He likes publicity and recognition, a trait that had not endeared him to his peers.
He made an appeal to the IETF's board a few months ago (a very time consuming process for all those involved). One of his complaints was that he did not get credit for his contributions.
I would give him very low credibility. I am suprised that anyone believes his story about being investigated by the FBI. Abduction by aliens who can break triple DES in microseconds is next.
> Now, in an environment that hasn't been properly configured, especially one running the Domino > HTTP task, it can be pretty easy to crack the server. L0pht has posted about ways to exploit > Domino default settings. However, I just don't think that its feasible to crack a properly > configured Domino server.
Unfortunately, there appear to be a lot of improperly configured Domino servers running the http task, especially on NT, but even on AIX. The default settings make admin easy, but open you up to serious attacks from anyone with a web browser.
This raises an interesting question: should the products that are ported to Linux be configured differently/more securely by default to suit the environment?
Is there any hope that vendors will stop citing tests on a platform that is never going to be commercially available unless the results are specifically labeled as R&D?
I have not gone looking yet at the SpecWeb99, but I think some of the TPC benchmarks now require the platform to be commercially available within six months.
At least IBM was honest enough to tell us that there was special tuning and new hardware involved. That gives me some hope.
I think Muth is making a bogus argument, and I think he knows it. The problems within the source trees of each MSFT OS are pretty well known. The commercial Unix OS's I have worked with have source trees that are just as broken. Mozilla released portions of Netscape's source and it was broken too. Consider any argument against Open Source that claims any quality or consistency benefits from having a single business entity controlling the source code bogus. Distributing development of an OS in a way that forces independent justification and review of code changes has a positive impact on quality and consistency.
I was turned on to it by a mention in "Computer Lib/Dream Machines" by Ted Nelson. I thought when I took programming courses in college that TPOCP would be a core text, but no such luck. The profs must not have thought psychology was relevant to software devlopment. Or maybe (irony alert) they thought teaching the concepts in TPOCP was a waste of time.
Now that I am out in the real world, I find that very few computer "professionals" and even fewer manager types have even heard of TPOCP. That's a shame because it contains ideas that, if taken to heart, usually lead to faster development, better code and fewer bruised egos. I have been shocked to see local libraries and used book stores selling copies of TPOCP for $.10 or throwing/giving it away. I scarf them up and give them away to friends and anyone who complains about the difficulty of collaboration with others. Hurray for the publisher that decided to take a chance and put TPOCP back into print. Now if I could just get the guy in the next cube to read it...
Slashdot Mirror
Consider the source, Simpson himself.
He likes publicity and recognition, a trait that had not endeared him to his peers.
He made an appeal to the IETF's board a few months ago (a very time consuming process for all those involved). One of his complaints was that he did not get credit for his contributions.
I would give him very low credibility. I am suprised that anyone believes his story about being investigated by the FBI. Abduction by aliens who can break triple DES in microseconds is next.
> Now, in an environment that hasn't been properly configured, especially one running the Domino
> HTTP task, it can be pretty easy to crack the server. L0pht has posted about ways to exploit
> Domino default settings. However, I just don't think that its feasible to crack a properly
> configured Domino server.
Unfortunately, there appear to be a lot of improperly configured Domino servers running the http task, especially on NT, but even on AIX. The default settings make admin easy, but open you up to serious attacks from anyone with a web browser.
This raises an interesting question: should the products that are ported to Linux be configured differently/more securely by default to suit the environment?
Is there any hope that vendors will stop citing tests on a platform that is never going to be commercially available unless the results are specifically labeled as R&D?
I have not gone looking yet at the SpecWeb99, but I think some of the TPC benchmarks now require the platform to be commercially available within six months.
At least IBM was honest enough to tell us that there was special tuning and new hardware involved. That gives me some hope.
I think Muth is making a bogus argument, and I think he knows it.
The problems within the source trees of each MSFT OS are pretty well known.
The commercial Unix OS's I have worked with have source trees that are just as broken.
Mozilla released portions of Netscape's source and it was broken too.
Consider any argument against Open Source that claims any quality or consistency benefits from having a single business entity controlling the source code bogus.
Distributing development of an OS in a way that forces independent justification and review of code changes has a positive impact on quality and consistency.
I was turned on to it by a mention in "Computer Lib/Dream Machines" by Ted Nelson.
I thought when I took programming courses in college that TPOCP would be a core text, but no such luck.
The profs must not have thought psychology was relevant to software devlopment.
Or maybe (irony alert) they thought teaching the concepts in TPOCP was a waste of time.
Now that I am out in the real world, I find that very few computer "professionals" and even fewer manager types have even heard of TPOCP.
That's a shame because it contains ideas that, if taken to heart, usually lead to faster development, better code and fewer bruised egos.
I have been shocked to see local libraries and used book stores selling copies of TPOCP for $.10 or throwing/giving it away.
I scarf them up and give them away to friends and anyone who complains about the difficulty of collaboration with others.
Hurray for the publisher that decided to take a chance and put TPOCP back into print.
Now if I could just get the guy in the next cube to read it...