It was an easy choice for me. FC 1 and FC 2 would install properly, but never boot fully after the lengthly installs. However, Ubuntu is working great and I am very pleased with it.
Perhaps I'll try FC 3 to see if it even runs on my hardware.
The G.I. Bill helped pay my way through a very good (and expensive) private university. Hell, I be anyone can at least get into the Air Force or Coast Guard! [ducks]
1 Motivation
Internet worms are perceived to be one of the primary threats to the nation's information
technology infrastructure. They are a significant cause for concern from both financial and
network security perspectives. According to the Worm Information Center FAQ [1], the Sobig
and Blaster worms, which occurred at the same time, are estimated to have cost companies more
than two billion dollars.
For this paper, we studied current worm strategies and implementations and tried to determine
whether the trends point to a significant worsening of the problem in the near future. Are worm
technologies improving? Are worm attacks becoming more sophisticated? We were also
interested in defensive technologies that can be used to combat the worm problem. Where are
defensive technologies best applied? Should other technologies be developed to help defend
against the worm problem? Ultimately, we would like to know whether a sophisticated attack
can be prevented - could current defensive mechanisms be used to defend against future
sophisticated attacks?
2 Paper Organization
Answering our questions required an understanding of current worm technology and how it is
evolving. We choose to focus on the technology used by worms rather than the social
engineering methods used to deploy them, for which there is no technical solution.
In the Worm Technology section (sec. 4) of this paper, we devise a novel method for describing
Internet worms based on characteristics they exhibit, which we call life functions. By
decomposing these life functions, we derived the fundamental conditions needed for worm
success, which we call its attack attributes. In the Attack Attributes section (sec. 5), we
describe a system by which to classify worms.
The Defensive Mechanisms and Techniques section (sec. 6) surveys the existing technologies
that combat worms and other malicious code. The worm attack attributes are matched against
the defenses in the Attacks vs. Defenses section (sec. 7) in a defense matrix. From this matrix,
we draw conclusions about how best to detect and prevent worm attacks. We present a summary
of our results in the Findings section (sec. 3) below.
Finally, in the Applying Defensive Methodology section (sec. 8), we discuss how five
aggressive worms would have been easily defeated using the defense- in-depth strategy that we
advocate in this paper.
3.1 Defense-in-Depth
Many defensive technologies have been developed to combat the spread of Internet worms.
Unfortunately, there is no single technology that protects against all types of mobile malicious
code. Many enterprises rely on only a small set of protective technologies to protect their assets,
such as firewalls and virus scanners. Our research suggests that a layered defensive solution
would be more effective at preventing all known worm infection vectors and, potentially, many
unknown ones as well.
We reached this conclusion based on our study of a wide variety of Internet worms and defensive
mechanisms. As part of our research, we have produced a system for describing worms and
measuring whether defenses can stop them. We believe that this method captures the critical
characteristics that define current worms and the characteristics that will be displayed by worms
in the future. Our system demonstrates that no single defense works against all worms and that
multiple layered defenses provide robust protection.
Defense- in-depth security helps defend against not only worms but other network threats like
Trojan horses, malicious insiders, and hackers who have guessed passwords or entered systems
via flaws in network code. It bolsters security with solutions that are effective even without
forward knowledge of any attack. Such security solutions scale even to zero-day attacks, which
are attacks that make use of previously unknown vulnerabilities. Reactive defenses, like
signature-based virus scanners and automated patching systems are still necessary, but they are
ineffective against fast moving worms or zero-day attacks.
Worms have increasingly become "blended threats"[12]; they
I reference OO.o mostly because it is cross-platform and does a great job. Sometimes the right tool for the job makes all the difference. In most cases, I'm not so sure that a HTML based presentation is best. But don't get me wrong,the technology presented by this thread is really cool.
I wouldn't doubt that this type of technology filters it's way to OO.o, but I wouldn't think by the 2.0 release. BTW, the 1.9.xx series is a vast improvement over the 1.3.x series.
"I wish that every software company would put optimization first and features second. This way, we would not have to buy computers every few years. They can potentially last much longer."
And why would the hardware and/or software manufacturers want that?
Perhaps if you are only running RedHat with the required kernel can you get the Matrox Parhelia driver to work. If not, good f'n luck. Loved the Parhelia hardware better than any other video card I've ever had, but their FOSS support is minimal despite some marketing statement like those.
" yes, matrox is a high quality 2D card maker, and or multi head card maker.
They realize it would be foolish to try to compete with the big 2. That and a large chunk of the people out there don't game, or just simply don't care about FPS and so forth. They just want something that is solid, works, quiet, and not space heater."
Too bad Matrox hasn't realized that they can do that with Unix, GNU Linux, or BSD's. I sold my awesome Parhelia and put in an nVidia card only beacuse it was a everloving mess to get X working in Linux, and getting X working in BSD was over my head.
"But MS stuff is likewise useful (despite what many of you think)."
Remember not to long ago when a search for "XFree86" on msn.com resulted in an error for adult material? But of course, a search for any "XFree8x" went as anticipated.
At least I've not seen blatent censorship in Google site - especially to competing technologies.
The reason why Google has succeeded has more to do with the fact that it has an excellent product
And one would hope that Google leadership also realizes the very low product switching costs should another competitor come out with a better product. Therefore, Google still needs to remain the best at what they do because it is not like most people have invested heavily in an intricate Google infrastructure and have an easy path to an alternate product should one appear superior.
"...the working stiff's in the accounting / secretarial pool that could care less, know enough Windows 2K/XP to get the job done and would need a 2 week special high intensity training course for dummies to learn where all their new tools are? These are people who would rather be fishing or watching the soaps, secretly despise having to work at all in an office, dream of winning the lottery, and resist change or having to learn something different..."
Then these people can, and should, be easily identified and promptly fired!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm still waiting for Intel to put WTF back in their chipsets.
Perhaps it's been delayed until after the RTFA implementation?
"WTF is a Physical CD Pirate?"
Copying a CD with your CD burner to another CD.
It was an easy choice for me. FC 1 and FC 2 would install properly, but never boot fully after the lengthly installs. However, Ubuntu is working great and I am very pleased with it.
Perhaps I'll try FC 3 to see if it even runs on my hardware.
"Did they fix that little problem of the install process hosing drive geometry tables so that Windows won't load anymore?
Sounds like a feature to me!
G.I. Bill!
The G.I. Bill helped pay my way through a very good (and expensive) private university. Hell, I be anyone can at least get into the Air Force or Coast Guard! [ducks]
Semper Fi
And happy 229th Marines!
"What a great way of getting someone to solve your business programming problems on the cheap. :)"
Exactly!
Who said big blue was stupid?
- Or just visit your local Apple Store.
But be forwarned! Leave your credit card at home is you absolutely don't want to make a purchase; once you use one, you'll want one!Converse of Author's guide
1) Don't use Windows NT
2) Don't feel compelled to write "WORMPAPER" guide
3) Don't publish broken Acrobat file
4) Prof....er...retain profits!
Damn, I was about to add some damn line breaks and edit further but hit enter on accident.....
Can (should) Slashcode be changed to implement a preview instead of submission by hitting the enter key?
1 Motivation Internet worms are perceived to be one of the primary threats to the nation's information technology infrastructure. They are a significant cause for concern from both financial and network security perspectives. According to the Worm Information Center FAQ [1], the Sobig and Blaster worms, which occurred at the same time, are estimated to have cost companies more than two billion dollars. For this paper, we studied current worm strategies and implementations and tried to determine whether the trends point to a significant worsening of the problem in the near future. Are worm technologies improving? Are worm attacks becoming more sophisticated? We were also interested in defensive technologies that can be used to combat the worm problem. Where are defensive technologies best applied? Should other technologies be developed to help defend against the worm problem? Ultimately, we would like to know whether a sophisticated attack can be prevented - could current defensive mechanisms be used to defend against future sophisticated attacks? 2 Paper Organization Answering our questions required an understanding of current worm technology and how it is evolving. We choose to focus on the technology used by worms rather than the social engineering methods used to deploy them, for which there is no technical solution. In the Worm Technology section (sec. 4) of this paper, we devise a novel method for describing Internet worms based on characteristics they exhibit, which we call life functions. By decomposing these life functions, we derived the fundamental conditions needed for worm success, which we call its attack attributes. In the Attack Attributes section (sec. 5), we describe a system by which to classify worms. The Defensive Mechanisms and Techniques section (sec. 6) surveys the existing technologies that combat worms and other malicious code. The worm attack attributes are matched against the defenses in the Attacks vs. Defenses section (sec. 7) in a defense matrix. From this matrix, we draw conclusions about how best to detect and prevent worm attacks. We present a summary of our results in the Findings section (sec. 3) below. Finally, in the Applying Defensive Methodology section (sec. 8), we discuss how five aggressive worms would have been easily defeated using the defense- in-depth strategy that we advocate in this paper. 3.1 Defense-in-Depth Many defensive technologies have been developed to combat the spread of Internet worms. Unfortunately, there is no single technology that protects against all types of mobile malicious code. Many enterprises rely on only a small set of protective technologies to protect their assets, such as firewalls and virus scanners. Our research suggests that a layered defensive solution would be more effective at preventing all known worm infection vectors and, potentially, many unknown ones as well. We reached this conclusion based on our study of a wide variety of Internet worms and defensive mechanisms. As part of our research, we have produced a system for describing worms and measuring whether defenses can stop them. We believe that this method captures the critical characteristics that define current worms and the characteristics that will be displayed by worms in the future. Our system demonstrates that no single defense works against all worms and that multiple layered defenses provide robust protection. Defense- in-depth security helps defend against not only worms but other network threats like Trojan horses, malicious insiders, and hackers who have guessed passwords or entered systems via flaws in network code. It bolsters security with solutions that are effective even without forward knowledge of any attack. Such security solutions scale even to zero-day attacks, which are attacks that make use of previously unknown vulnerabilities. Reactive defenses, like signature-based virus scanners and automated patching systems are still necessary, but they are ineffective against fast moving worms or zero-day attacks. Worms have increasingly become "blended threats"[12]; they
How did I know that invitation sig just wouldn't be neglected on /dot? ;)
Direct link: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/scr eenshots/index.html
Use google. Okay, so Google cache isn't worth much in this case, but a picture is worth.....
= en&btnG=Google+Search
http://images.google.com/images?q=konfabulator&hl
I reference OO.o mostly because it is cross-platform and does a great job. Sometimes the right tool for the job makes all the difference. In most cases, I'm not so sure that a HTML based presentation is best. But don't get me wrong,the technology presented by this thread is really cool.
I wouldn't doubt that this type of technology filters it's way to OO.o, but I wouldn't think by the 2.0 release. BTW, the 1.9.xx series is a vast improvement over the 1.3.x series.
"I personally am glad that Kerry has done this. My opinion of him has gone up and I am glad that he will not try to divide the country further..."
;)
Kerry should have done that months ago.
--OR--
Windows users can use OpenOffice!
If you've been living under a rock for the past several years, you can get it at: http://www.openoffice.org/
"I wish that every software company would put optimization first and features second. This way, we would not have to buy computers every few years. They can potentially last much longer."
And why would the hardware and/or software manufacturers want that?
"I'd like Apple to make a...fast...system... and here's how to do it: underclock."
So that's the secret!
I'm so surprised that processor engineers never thought of that one. Oh wait...
Perhaps if you are only running RedHat with the required kernel can you get the Matrox Parhelia driver to work. If not, good f'n luck. Loved the Parhelia hardware better than any other video card I've ever had, but their FOSS support is minimal despite some marketing statement like those.
" yes, matrox is a high quality 2D card maker, and or multi head card maker. They realize it would be foolish to try to compete with the big 2. That and a large chunk of the people out there don't game, or just simply don't care about FPS and so forth. They just want something that is solid, works, quiet, and not space heater."
Too bad Matrox hasn't realized that they can do that with Unix, GNU Linux, or BSD's. I sold my awesome Parhelia and put in an nVidia card only beacuse it was a everloving mess to get X working in Linux, and getting X working in BSD was over my head.
"But MS stuff is likewise useful (despite what many of you think)."
Remember not to long ago when a search for "XFree86" on msn.com resulted in an error for adult material? But of course, a search for any "XFree8x" went as anticipated.
At least I've not seen blatent censorship in Google site - especially to competing technologies.
The reason why Google has succeeded has more to do with the fact that it has an excellent product
And one would hope that Google leadership also realizes the very low product switching costs should another competitor come out with a better product. Therefore, Google still needs to remain the best at what they do because it is not like most people have invested heavily in an intricate Google infrastructure and have an easy path to an alternate product should one appear superior.
"...the working stiff's in the accounting / secretarial pool that could care less, know enough Windows 2K/XP to get the job done and would need a 2 week special high intensity training course for dummies to learn where all their new tools are? These are people who would rather be fishing or watching the soaps, secretly despise having to work at all in an office, dream of winning the lottery, and resist change or having to learn something different..."
Then these people can, and should, be easily identified and promptly fired!
"...with restrictions on the use of Windows machines having no outside Internet access."
Isn't it sad that is about the only sane way these days to keep Windows secure?
To bad all Windows users don't use this policy!
I'm a recent convet, and it was worth it.
For Photoshop look work into the GIMP as a good free alternative or Codeweavers Crossover to run Photoshop on Linux.