I'm sure the truly paranoid will never be able to sleep at night knowing this little tidbit.
Friday, September 23, 2005
Researchers recover typed text using audio recording of keystrokes
Thursday, September 22, 2005
Freakonomics, abortions and crime
Even if you disagree (and I'm sure most people will, because the conclusions are quite disturbing), it's extremely thought provoking and should be read by as many people as possible.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Common sense security
All security for all operating systems must start and end with the user. If the user is knowledgeable and vigilant, then most security products are unnecessary. If he is not, then no amount of add-ons will protect him.
I use a wide variety of computers at home and at work, running a wide variety of operating systems, including Windows. I employ the following security measures for all of them:
- The networks (home and work) are behind hardware firewalls. The home LAN is behind a Linksys router with NAT turned on and all but one inbound port (SSH) blocked. The corporate LAN has its own firewall, administered by the IT department.
- Operating system software is kept up to date with all the latest patches. I use the auto-update facilities to inform me of updates, but not auto-install them. (I want to know what and when I'm installing these patches, even if I end up installing them all.
- I keep my applications (especially internet-using ones) up to date with the latest patches from their respective vendors.
- I only install software that I purchase or download from well-known sites. This is almost always the publisher's own site or a genuine not-pirated CD.
- I do not trade "warez"
- I do share my disk volumes over the LAN, but with some restrictions. At home, all volumes are exported as read-only (if I need to put a file on another computer, I log-in locally to that computer and use the network to fetch it from the file's source computer, which also exports its volumes as read-only.) At work, I use our network's domain-level security so that only my personal account can mount one of my volumes read-write - other domain users are read-only, and guest-access is blocked.
- I disable auto-installation in all programs, including web browsers, games, and the OS itself. I will let apps notify me when updates are available, but I must always give approval before download or installation. When stuff has certificates (like Windows updates), I review them to make sure the files come from where they are supposed to be coming from.
- I never run a program e-mailed to me. Never. Even if the message is expected and comes from someone I know, I won't trust it. If I want someone to give me a program (which happens very very infrequently), I'll have him put it on a known web server and send me a URL to it, or (even better) snail-mail me a CD or load it into a flash drive I always carry with me.
- I don't use known-insecure programs (like Outlook)
- I configure my e-mail program (Thunderbird) to disable plugins, Java and JavaScript. Remote images are blocked.
- Whenever possible/practical, I work from non-administrator accounts. Unfortunately, this usually isn't practical for Windows systems, but it is no big deal on other systems (including Linux and Mac OS.)
I do keep a virus scanner (provided by my employer) running on the Windows PC's just in case something should slip by my procedures. (The scanner updates itself every day at 1:00am and scans the local hard drives every day at 2:00am.) To date, I have gotten exactly one virus over the entire time I've had computers attached to the internet (which is as long as the internet has existed.) And this virus arrived via Microsoft's own Office Update server.
I also run AdAware and SpyBot S&D to scan for spyware on the PC's. I run these scans infrequently, but they have never found anything more intrusive than tracking cookies in my web browsers. (Which I make no attempt to block - I don't consider cookies a serious threat.)
I run the Microsoft software firewall on my Windows XP boxes, but I do not normally run software firewalls on any other computers, preferring to rely on the LAN's hardware firewall. I do keep a copy of Zone Alarm installed, but disabled on Windows laptops - I enable it when traveling in case other networks don't have proper firewalls in place.
Sometimes people ask if I should run antivirus software on my Mac. I tell them what I just wrote above. With proper security procedures, a virus scanner should not be necessary. If the Mac should ever become a target of intense malware activity (like Windows is), I will probably invest in antivirus software "just in case" it should be needed, but I intend on waiting until then.
Monday, September 05, 2005
Pizza to prevent cancer?
Follow the link for the details.
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Orson Scott Card: Gaza and the Israeli Settlers
His analysis (which I won't repeat, because it is somewhat involved - go read the article) seems solid, but it does not leave me with a good feeling about the man.
While Card's analysis may make perfect sense from a global-politics point of view, ultimately, this policy boils down to forcing people out of their homes in order to create a PR campaign. This is especially disgusting and hypocritical when you note that Sharon (who was not Prime Minister at the time) was one of those trying to convince as many Jews as possible to move into Gaza.
My prediction (which is far from mine alone) is that this policy is not going to change a thing. The terrorists will continue to use Gaza as a base of operations for attacks against Israel. They will now start demanding more land, including Jerusalem (and based on recent reports of attacks there, this may already have begun.) And what is Israel going to do? They're either going to have to wage an all-out war (destroying any sympathy from the press) or they'll sit back and let their people be murdered (which seems to have been their policy up until now.)
PR stunts may work fine for drumming up global sympathy, but they won't do squat for bringing about peace. When you're dealing with an enemy that sincerely believes in victory-or-death, and victory means your complete annihilation, you only have one option - to give them death. Until Israel (regardless of who is in charge) faces this reality, every action they take is just another euphemism for surrender and suicide.
Maybe I'm being far too pessimistic here. I certainly hope I am. But so far, those who disagree with me can only point to wishful thinking to back up their arguments.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Why corporate IT is melting down
http://securityawareness.blogspot.com/2005/08/mad-as-hell-xiii-reprise.html
In a comment on this article, I wrote about what happens when corporate idiocy is then combined with the WinTel problem of cheap PC's and bug-ridden software.
I think this comment is worthy of an article in its own right, so here it is, in an expanded form, since I can write more here than on a comment page.
It is human nature to not want to admit error. It is the nature of bureaucracies to flat out refuse to admit error, no matter what the cost. They would rather run the entire corporation into bankruptcy than do something that would be an admission of error. And this is with good reason. The one who admits a mistake gets blamed for everything that goes wrong, even if the mistake wasn't his decision and even if the things going wrong have nothing to do with the decision. People get fired from their jobs for admitting mistakes. People get blacklisted from whole industries if they admit mistakes in public.
This, in itself, is a disaster that affects most corporations. Now guess what happens when you get an IT department involved, an aging infrastructure, and a budget crunch.
Initially, everything is running smoothly. The corporation is using big iron for everything important. This is probably some combination of mainframes, minis, workstations, etc. PC's are used, but not for anything more critical than as terminals for accessing the equipment in the machine room. The equipment works well. Partly because very expensive equipment is designed better, partly because it is easier to design and test software when the hardware configuration is carefully controlled, and partly because the number of computers is small enough for the IT department to be able to support.
This all works great until the big iron starts costing too much money. Maybe the electric bills are too high (some old mainframes draw a LOT of power!) Maybe some parts have broken and need replacement. Maybe the annual maintenance contracts are getting too expensive. Maybe the manufacturer is dropping support for the old equipment. It could even be something as trivial as needing more hard drives.
At this point, the IT department is doomed. They would like to buy more of the same. Add more memory/disk to the mainframe. Replace one cluster of minis with the newest model. Move to the latest system software. Ideally, they want to keep everything exactly the way it is. But their bosses won't stand for this. They know an upgrade is needed, but they don't want to spend the money on new big-iron. They look through the latest Dell/Gateway/HP catalog and see that PC's cost $500 each, and PC servers cost $5000 each. They order the IT group to replace the mainframes with a network of PC's.
Sometimes, an IT manager can fight this. Most of the time, he doesn't dare. He can be fired and replaced with someone who will tow the corporate line. The decision has already been made, and made by people with absolutely no expertise.
So the PC's are installed everywhere. The IT managers get bonuses for saving money (if they can make their bosses believe the move to PC's was their idea), and the executives consider the case closed. Everybody pats themselves on the back for a job well done (except for the IT people who know exactly what's about to happen - usually the help desk staff.)
Soon, the PC's start failing, or other weird problems start happening. Users have random system crashes. Unwanted programs (spyware, viruses, worms, etc.) start installing themselves all over the place. Users bring programs in from home, even though there may be a policy forbidding it.
The IT help desk does their best to keep everything running smoothly. They patch, clean, upgrade, and reinstall the PC's as necessary. But the problem doesn't ever go away. This is partly because the hardware is cheap junk. Partly because individual (usually untrained) users are doing their own system maintenance (even possibly against corporate policy). Partly because hackers and script kiddies attack Windows far more often than any other system. Partly because the IT staff has not been properly trained to transition from mainframe maintenance to Windows maintenance. And partly because Windows really is very insecure and very expensive to maintain in a large networked environment.
So the users start complaining a lot. The IT help desk gets swamped with calls. There is never enough money in the budget to hire more help desk staff. Help desk staff burn out and quit and have to be replaced with new staff that don't have sufficient training. This forces the help desk to start using handbooks instead of analysis in order to keep up with the calls, degrading the quality of support and making users even more angry.
IT clamps down on security by installing draconian firewalls and proxies throughout the network. They lock users out of their own PC's in order to restrict who upgrades what. They download and test/review every patch from Microsoft and push the updates onto user's computers over the network.
But this isn't fast enough. Soon a virus arrives and trashes the network. It takes weeks to fully recover. Word gets around that Microsoft actually had a patch available to fix the security hole that the virus used, but it wasn't deployed across the corporate network. Because IT hadn't yet tested the patch against all the corporate software. Those users who had hacked their way around IT's restrictions and installed the update anyway, of course, weren't damaged by the virus.
In order to prevent this from happening again, IT turns on Windows' auto-update facility, where patches are automatically downloaded from Microsoft and installed. This prevents a recurrence of the problem, but it also eliminates any semblance of control over the network. IT no longer knows what system software is running on the PC's. Some patches will break applications, and IT won't find out until after users complain about the broken apps.
The situation spirals further and further out of control. Ultimately, the entire IT department is little more than a group of highly paid errand-boys. All of the real system maintenance is being done by the software vendors through automatic updates. The IT people will run cables and replace broken hardware, but they end up powerless to do anything else. The help desk tries valiantly to make the best of the situation, but ultimately, they are powerless to do anything more than chase down symptoms, read scripts, and apologize a lot.
Some people in IT see this happening and they know exactly why. They know that they need to get rid of the PCs and consolidate control back in the machine room. But the reasons for getting rid of the big iron (high cost) still exist, and executives refuse to include in-house support as part of the cost of running a PC-based network. And he who admits an error gets blamed for it. And users won't want to give up the freedom they were given, even if that freedom is clobbering their ability to do their jobs.
And, of course, the executives will say something like "Everybody else has switched over to PC's and they're doing fine, so the problem must be with you and your staff." Completely ignoring the fact that everybody else is also melting down and refusing to admit it.
Which is where we are today.
Monday, August 29, 2005
... and so it begins ...
Well, D&M has decided to drop the Rio line of music players. Apparently they decided that they could not profitably compete against Apple's iPod.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
I got an iPod. Yippie!
I've been wanting an iPod since they were first invented, but various factors prevented me from getting one. At first, it was the small capacity (my music collection is around 40GB. That's what happens when you've been buying CDs for over 15 years and rip them all into your computer.) Then it was the high price for the models large enough. Then (after figuring out how to load a random subset of music into it) it was indecision over what model to buy.
Well, fate made the decision for me this month. Earlier this year, Exabyte (makers of tape drives) ran a "VXA Saved The Day" promotion. You were asked to send in your stories about how their tape drive averted disaster. I told them about how an aberrant disk utility trashed my Mac's hard drive, and how I was able to recover in a few hours thanks to a full system backup on my Exabyte VXA-1 tape drive.
Well, they liked my story and I won an iPod mini (silver color). It arrived in the mail yesterday, and I'm enjoying it quite a bit. This is the previous generation mini, which means a shorter battery life (8 hours instead of 18), but with more bundled accessories. Mine came with both USB and FireWire cables, and an AC adapter. (The current model only includes a USB cable.)I spent a few hours last night hand-picking songs to load into it (in the future, I'll set up iTunes to load stuff randomly, but right now, it's a new toy and I'm playing with it.) A simple audio cable to connect it to the car stereo, and I'm all set to take a road trip without bringing along a box of CDs.
I also noticed a feature in it that I requested from Apple a few years ago, and that hasn't gotten much publicity. The iPod supports a sleep timer. You can configure it to play for a fixed amount of time (15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 1.5 hours, or 2 hours), after which it will turn itself off. Which means I can attach it to the stereo in my bedroom and have it play me to sleep.
At this point, the only question I have (which I'm sure will be answered soon) is how long the batteries will really last on a charge. Apple says that this model will run for up to 8 hours on a charge. Hopefully, they will be right.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
C|Net: Info from Intel's Developer Forum
Low power consumption is the big deal for all the new chips:
Current New Notebook chips
Pentium-M (22W)
Low-voltage Pentium-M (5.5W)
Merom (5W)
Low-voltage Merom (0.5W)Desktop chips
Pentium 4 (95W)
Conroe (65W)Server chips
Xeon (110W)
Woodcrest (80W)
Follow the link to the C|Net article for all the details.
Friday, August 19, 2005
Interview with John Gruber
A good read for anybody interested in UI issues.