CERTStation Threat-Level Aggregator
sloit writes "Just spotted, the CERTStation Threat level Aggregator displays the current threat level, in real-time, as assessed by 8 of the Internet's leading vulnerability watch services such as Symantec Threatcon, ISS Alertcon and SANS Infocon on one publically accessible Web page. Well, that saves a lot of daily trudging!"
Fine, fine, I guess. But with all those flicks and ticks and whooshes, isn't this the most annoyingly designed page *ever*? I can barely see anything. I think I'm about to have an epileptic fit, and I'm not epileptic.
Man wird am besten für seine Tugenden bestraft.
...breaking down threats and dangers in to colors like magenta, cyan, mauve, ash, and indigo, rather than actually telling us what the threat is, is a great way to communicate to the populace the danger they should think they are in, and thus keep control over the small minded populace.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Wow, with my Linux box, I can't see any threats at all! Linux makes everything more secure!
I think its nice because I can forward the page to my boss and justify a whole bunch of hours online surfin' the web. He'll be too busy figuring out what the hell those animations mean.
--MaxPowerDJ
> the CERTStation Threat level Aggregator displays the current threat level,
Well, it does if you have Flash installed.
Which makes the page 100% useless to all those who do not.
Making a page useless to a proportion of your viewers, in exchange for (supposedly!) looking better, is a poor exchange; even more so when you consider that Flash sites in practise often violate user-interface guidelines and are a nightmare for users.
My view is that the larger the number of people involved, the more strongly the decisions taken gravitate towards the worst possible choice.
This is why they have Flash on their site.
If just one reasonably talented bloke had been given responsibility for the site, it would, I think, be likely to be useable and functional.
Companies that make their business on selling virus checking software will almost always over-exaggerate the threat. I'd be shocked to see Symantec and McAfee show anything much lower than their showing (yellow). It is in their best interest to keep the perception of impending doom alive and well.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Who the f*ck posted this article? -- Astroturfing his own site, no doubt.
In any case, this is the FUGLIEST site I've ever seen anywhere. Bar None!
Flash. Bah! Humbug! -- I won't visit it again. Ever.
slashvert
Sent from my desktop computer
The vertical ticker on the right showed 10 flaws in Firefox and 8 flaws in Thunderbird. Oddly, it didn't list Internet Explorer, Windows XP, Windows 2000, Vista, Outlook, Outlook Express, etc.
I'm sure all eat my words and someone is going to love that overly flashy page but hey for the moment we have a consensus. What i would like to know is how do these places the info is being grabbed from determine threat level? Then again I think I have gotten one virus in the past 8 years. I just don't open emails that I don't recognize and I sure as hell don't download attachements from them. Yes I know you can get virii other ways but that is the most predominant.
WTF?
What a strange site. Very busy, if your machine is infested with flash, useless otherwise.
/. to place an advertisement on their front page in the guise of a normal article.
After finding a few places on the site which claims the service is free in exchange for personal information, I found an order site that wants a US$5,000 sign up fee, plus US$1,020/year subscription. Just another commercial site that has paid
There doesn't seem to be anything there that a person responsible for security couldn't cobble together as a normal part of their job. But they only have to get a few gullible companies to sign up to earn back their hiring a couple of ADD afflicted flash developers.
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
This is good, but this is better.
This is another demonstration of Slashdot editor incompetence. The Slashdot story is apparently nothing but an advertisement for a commercial company formerly called Haval-Daar that seems completely incompetent and destined to fail immediately. There is apparently no connection with CERT whatsoever; the name is apparently intended only to confuse. Since the word havaldaar is apparently a Hindi word, I suppose Haval-Daar is a company started by people from India.
Did someone at Slashdot take money to advertise this company?
Let this be a lesson to those who spend a lot of time playing video games when they could be learning to be socially competent: If you don't learn about the people around you, you will eventually sink to the bottom of business.
--
U.S. government incompetence