 |
|||
|
March 9, 2010
This is a dodgy operation who went bankrupt and did not pay their bills but somehow still exist under the same name? Stay away from them. Weird they exist. ———————————————————————————————- Comments (6)
I’m not going to go back over all the old posts to try to remember who all these mobs were, but is there a consortium still doing anything? eg; ICASI and SAFECode. etc etc….. Some previous posts mentioning them: http://beastorbuddha.com/?s=consortium Not much more to add that I haven’t already said in the link above and links within the posts. Is there a Cloud one also? Sure there is. ———————————————————————————————- March 8, 2010
A bit quiet lately. Sometimes I wonder if there’s more to say that I haven’t covered in the 500+ posts in Beast or Buddha. (The really interesting stuff, you can’t write about for obvious reasons). What do you do? Continue to rehash the old stuff? Sometimes!….which brings me to an interesting discussion. We were asked to do a presentation recently on “emerging threats” at a business forum for IT Security and Risk Management professionals. Seems straightforward enough but when looking back over previous such presentations we’ve been doing over the years, nothing much was changing – in particular our recommendations on how organisations should be dealing with “emerging threats”. We could have almost just pulled out “Emerging Threats” presentation, (circa 2002) and done it word for word, (with only a few very minor wording and definition changes, eg; “Cloud”, “APT” etc Should we be calling these presentations; “Emerging Responses”? It’s the response part that is in most cases yet to “emerge” effectively! The “threats” (most of them), emerged a long time ago. In many cases, we just call them different things now because we’ve failed to deal with them properly at the time, so it’s easier to rename something – makes it all seem that little bit new, and covers up to a degree for failures in the past. Am I being unfair? Keen on your thoughts. ———————————————————————————————- February 28, 2010
I know it has taken me a while to catch up, but I relegated it low priority when I first heard of this “APT” business. Bad of me? Who made this stuff up? This is something you’d only make up for a laugh. But, all of the sudden, my industry is talking about it. FFS. Is this an American thing? I have nothing! If this makes Wikipedia, (which it may have by now (Ed: yeah, I know it’s there), I’d love to chat (Ed: modified to not scare people), with that genius who invented the term, (for our industry). ———————————————————————————————- February 23, 2010
Symantec Press Release 22 February, 2010: Symantec 2010 State of Enterprise Security Study…… (Time to pump out another piece of marketing to get people thinking about buying Symantec. Here’s the report if you are interested in wasting a few minutes). Just reading this now…….wooo…..hang on……what I don’t see anywhere in this report is a proud statement that Symantec customers are the lucky few that are safe from malicious attacks that other businesses are facing. Why is this not in there Symantec? Surely you should be beating your own drums given you so proudly told us all some time ago that your product(s), and I quote; will provide “…proactive protection against unknown and zero-day threats”. It’s the Symantec Guarantee! As such, surely Symantec customers do not have the same concerns as those poor businesses you mention in your study. Let us know if this was just an error on your part, or Symantec just not wanting to show off here because, surely you would not use bullshit marketing in the past?! ———————————————————————————————- January 30, 2010
This video was put together by Donal and Wade at the recent RSA Conference in San Francisco (April 2009). Dan Kaminsky, Pete Lindstrom and Marcus Ranum put forward their thoughts on Australia’s plan to censor the Internet. Dan talks about many of the issues that Securus Global’s Matthew Strahan talked about in his interview with ban.this.url. Surprising that these concerns have barely rated a mention here. Marcus certainly adds some interesting analogies and angles to the whole debate. Related Posts on Internet Filtering. Thanks to Donal and Wade for representing BorB at the Blogger Meetup at the conference. ———————————————————————————————- Thanks to Wade for this one (and @Wadeis on Twitter). A bit late on my part, but worth a read. Obama position on; “…right to a free internet….and unshackled internet” – article from The AGE: White House steps into China-Google row. I wonder how that marries up to Stephen Conroy’s position and thoughts? Yes, I know he’ll “sell” his “project” as a different beast but is it really? We know the implications. More here: http://beastorbuddha.com/category/internet-filtering/ Can you have shades of grey here and spin to suit the occasion/scenario? Keep the fire burning people. ———————————————————————————————- January 25, 2010
Random thoughts: News?, OMG really?….nah!, Awesome marketing move Google!, Using the Net for spying…you naughty boys China…you’re the only ones and need to be punished ———————————————————————————————- January 7, 2010
It’s always interesting reading about larger scale fraud like this one recently with the Bank of Queensland. You wonder in cases like this, had the accused pulled the pin earlier, would he ever have gotten caught? You wonder how many do get away with it – stopping before obvious alarm bells start to ring? There’s no generic solution/strategy for fraud detection to critique, as each organisation addresses it’s own internal security and risk management practices differently, but there is a scary pattern of misguided thought in regards to securing systems and actually defending against, and detecting fraud. It’s “security” by definition but are many blinkered in regards to what the full definition of “security” encompasses? I think so. Many in the security industry are focussed to the point of obsession on only vulnerabilities and technical attack vectors (new attack type X, new attack type Y – all generally old stuff just re-invented in different ways but promoted as new big things by many in the industry). It’s such a narrow focused view that stops at the technical exploit. That’s not where the role of a security professional should stop. Read on: January 2, 2010
It amazes me that just as I think there’s no more new Ab Blaster type machines that could possibly be created, a new one pops up on one those infomercials. They get stupider and stupider looking with each generation, but given those infomercials aren’t cheap, they must sell a bomb. Who buys these things I think to myself? The obvious answer is those people who don’t know any better, know nothing about exercise and fitness, and who actually believe these things will give them; easily, in quick time and with minimal effort on their part, the same abs as the athletes who promote the devices, (who most likely have never used these machines). Here’s the big tip: Commitment to getting there, combined with a strict diet and exercise routine will get you those washboard abs. The new whiz bang device on it’s own won’t. It won’t even play a large percentage in getting you there. I’ll guarantee that one! No Rocket Science degree required to get the analogy here. ———————————————————————————————- |
Categories
|
||
