Actually, HavenCo may be doomed, but SeaLand isn't the same animal. The Principality may still fail, but their fate is not completely tied to the colocation facility.
This whole Data Haven thing does bare a striking similarity to "The Crypt" in Cryptonomicon though....
Just identifing color from orbit is no big deal, even through water. Remember that the water in that part of the world often has clear visibility in excess of 100 feet. From a boat on the surface, you can clearly see bottom features.
Anybody want to try proving that they *can't* see my face from space?
Several years ago, Sky and Telescope (I think) did an article on the theoretical maximum resolution of satellite imagery. This was in response to the rumor of Big Bird satellites being able to read someone's watch from orbit. While I don't remember the details, they did the math based on the physics involved and what was considered the state of the art in optics. Their conclusion was that the spy sat might be able to see there was a watch as a single pixel color change, but reading it was beyond the theoretical limits given the known maximum size of a scope.
But if you're really worried about them seeing your face from orbit, wear a hat...
The drive in Footfall was what's known as an Orion type drive. Basically, putttering into space standing on a series of small nuclear explosions. I understand there were actually experiments done using conventional explosives.
Put the crew and cargo on top of a tower of big shock absorbers, on top of a big solid plate, and set of a bomb underneath it.
The problem with Orion drives is they toss a ton of detonation byproducts into the atmosphere, space, whatever, and contaminate everything in the area. Never mind that your "fuel" is a bunch of nuclear (or thermonuclear) weapons.
The engine in the article seems to be a relative of the Kiwi class engines from the same vintage. Basically a small reactor into which is pumped H2 or He which is heated and vented as reaction mass. This new drive adds an air intake which (it would seem) increase the thrust and reduce the weight of reaction mass needed. The problem with all of them has been contamination.
Nuclear power isn't bad. Venting large quantities of radioactive wastes into the environment IS bad.
This is one of those ideas that makes such perfect sense. Solar is currently an expensive solution on a per KWh basis to add to an existing grid. But, when there is no power infrastructure in place, it's not surprising to see it as a good solution. I'm glad there are people finally out there trying to get it going.
The big trick with a low input power system like that is the user's energy budget. Here in the states, we're used to having a huge budget for power. But, when you live on battery or generator power, you learn to economize. Folks in rural areas won't have the energy budget we may be used to in an urban area, but any power is better than none, and Solar is often a great solution. One reason many long distance cruisers (sailboats) rely heavily on big batteries and a rack of solar cells...
xerox, in fact, did have a team of lawyers to defend its name. however, didn't work. the Hormel example is a better one.
Good point. And Kodak went after Paul Simon (I think I'm remembering the artist right) over "Kodachrome." But now Xerox is effectively another word for Photocopy, and that couldn't have hurt Xerox's image. Likewise, Kodak couldn't have lost money with the free advertising associated with the song.
The term "Illustrator" is too generic for Adobe to be fighting over, especially when they don't have a version of it for Linux. They don't compete in the market, how can their image be damaged? The point here, and the point of my original post was that some corporations (Hormel and "Spam" really is probably the best example) are a little more cluefull than others about what hurts their business and what doesn't. I suspect this is a lawyer's doing, not Adobe itself.
Going after someone in the Open Source community "because they need to be paid" is just . . . lame.
Actually, if you'd read what I said, you'll see my primary reference is to rubber stamp MCSE's hired as "system administrators" and (l)users who don't read the manuals that shipped with their products. Personally, I've worked with too many MCSE's who thought there were hot because of the piece of paper, but had neither real world skills or the experience to think beyond their indoctrination. I've done support for users who were so incredibly computer illiterate that they would insist - repeatedly - that they could use a RAS connection and send faxes from WinFAX Light (Under Win3.x no less) at the same time from the same 14.4 modem.
I have TRIED to teach these people. I'm sorry you decided to take a more or less rhetorical question and turn it into flame. While I may have been less than clear that there were -two- points in my post, you seem to have missed it completely.
What amazes me is that your post was moderated up, rather than marked flamebait.
You wouldn't work for me for very long.
Fortunate then that I don't. I don't deal especially well with a "boss" who's concept of debating a point is an open flame...
Do me a favor, save Slashdot and our readers bandwidth and don't post.
I'll ask the same favor, eh?
Oh, and for the record, I don't hang out in #linux, but have been known to ask "have you read the manual?" The point there being that people who are too lazy to at least try to read the manual aren't worth the effort in the lengthly explanation it will almost certainly take...
There's a difference between "healthy paranoia" and "Stupidly paranoid." If I were to jump at every hit I saw for NetBIOS and RPC scans on my router (which uncerimoniously drops the packets on the floor to be swept up and discarded later) I'd spend half my day sending out "Cease and Desist" emails to some script kidiot's ISP.
Which would acomplish nothing of note.
The thread seems to be "educate the users and admins, and life will be good." But where does it start? Another module in the rubber stamp MCSE that they will promptly forget? Big bold headers in the Personal Firewall manual (that the (l)user will never really read) saying "Not every connection is hostile!"
Who's going to teach people?
(l)users don't read/. or visit securityfocus. If they're (un)lucky they may have seen antionline, and picked up the wrong kind of paranoia.
I guess the addage is true: Some people really are too stupid to use the internet...
This seems to be drifting rather far off-topic. After all, very little of this message or it's parent has to do with the Zero Knowledge product.
My comment here, is really on the moderation. While the first one may have been a mild troll, and may have deserved the rating, calling the above "4: Interesting" is actually an insult to the intelligence.
Personally, tossing in the "OS of all good, honest God-fearing people" and "strong belief in the teachings of Christ" puts this firmly in the "Off-Topic: preaching" category.
Moderators: You're way off base here.
And, to put this at least momentarily BACK on-topic, abandoning a software product for religious reasons may be personally valid, but it's not a useful reason to give. If the product doesn't work, or doesn't support your OS of choice, then look elsewhere. Simple.
Runs on gasoline or "the product of rotting vegetable matter." (Does giving methane a new name make it a new fuel source?) Hmmm. Ok. So they took a Ford "Flexible Fuel" motor or one of it's kin (something that will run or gasoline or natural gas), stuck it in a light weight body so it's got enough power to weight to be quick, and wrapped exotic sheetmetal around it.
This is news?
This is almost as exciting as sticking a small industrial diesel in a Harley frame and running it on vegetable oil...
You're quite right./. is not the place to ask for legal advice. The thing is though, the poster wasn't asking for legal advice. He was asking for other IT professionals to share their experience and pay structures.
If he's looking for contract advice, I'd say "Talk to a lawyer." If he's asking for shared experience, I'd say:
"Depending on what company I was working for, the On-Call person would get a premium of between $50 and $250 a week to carry the duty pager."
That's not legal advice. That's a shared experience - what he was asking for...
Much as I hate to defend MicroSoft, notice the "PC that will be running a Microsoft Operating System" part of that sentence. You were't planning on running a MicroSoft OS. Neither was I when I ordered my last three PC's that all run free OS's.
Having encountered MicroSoft's obscure licensing rules in a corporate environment, I can understand what they're doing here. I don't particularly like it. But the vendors are free to tell them to get stuffed, and the corporate IT department that loaded Linux on their 500 PC's can laugh at them.
Linux was created in Finland, yes. Though the largest distributors are based in the US. (RedHat, for example) BSD stands for Berkeley Software Development, and came from Berkeley California, USA. The OpenBSD project is based in Canada at least in part because the US Crypto laws are so stupid.
I agree with the rest of your assessment though. Ruling out Open Source on the usual corporate-think grounds is pointless.
The US got rocket technology from the Germans, as did the Brits and Russians.
You seem to have forgotten a man by the name of Goddard. While we certainly gained a lot from the german technology, it's unfair to imply that our technology came from the Germans. The real advances we gained from them were in guidance and control. We already had our own liquid fuel engines - albeit less advanced. Also, the British made extensive use of solid fuel rockets as weapons during the second world war, as did the United States, Russia, etc.
The only thing I have to ask is . . . What does this have to do with the Air Force possibly taking over the X-33 project?
First of all, you don't have to exceed the speed of the missile to outrun it. You simply have to be moving fast enough and high enough to get out of it's maximum engagement envelope before it reaches you. It's possible for ordinary fighter aircraft to "outrun" some surface to air missiles in with the right engagement geometries.
You're referring to evading a missile. Outrunning something implies "moving at greater speed." Though, as I originally said the evidence is anecdotal, which means it may be nothing more than legend.
Second of all, fastest != finest. I'd say the B-2 is a greater technological achievement than the SR-71.
I didn't say fastest == finest. I said the Blackbird was perhaps the finest aircraft ever built. It is my opinion, as your opinion of the B2 is yours. But I will point out that designing one of the tyres for the B2's main gear probably consumed more computer power than there was during the SR71's design.
There is anecdotal evidence that the SR71 was capable of outrunning the Soviet anti-air missiles that were fired at it - indicating a maxed out speed in excess of Mach 4.
Other stories indicate that every time the Russians got an extra tenth or so out of the MiG25, the Blackbird pilots were sent up to "Give her a little more gas" on an official speed run. I seem to remember an official record around 3.4, though it may well have been lower.
Regardless of the speed the Blackbird would actually achieve, the fact remains that it is, perhaps, the finest aircraft ever designed. Never mind our current envelope, the SR71 was designed in the days when Engineers still used slide-rules.
A (far from) silent, and beautiful, tribute to the Geeks who came before us...
I forget which municipality has been running their buses off of cooking oil, but this is not a new technology. There's a reason Diesel cycle engines are called "Oil burners."
And calling it a "Harley" when it sounds like the engine is an industrial diesel just seems . . . wrong.
Without going into the whole conspiracy theory thing, the main reason we're not seeing a mass conversion to "vegetable oil" fuels it because the vegatables themselves are used for numerous other things, and the supply isn't even close to what would be needed to meet demand.
Anyone know how many acres of corn (soybeans, etc.) it takes to produce a barrel of oil?
At the risk of being redundant, this is absolutely brilliant! There are logistical problems of course, and there would need to be some "grace period" to cover administrative problems ("The check really did get lost in the mail" sort of things) but the concept is wonderful.
I do see a couple of problems though, there would have to be some way to "cover" the works of a prolific, but otherwise "unsigned" author. If I'm a prolific writer, the costs of protecting my articles past the first couple years would add up quickly.
Another problem, of course, is getting something like this into practice. We've already seen how much influence the recording industry has over the political system. Extending this to all the other media would make for an intersting fight.
Agreed 100%. Further, anyone who's not encrypting "important" and or "personal" email is asking for what they get.
I don't think the sysadmin at my ISP is reading my email, but I know he can read it if he wants to. Just like I can read any mail on the servers I tend. I doubt the admins at Hotmail (or the other free webmail systems) have time to read my email, but I know they can whether or not they're supposed to or not.
Because of that, I encrypt a large chunk of the traffic I send out. If they can't read it, they can't exploit it...
Actually, that's not too far from the way it can go. One of the topics of hall chatter at LISA was doing Themes for peep. Opens up a whole new area to play, eh?
Bingo. Unlike ground based systems where you can lay in more fiber or set up more towers to build a bigger pipe, satellites are stuck with the bandwidth originally installed. At least as far as hardware goes.
While they can probably restrict the footprint to a metro-area size, there is also the point of everyone listening to the signal. The same issue you have with virtually any wireless system really. That 56-bit encryption is ok, but not strong enough for serious security.
As others have pointed out, this will be a great option for rural areas that wouldn't be able to get broadband any other way. I wish 'em luck, but I'll stick with a wired system or a 2Ghz band wireless solution.
Security doesn't start with encryption or passwords or security guards. Security starts with corporate culture. Do you have a policy that says everyone has to wear a badge? Yes? Ok. Do you have a culture where people -look- for the badge, particularly on people they don't know?
The IT department recommends strong passwords. Do people actually follow the recommendation? How about making a game out of seeing just how obscure you can get?
Does the company use encryption as a matter of course? It's nice to encrypt the sensitive information, but if people encrypted ALL their email as a matter of habit, it woould make encrypting the important things second nature.
That combines a technological solution with a cultural one.
In fact, this one leads to better general security on a number of levels. If you only encrypt the important files, an attacker only has to worry about cracking the encrypted files.
Encrypt the whole drive? Sure. Why not? Other than the performance penalty.
On a pure technology stantpoint, dump ftp and telnet and http in favor of scp, ssh, and https. The list goes on and on. Security is ALL of these issues. Physical, technological, cultural. It's a matter of finding the combination that's right for your environment.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, HavenCo may be doomed, but SeaLand isn't the same animal. The Principality may still fail, but their fate is not completely tied to the colocation facility.
This whole Data Haven thing does bare a striking similarity to "The Crypt" in Cryptonomicon though....
This looks like the formula from the S&T article. Thanks for clarifying it.
Just identifing color from orbit is no big deal, even through water. Remember that the water in that part of the world often has clear visibility in excess of 100 feet. From a boat on the surface, you can clearly see bottom features.
Anybody want to try proving that they *can't* see my face from space?
Several years ago, Sky and Telescope (I think) did an article on the theoretical maximum resolution of satellite imagery. This was in response to the rumor of Big Bird satellites being able to read someone's watch from orbit. While I don't remember the details, they did the math based on the physics involved and what was considered the state of the art in optics. Their conclusion was that the spy sat might be able to see there was a watch as a single pixel color change, but reading it was beyond the theoretical limits given the known maximum size of a scope.
But if you're really worried about them seeing your face from orbit, wear a hat...
The drive in Footfall was what's known as an Orion type drive. Basically, putttering into space standing on a series of small nuclear explosions. I understand there were actually experiments done using conventional explosives.
Put the crew and cargo on top of a tower of big shock absorbers, on top of a big solid plate, and set of a bomb underneath it.
The problem with Orion drives is they toss a ton of detonation byproducts into the atmosphere, space, whatever, and contaminate everything in the area. Never mind that your "fuel" is a bunch of nuclear (or thermonuclear) weapons.
The engine in the article seems to be a relative of the Kiwi class engines from the same vintage. Basically a small reactor into which is pumped H2 or He which is heated and vented as reaction mass. This new drive adds an air intake which (it would seem) increase the thrust and reduce the weight of reaction mass needed. The problem with all of them has been contamination.
Nuclear power isn't bad. Venting large quantities of radioactive wastes into the environment IS bad.
Dude, what is your problem?
Actually, I use that address because of folks like you who have nothing better to do than flame for no comprehendable reason.
Of course, I at least include one...
This is one of those ideas that makes such perfect sense. Solar is currently an expensive solution on a per KWh basis to add to an existing grid. But, when there is no power infrastructure in place, it's not surprising to see it as a good solution. I'm glad there are people finally out there trying to get it going.
The big trick with a low input power system like that is the user's energy budget. Here in the states, we're used to having a huge budget for power. But, when you live on battery or generator power, you learn to economize. Folks in rural areas won't have the energy budget we may be used to in an urban area, but any power is better than none, and Solar is often a great solution. One reason many long distance cruisers (sailboats) rely heavily on big batteries and a rack of solar cells...
xerox, in fact, did have a team of lawyers to defend its name. however, didn't work. the Hormel example is a better one.
Good point. And Kodak went after Paul Simon (I think I'm remembering the artist right) over "Kodachrome." But now Xerox is effectively another word for Photocopy, and that couldn't have hurt Xerox's image. Likewise, Kodak couldn't have lost money with the free advertising associated with the song.
The term "Illustrator" is too generic for Adobe to be fighting over, especially when they don't have a version of it for Linux. They don't compete in the market, how can their image be damaged? The point here, and the point of my original post was that some corporations (Hormel and "Spam" really is probably the best example) are a little more cluefull than others about what hurts their business and what doesn't. I suspect this is a lawyer's doing, not Adobe itself.
Going after someone in the Open Source community "because they need to be paid" is just . . . lame.
Actually, if you'd read what I said, you'll see my primary reference is to rubber stamp MCSE's hired as "system administrators" and (l)users who don't read the manuals that shipped with their products. Personally, I've worked with too many MCSE's who thought there were hot because of the piece of paper, but had neither real world skills or the experience to think beyond their indoctrination. I've done support for users who were so incredibly computer illiterate that they would insist - repeatedly - that they could use a RAS connection and send faxes from WinFAX Light (Under Win3.x no less) at the same time from the same 14.4 modem.
I have TRIED to teach these people. I'm sorry you decided to take a more or less rhetorical question and turn it into flame. While I may have been less than clear that there were -two- points in my post, you seem to have missed it completely.
What amazes me is that your post was moderated up, rather than marked flamebait.
You wouldn't work for me for very long.
Fortunate then that I don't. I don't deal especially well with a "boss" who's concept of debating a point is an open flame...
Do me a favor, save Slashdot and our readers bandwidth and don't post.
I'll ask the same favor, eh?
Oh, and for the record, I don't hang out in #linux, but have been known to ask "have you read the manual?" The point there being that people who are too lazy to at least try to read the manual aren't worth the effort in the lengthly explanation it will almost certainly take...
There's a difference between "healthy paranoia" and "Stupidly paranoid." If I were to jump at every hit I saw for NetBIOS and RPC scans on my router (which uncerimoniously drops the packets on the floor to be swept up and discarded later) I'd spend half my day sending out "Cease and Desist" emails to some script kidiot's ISP.
/. or visit securityfocus. If they're (un)lucky they may have seen antionline, and picked up the wrong kind of paranoia.
Which would acomplish nothing of note.
The thread seems to be "educate the users and admins, and life will be good." But where does it start? Another module in the rubber stamp MCSE that they will promptly forget? Big bold headers in the Personal Firewall manual (that the (l)user will never really read) saying "Not every connection is hostile!"
Who's going to teach people?
(l)users don't read
I guess the addage is true: Some people really are too stupid to use the internet...
This seems to be drifting rather far off-topic. After all, very little of this message or it's parent has to do with the Zero Knowledge product.
My comment here, is really on the moderation. While the first one may have been a mild troll, and may have deserved the rating, calling the above "4: Interesting" is actually an insult to the intelligence.
Personally, tossing in the "OS of all good, honest God-fearing people" and "strong belief in the teachings of Christ" puts this firmly in the "Off-Topic: preaching" category.
Moderators: You're way off base here.
And, to put this at least momentarily BACK on-topic, abandoning a software product for religious reasons may be personally valid, but it's not a useful reason to give. If the product doesn't work, or doesn't support your OS of choice, then look elsewhere. Simple.
Runs on gasoline or "the product of rotting vegetable matter." (Does giving methane a new name make it a new fuel source?) Hmmm. Ok. So they took a Ford "Flexible Fuel" motor or one of it's kin (something that will run or gasoline or natural gas), stuck it in a light weight body so it's got enough power to weight to be quick, and wrapped exotic sheetmetal around it.
This is news?
This is almost as exciting as sticking a small industrial diesel in a Harley frame and running it on vegetable oil...
You're quite right. /. is not the place to ask for legal advice. The thing is though, the poster wasn't asking for legal advice. He was asking for other IT professionals to share their experience and pay structures.
If he's looking for contract advice, I'd say "Talk to a lawyer." If he's asking for shared experience, I'd say:
"Depending on what company I was working for, the On-Call person would get a premium of between $50 and $250 a week to carry the duty pager."
That's not legal advice. That's a shared experience - what he was asking for...
Much as I hate to defend MicroSoft, notice the " PC that will be running a Microsoft Operating System " part of that sentence. You were't planning on running a MicroSoft OS. Neither was I when I ordered my last three PC's that all run free OS's.
Having encountered MicroSoft's obscure licensing rules in a corporate environment, I can understand what they're doing here. I don't particularly like it. But the vendors are free to tell them to get stuffed, and the corporate IT department that loaded Linux on their 500 PC's can laugh at them.
Linux was created in Finland, yes. Though the largest distributors are based in the US. (RedHat, for example) BSD stands for Berkeley Software Development, and came from Berkeley California, USA. The OpenBSD project is based in Canada at least in part because the US Crypto laws are so stupid.
I agree with the rest of your assessment though. Ruling out Open Source on the usual corporate-think grounds is pointless.
The US got rocket technology from the Germans, as did the Brits and Russians.
You seem to have forgotten a man by the name of Goddard. While we certainly gained a lot from the german technology, it's unfair to imply that our technology came from the Germans. The real advances we gained from them were in guidance and control. We already had our own liquid fuel engines - albeit less advanced. Also, the British made extensive use of solid fuel rockets as weapons during the second world war, as did the United States, Russia, etc.
The only thing I have to ask is . . . What does this have to do with the Air Force possibly taking over the X-33 project?
First of all, you don't have to exceed the speed of the missile to outrun it. You simply have to be moving fast enough and high enough to get out of it's maximum engagement envelope before it reaches you. It's possible for ordinary fighter aircraft to "outrun" some surface to air missiles in with the right engagement geometries.
You're referring to evading a missile. Outrunning something implies "moving at greater speed." Though, as I originally said the evidence is anecdotal, which means it may be nothing more than legend.
Second of all, fastest != finest. I'd say the B-2 is a greater technological achievement than the SR-71.
I didn't say fastest == finest. I said the Blackbird was perhaps the finest aircraft ever built. It is my opinion, as your opinion of the B2 is yours. But I will point out that designing one of the tyres for the B2's main gear probably consumed more computer power than there was during the SR71's design.
There is anecdotal evidence that the SR71 was capable of outrunning the Soviet anti-air missiles that were fired at it - indicating a maxed out speed in excess of Mach 4.
Other stories indicate that every time the Russians got an extra tenth or so out of the MiG25, the Blackbird pilots were sent up to "Give her a little more gas" on an official speed run. I seem to remember an official record around 3.4, though it may well have been lower.
Regardless of the speed the Blackbird would actually achieve, the fact remains that it is, perhaps, the finest aircraft ever designed. Never mind our current envelope, the SR71 was designed in the days when Engineers still used slide-rules.
A (far from) silent, and beautiful, tribute to the Geeks who came before us...
I forget which municipality has been running their buses off of cooking oil, but this is not a new technology. There's a reason Diesel cycle engines are called "Oil burners."
And calling it a "Harley" when it sounds like the engine is an industrial diesel just seems . . . wrong.
Without going into the whole conspiracy theory thing, the main reason we're not seeing a mass conversion to "vegetable oil" fuels it because the vegatables themselves are used for numerous other things, and the supply isn't even close to what would be needed to meet demand.
Anyone know how many acres of corn (soybeans, etc.) it takes to produce a barrel of oil?
At the risk of being redundant, this is absolutely brilliant! There are logistical problems of course, and there would need to be some "grace period" to cover administrative problems ("The check really did get lost in the mail" sort of things) but the concept is wonderful.
I do see a couple of problems though, there would have to be some way to "cover" the works of a prolific, but otherwise "unsigned" author. If I'm a prolific writer, the costs of protecting my articles past the first couple years would add up quickly.
Another problem, of course, is getting something like this into practice. We've already seen how much influence the recording industry has over the political system. Extending this to all the other media would make for an intersting fight.
Agreed 100%. Further, anyone who's not encrypting "important" and or "personal" email is asking for what they get.
I don't think the sysadmin at my ISP is reading my email, but I know he can read it if he wants to. Just like I can read any mail on the servers I tend. I doubt the admins at Hotmail (or the other free webmail systems) have time to read my email, but I know they can whether or not they're supposed to or not.
Because of that, I encrypt a large chunk of the traffic I send out. If they can't read it, they can't exploit it...
Actually, it's 666 Folsom...
Actually, that's not too far from the way it can go. One of the topics of hall chatter at LISA was doing Themes for peep. Opens up a whole new area to play, eh?
Bingo. Unlike ground based systems where you can lay in more fiber or set up more towers to build a bigger pipe, satellites are stuck with the bandwidth originally installed. At least as far as hardware goes.
While they can probably restrict the footprint to a metro-area size, there is also the point of everyone listening to the signal. The same issue you have with virtually any wireless system really. That 56-bit encryption is ok, but not strong enough for serious security.
As others have pointed out, this will be a great option for rural areas that wouldn't be able to get broadband any other way. I wish 'em luck, but I'll stick with a wired system or a 2Ghz band wireless solution.
Security doesn't start with encryption or passwords or security guards. Security starts with corporate culture. Do you have a policy that says everyone has to wear a badge? Yes? Ok. Do you have a culture where people -look- for the badge, particularly on people they don't know?
The IT department recommends strong passwords. Do people actually follow the recommendation? How about making a game out of seeing just how obscure you can get?
Does the company use encryption as a matter of course? It's nice to encrypt the sensitive information, but if people encrypted ALL their email as a matter of habit, it woould make encrypting the important things second nature.
That combines a technological solution with a cultural one.
In fact, this one leads to better general security on a number of levels. If you only encrypt the important files, an attacker only has to worry about cracking the encrypted files.
Encrypt the whole drive? Sure. Why not? Other than the performance penalty.
On a pure technology stantpoint, dump ftp and telnet and http in favor of scp, ssh, and https. The list goes on and on. Security is ALL of these issues. Physical, technological, cultural. It's a matter of finding the combination that's right for your environment.