NTIA/DOC requesting comments on root DNSSEC deployment
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/DNS/DNSSEC.html vote early, vote often. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED],darkuncle.net} || 0x5537F527 http://darkuncle.net/pubkey.asc for public key
Re: Fwd: cnn.com - Homeland Security seeks cyber counterattack system(Einstein 3.0)
On Tue, 7 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You don't want "the securest implementation". You want one that's "secure enough" while still allowing the job to get done. You also don't want to be *paying* for more security than you actually need. Note that the higher price paid to the vendor isn't the only added cost of too much security. The most recent (September 15 2008) US Government DNI directive about IT systems security includes the concept of appropriate risk management. http://www.dni.gov/electronic_reading_room/ICD_503.pdf D. POLICY 1. Risk Management a. The principal goal of an IC element's information technology risk management process shall be to protect the element's ability to perform its mission, not just its information assets. [...] b. [...] For example, a very high level of security may reduce risk to a very low level, but can be extremely expensive, and may unacceptably impede essential operations. In practice, it often turns out a "secure" system that is unusable for its mission is both insecure and unused because people start using other ways that bypass the "secure" system just to get the job done. So back to my original questions, what advice would you give to the US Government about protecting and defending its networks to maintain its capability to perform. And how can it be sure its getting what it paid for.
Re: Rackmount Vendors
http://www.racksolutions.com/ On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Rogelio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Charles Wyble wrote: > >> >> I second that. Worked at several places that used them. Also check out >> Graybar. They have a will call office in Van Nuys. >> http://www.graybar.com/ >> PDU search results for example: http://tinyurl.com/4xh4wg >> > > > If you're looking for a "one stop place", Graybar is great. > > But if you need better prices, it's often better to shop around and get the > stuff individually at other shops. > >
Re: Rackmount Vendors
Charles Wyble wrote: I second that. Worked at several places that used them. Also check out Graybar. They have a will call office in Van Nuys. http://www.graybar.com/ PDU search results for example: http://tinyurl.com/4xh4wg If you're looking for a "one stop place", Graybar is great. But if you need better prices, it's often better to shop around and get the stuff individually at other shops.
Re: Some odd harvesting going on?
On Oct 9, 2008, at 6:37 AM, Michienne Dixon wrote: I too think C-R spam 'prevention' is the lazy-mans approach at filtering spam. People can easily create their own whitelists based on their maillogs or mailhistory. Unfortunately, I feel the majority of the solutions offered cater to the non-technical. The process of simplifying often results in a product that requires the least amount of hands-on from the end-user. Coupled with the fact that the average end-user is not interested in learning a process that takes more then 5 paragraphs to explain and more than 10 minutes to implement (without some sort of "wizard") and I think we have a good idea why the layman's approach is so prevalent. There are many, many other solutions that satisfy these requirements without massively inconveniencing everyone who tries to send you e-mail. I can only attribute the persistence of C-R as a method for combating spam to the fact that a sufficiently small percentage of humans will believe in *anything*, no matter how ludicrous it is. Hopefully this provides some motivation to those few who still cling uselessly to C-R to go out and spend 15 minutes researching advances in anti-spam technology in the last 5 years. Perhaps they will pull themselves out of the stone ages and stop irritating everyone. -- bk
Re: Some odd harvesting going on?
On Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:44:57 EDT, "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" said: > I don't have any argument with making the end-user's experience simpler > and easier. I do complain when that simplification is at the expense > of others. It's the difference between software that does some of your > work and software that moves your work onto someone else's shoulders. The problem being solved is that the average end-user is proving that CM Kornbluth was right. The meta-problem is that the average developer is *also* proving Kornbluth correct... pgpMGoawAn7k7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Some odd harvesting going on?
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 08:37:51 -0500 "Michienne Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I too think C-R spam 'prevention' is the lazy-mans approach at filtering > spam. People can easily create their own whitelists based on their > maillogs or mailhistory. > > > Unfortunately, I feel the majority of the solutions offered cater to the > non-technical. The process of simplifying often results in a product > that requires the least amount of hands-on from the end-user. Coupled I don't have any argument with making the end-user's experience simpler and easier. I do complain when that simplification is at the expense of others. It's the difference between software that does some of your work and software that moves your work onto someone else's shoulders. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner.
RE: Some odd harvesting going on?
I too think C-R spam 'prevention' is the lazy-mans approach at filtering spam. People can easily create their own whitelists based on their maillogs or mailhistory. Unfortunately, I feel the majority of the solutions offered cater to the non-technical. The process of simplifying often results in a product that requires the least amount of hands-on from the end-user. Coupled with the fact that the average end-user is not interested in learning a process that takes more then 5 paragraphs to explain and more than 10 minutes to implement (without some sort of "wizard") and I think we have a good idea why the layman's approach is so prevalent. - Michienne Dixon Network Administrator liNKCity 312 Armour Rd. North Kansas City, MO 64116 www.linkcity.org (816) 412-7990
Re: Some odd harvesting going on?
Quoting D'Arcy J.M. Cain ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Personally I think that the answer to this problem is to simply reply > automatically to these challenges positively no matter what. Puts the > job of filtering spam back on the first person. I tend to click on the 'authorize' links i see in any ticket-queue that gets loaded with these messages at my job. Usually resulted by a joe-job run of some sort. I too think C-R spam 'prevention' is the lazy-mans approach at filtering spam. People can easily create their own whitelists based on their maillogs or mailhistory. -Sndr. -- | Bakers trade bread recipes on a knead to know basis. | 1024D/08CEC94D - 34B3 3314 B146 E13C 70C8 9BDB D463 7E41 08CE C94D
