. Their question is: what do I need to click on to fix it? Greg -----Original Message----- From: variable(a)ednet.co.uk [mailto:variable@ednet.co.uk] Sent: 14 August 2003 14:17 To: St. Clair, James Cc: 'nanog(a)merit.edu ' Subject: RE: How much longer.. On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, St. Clair, James wrote: > Cars did not become more popular because owners had to learn how to swap > more parts. The good ole "computers as cars" metaphor. In the UK: 1) In order to drive a car, you have to have a license. 2) In order to have the car on the road, you have to have it taxed and have a qualified mechanic certify it for basic road worthiness. Neither of these rules currently apply to computers. Maybe they should. Rich Vodafone Global Content Services Limited Registered Office: Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire RG14 2FN Registered in England No. 4064873 This e-mail is for the addressee(s) only. If you are not an addressee, you must not distribute, disclose, copy, use or rely on this e-mail or its contents, and you must immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail and all copies from your system. Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may also be legally privileged.

1 0

RE: How much longer..
by Jason Armstrong 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

But we digress and this horse is dead. Can we move on?

1 0

RE: How much longer..
by St. Clair, James 14 Aug '03

14 Aug '03

I've lived in the UK, and never had a license to maintain or update the engine. Additionally, I could drive on the M1 or M5 at speeds rarely found in the US, certainly not legally. You don't get any additional training to do this - its implied in your licensing. The "computers as cars" analogy applies to commoditization of a utility. The message is 99% of the world's computer users (private and otherwise) view their PC/laptop as a "gadget" like their phone or TV. They plug it in, they turn it on, it works. That is what the expect and is all they will culturally accept. Placing the burden on the user will not work. -----Original Message----- From: variable(a)ednet.co.uk To: St. Clair, James Cc: 'nanog(a)merit.edu ' Sent: 8/14/2003 9:17 AM Subject: RE: How much longer.. On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, St. Clair, James wrote: > Cars did not become more popular because owners had to learn how to swap > more parts. The good ole "computers as cars" metaphor. In the UK: 1) In order to drive a car, you have to have a license. 2) In order to have the car on the road, you have to have it taxed and have a qualified mechanic certify it for basic road worthiness. Neither of these rules currently apply to computers. Maybe they should. Rich

3 2