If you do what Microsoft has done, yes it is worthless. If you actually intend to operate in a classified environment and expect to get your product into a Government network (especially encryption products) you had better have it evaluated.
Windows 2000 was evaluated for CC EAL4 in much the same way Windows NT was evaluated under TCSEC (minimum risk, behind a firewall, no vulnerable services or programs running). For people who do not understand Common Criteria it sounds impressive, actually the EAL4 level for Windows 2000 SP3 is worthless because it is based on the Controlled Access Protection Profile (CAPP). If anyone intended to deploy Windows 2000 as a secure server it would fail CC as soon as you went to the more demanding PP's (such as Role Based Access Control and Labeled Security), this is the criteria used to evaluate Trusted Solaris 8.
When is the last time you saw Linux running on a 20 CPU, 32 GB 6500? I work on a large Government Contract and have worked on two others, and Linux played a minor role (cheap DNS server).
The Government is not going to put up Linux boxes (especially in classified environments) until a distribution gets an EAL4 or better Common Criteria rating. The last time I read anything about Linux and CC, the group that was going for CC Evaluation of Linux was only shooting for EAL2. Totally insufficent for a C2 (under TCSEC) environment.
Not only that, but with the number of companies and Government agencies that have millions of dollars worth of Sun, HP, and IBM hardware, I highly doubt that they are going to trash that investment for Linux. Nevermind trying to port all of the custom applications, that effort alone could take years.
Linux skills are nice to have, but until you start seeing the "big iron" on eBay for next to nothing, I would still learn a "major player" product.
If you are looking for Solaris training, go right to Sun. Their courses are not cheap ($2500-3000 per class) but you get hands-on, books that are worth their weight in gold, and a good feel for Solaris. And the other benefit of coughing up that kind of cash is that only people "who want to be there" will be present. My previous job gave us three weeks of Solaris training (not by Sun), and three of us spent most of that time training everybody else!
I wouldn't worry about Cisco training, there are lots of CCNA's out of work.
And although many people will tell you "learn Linux", I think having some education and experience with a major vendor's product is more helpful (in my case Solaris and AIX). But that is just my opinion.
Re:hardware review sites are practically scams
on
Hardware Bytes
·
· Score: 1
I wholeheartedly agree! When I want to read about a new piece of hardware, I do not want to read a "20 page review" because of the site pimping whatever their "sponsors" want them to pimp. Never mind the hardware sites that use babes, bimbos, and porn stars to get your attention. If those sites need that much help, they have some real problems with their audience!
Also the quality of the reviews is questionable, the LCD monitor review is nothing more than "see how much space it saves and the "quality" of playing a game"! I want to know about color quality using standards like Pantone and CIE (I am sure the reviewer has never heard of either). And for someone who says in the review "If you do not know how to install a monitor, you shouldn't be reading this." take a look at the shot of his desktop with all the icons on it. Obviously he does not know how to move anything to the Task Bar and he really doesn't know much about Windows!
The last "real" review I read was for the Albatron motherboard at www.overclockers.com (not a plug for their site). They used professional test equipment to determine points of failure with power, memory, adn CPU (not that I am an overclocker but it was interesting). Unfortunately there are too few sites that really test equipment, other than the "standard benchmarks". Maybe someday they will get it, more than likely they won't.
Re:Whatever happened to smart advertising?
on
Next-Gen Pop-up Ads
·
· Score: 1
To target advertising the advertising companies would require a certain amount of market research, and that takes time and money. Conventional advertisers use research since print, TV, and radio ads cost big bucks. Internet advertising costs next to nothing, so why bother conducting any kind of research when you can "blanket" the Internet with useless advertising. These companies take specific advantage of the computing community that are clueless and are not aware of pop-up blockers, bot removers, etc. And it obviously makes them money, so why stop at simple pop-ups. The company selling the product might not be making a dime, but the advertiser is!
This type of advertising will go away when the vast majority of people employ tools to stop these annoyances, until then the rest of us will have to invent more ways to stop the annoying and pervasive ads from bothering us.
You are partially right, the difference is they are on Shore Duty which means they can hire an attorney to represent them at Mast. When you are on the ship you are screwed, because that option of legal representation is not given to you when you are underway! And I know because I am a 20 year Navy veteran who has been to Mast (as the "main attraction") and has sent his share of people to Mast.
It depends on what they are charged with under the UCMJ, because a slick lawyer versed in Military Law could probably get them off very easily. Considering who goes to Annapolis, money will not be an issue. What will be an issue is publicity, which the Navy and eventually the RIAA will want to avoid because the taxpayer "foots the bill" for the military, and with the emphasis on fighting terrorism, Iraq, etc., the last thing the RIAA wants is to be on the front page spouting their half-baked "we have been violated" crap, protecting the rich (namely themselves) and trying to prosecute future military officers who don't make squat until they are actually commissioned. Downloading music is real low on the "radar scope" as compared to selling secrets, in other words real crime!
At home I use three operating systems, Windows 2000, Solaris 9, and AIX 4.3. Where I see the problem with upgrading is is twofold (1) software is seriously lagging behind hardware and (2), operating systems really don't support the "killer" hardware!
Looking at the hardware requirements for Unreal Tournament and Quake III Arena, Pentium CPU's minimum! Why should I purchase a game that runs on a CPU that is four generations behind the current hardware! Now I am sure I will get flamed by many gamers for that statement, but if you want killer performance, the applications and OS should be compiled to support the hardware, and in many cases it is not.
My Windows boxes are dual Celeron machines with 512 MB of RAM, dual hard disks and AGP video. This is more than sufficient for what I, my wife and daughter use them for. My Sparcs (2 Ultra 1's, an Ultra 30 and an Ultra 2) all support 64 bit Solaris, and I am sure it could be faster if the following would take place:
1. Removal of SunOS 4.x support
2. Removal of 32 bit support
3. More applications are compiled for 64 bit support
On the Windows side of the house:
1. Remove NetBIOS support.
2. Remove 16 bit support.
3. Remove OS/2 support
4. Compile the OS for something a little more recent (like a PIII).
5. Compile applications to take advantage of better hardware instead of what I call "lowest common denominator" for "compatibility". Why should we be using software compiled for computers that for some of us we have donated to schools, sold, given away, or thrown away.
The only hardware I might replace is hard disks and possibly video cards (unless something blows up). I use PIII and PIV desktops at work and the performance difference is not that great for me to justify a new machine at home. Maybe if enough people "pitch a fit" about the lousy software being cranked out (and I am not just talking from a security standpoint), maybe we will be in a better position to look at upgrading, as opposed to upgrading simply to deal with OS and application bloat!
The problem with Solaris and printed documentation is that Sun makes changes to the OS between releases that even Sun does not fully document (such as the -k option of netstat, added RBAC profiles in the 4/01 Solaris 8 Release) and Solaris specific commands such as prstat. Most Unix books cover the basics pretty well, but OS specific options you end up having to buy an OS specific book.
I am playing with Solaris 9 at home, and other than better 64-bit hardware support, more options with IPSec, and enhancements to Solaris Management Console (including the addition of Solaris Volume Manager (the replacement for Solstice DiskSuite)) most of the Solaris 8 commands work fine.
You have to keep the wife and daughter happy (they like color)! I would just as soon get a nice PostScript laser with duplexing and replace them both. The scanner I kkep around for the occasional thing I want to scan (it wasn't a cheapie, but I just couldn't justify a $30,000 drum scanner). Th problem I have now is I am running out of desktop space for my machines!
I always get a chuckle out of people posting to 2cpu.com and their signature includes their PC specs. I usually tell people about my stuff and either they think I'm nuts (until they need help fixing their stuff) or they mutter some obscenities about what I have. At one time I had 8 PC's running Windows and Solaris in a small bedroom. I have either sold the old stuff off, or given it to my daughter's school.
Now that I have a room with over 500 sq. ft., I can "stretch out"! I have two Ikea Effektiv desks with the following hardware:
2 Sun Ultra 1's (one Enterprise, one Creator) 1 Ultra 30 1 IBM RS/6000 7043-140 3 dual processor Celeron rigs (one for each member of the family) 1 HP LaserJet 1 HP DeskJet 1 Umax 2200 scanner
In the closet I have a Sparc 20 MP, a Sun 911 enclosure and a few SCSI disks. And for Christmas I am getting an Ultra 2!
I also have room for my 27" TV, two butterfly chairs, foot stools, large bookshelf and two file cabinets. My wife and daughter try their best to "trash out" the place but I always pick it up (it is "my" room)! It might not as much as some people have, but it still looks impressive!
Slashdot Mirror
If you do what Microsoft has done, yes it is worthless. If you actually intend to operate in a classified environment and expect to get your product into a Government network (especially encryption products) you had better have it evaluated. Windows 2000 was evaluated for CC EAL4 in much the same way Windows NT was evaluated under TCSEC (minimum risk, behind a firewall, no vulnerable services or programs running). For people who do not understand Common Criteria it sounds impressive, actually the EAL4 level for Windows 2000 SP3 is worthless because it is based on the Controlled Access Protection Profile (CAPP). If anyone intended to deploy Windows 2000 as a secure server it would fail CC as soon as you went to the more demanding PP's (such as Role Based Access Control and Labeled Security), this is the criteria used to evaluate Trusted Solaris 8.
When is the last time you saw Linux running on a 20 CPU, 32 GB 6500? I work on a large Government Contract and have worked on two others, and Linux played a minor role (cheap DNS server). The Government is not going to put up Linux boxes (especially in classified environments) until a distribution gets an EAL4 or better Common Criteria rating. The last time I read anything about Linux and CC, the group that was going for CC Evaluation of Linux was only shooting for EAL2. Totally insufficent for a C2 (under TCSEC) environment. Not only that, but with the number of companies and Government agencies that have millions of dollars worth of Sun, HP, and IBM hardware, I highly doubt that they are going to trash that investment for Linux. Nevermind trying to port all of the custom applications, that effort alone could take years. Linux skills are nice to have, but until you start seeing the "big iron" on eBay for next to nothing, I would still learn a "major player" product.
If you are looking for Solaris training, go right to Sun. Their courses are not cheap ($2500-3000 per class) but you get hands-on, books that are worth their weight in gold, and a good feel for Solaris. And the other benefit of coughing up that kind of cash is that only people "who want to be there" will be present. My previous job gave us three weeks of Solaris training (not by Sun), and three of us spent most of that time training everybody else! I wouldn't worry about Cisco training, there are lots of CCNA's out of work. And although many people will tell you "learn Linux", I think having some education and experience with a major vendor's product is more helpful (in my case Solaris and AIX). But that is just my opinion.
I wholeheartedly agree! When I want to read about a new piece of hardware, I do not want to read a "20 page review" because of the site pimping whatever their "sponsors" want them to pimp. Never mind the hardware sites that use babes, bimbos, and porn stars to get your attention. If those sites need that much help, they have some real problems with their audience! Also the quality of the reviews is questionable, the LCD monitor review is nothing more than "see how much space it saves and the "quality" of playing a game"! I want to know about color quality using standards like Pantone and CIE (I am sure the reviewer has never heard of either). And for someone who says in the review "If you do not know how to install a monitor, you shouldn't be reading this." take a look at the shot of his desktop with all the icons on it. Obviously he does not know how to move anything to the Task Bar and he really doesn't know much about Windows! The last "real" review I read was for the Albatron motherboard at www.overclockers.com (not a plug for their site). They used professional test equipment to determine points of failure with power, memory, adn CPU (not that I am an overclocker but it was interesting). Unfortunately there are too few sites that really test equipment, other than the "standard benchmarks". Maybe someday they will get it, more than likely they won't.
To target advertising the advertising companies would require a certain amount of market research, and that takes time and money. Conventional advertisers use research since print, TV, and radio ads cost big bucks. Internet advertising costs next to nothing, so why bother conducting any kind of research when you can "blanket" the Internet with useless advertising. These companies take specific advantage of the computing community that are clueless and are not aware of pop-up blockers, bot removers, etc. And it obviously makes them money, so why stop at simple pop-ups. The company selling the product might not be making a dime, but the advertiser is!
This type of advertising will go away when the vast majority of people employ tools to stop these annoyances, until then the rest of us will have to invent more ways to stop the annoying and pervasive ads from bothering us.
You are partially right, the difference is they are on Shore Duty which means they can hire an attorney to represent them at Mast. When you are on the ship you are screwed, because that option of legal representation is not given to you when you are underway! And I know because I am a 20 year Navy veteran who has been to Mast (as the "main attraction") and has sent his share of people to Mast. It depends on what they are charged with under the UCMJ, because a slick lawyer versed in Military Law could probably get them off very easily. Considering who goes to Annapolis, money will not be an issue. What will be an issue is publicity, which the Navy and eventually the RIAA will want to avoid because the taxpayer "foots the bill" for the military, and with the emphasis on fighting terrorism, Iraq, etc., the last thing the RIAA wants is to be on the front page spouting their half-baked "we have been violated" crap, protecting the rich (namely themselves) and trying to prosecute future military officers who don't make squat until they are actually commissioned. Downloading music is real low on the "radar scope" as compared to selling secrets, in other words real crime!
At home I use three operating systems, Windows 2000, Solaris 9, and AIX 4.3. Where I see the problem with upgrading is is twofold (1) software is seriously lagging behind hardware and (2), operating systems really don't support the "killer" hardware! Looking at the hardware requirements for Unreal Tournament and Quake III Arena, Pentium CPU's minimum! Why should I purchase a game that runs on a CPU that is four generations behind the current hardware! Now I am sure I will get flamed by many gamers for that statement, but if you want killer performance, the applications and OS should be compiled to support the hardware, and in many cases it is not. My Windows boxes are dual Celeron machines with 512 MB of RAM, dual hard disks and AGP video. This is more than sufficient for what I, my wife and daughter use them for. My Sparcs (2 Ultra 1's, an Ultra 30 and an Ultra 2) all support 64 bit Solaris, and I am sure it could be faster if the following would take place: 1. Removal of SunOS 4.x support 2. Removal of 32 bit support 3. More applications are compiled for 64 bit support On the Windows side of the house: 1. Remove NetBIOS support. 2. Remove 16 bit support. 3. Remove OS/2 support 4. Compile the OS for something a little more recent (like a PIII). 5. Compile applications to take advantage of better hardware instead of what I call "lowest common denominator" for "compatibility". Why should we be using software compiled for computers that for some of us we have donated to schools, sold, given away, or thrown away. The only hardware I might replace is hard disks and possibly video cards (unless something blows up). I use PIII and PIV desktops at work and the performance difference is not that great for me to justify a new machine at home. Maybe if enough people "pitch a fit" about the lousy software being cranked out (and I am not just talking from a security standpoint), maybe we will be in a better position to look at upgrading, as opposed to upgrading simply to deal with OS and application bloat!
The problem with Solaris and printed documentation is that Sun makes changes to the OS between releases that even Sun does not fully document (such as the -k option of netstat, added RBAC profiles in the 4/01 Solaris 8 Release) and Solaris specific commands such as prstat. Most Unix books cover the basics pretty well, but OS specific options you end up having to buy an OS specific book.
I am playing with Solaris 9 at home, and other than better 64-bit hardware support, more options with IPSec, and enhancements to Solaris Management Console (including the addition of Solaris Volume Manager (the replacement for Solstice DiskSuite)) most of the Solaris 8 commands work fine.
You have to keep the wife and daughter happy (they like color)! I would just as soon get a nice PostScript laser with duplexing and replace them both. The scanner I kkep around for the occasional thing I want to scan (it wasn't a cheapie, but I just couldn't justify a $30,000 drum scanner). Th problem I have now is I am running out of desktop space for my machines!
I always get a chuckle out of people posting to 2cpu.com and their signature includes their PC specs. I usually tell people about my stuff and either they think I'm nuts (until they need help fixing their stuff) or they mutter some obscenities about what I have. At one time I had 8 PC's running Windows and Solaris in a small bedroom. I have either sold the old stuff off, or given it to my daughter's school.
Now that I have a room with over 500 sq. ft., I can "stretch out"! I have two Ikea Effektiv desks with the following hardware:
2 Sun Ultra 1's (one Enterprise, one Creator)
1 Ultra 30
1 IBM RS/6000 7043-140
3 dual processor Celeron rigs (one for each member of the family)
1 HP LaserJet
1 HP DeskJet
1 Umax 2200 scanner
In the closet I have a Sparc 20 MP, a Sun 911 enclosure and a few SCSI disks. And for Christmas I am getting an Ultra 2!
I also have room for my 27" TV, two butterfly chairs, foot stools, large bookshelf and two file cabinets. My wife and daughter try their best to "trash out" the place but I always pick it up (it is "my" room)! It might not as much as some people have, but it still looks impressive!