For those that want to buy used equipment on eBay, they can get it rather cheap. For those that don’t need cutting edge hardware, there is a lot available at near giveaway prices.
I don’t know the laws. But Krebs was explicit that the Washington Post lawyers put the kibosh on many of his stories due to those lawsuit fears. And when they didn’t, it took months of review to finally to get the story out.
Krebs writes that he had people at The University of Alabama at Birmingham ready to do the testing. But they couldn’t get the necessary sign off, both from the school administration and the FDA.
And even if they did, imagine if CNN got hold of the story. They would plaster the headlines with: University testing illegal Russian drugs for potency.
Agreed, but they still have turned a blind-eye to the foreign illegal pharma. The amount important is not insignificant, and pharma has gone after smaller fish in the past.
Such tests require sophisticated testing equipment.
Those with the equipment are not going to risk getting their labs shut down for testing illegal drugs.
The book notes that The University of Alabama at Birmingham was ready to do the testing; but the necessary approval from the FDA and university administrations simply could not be obtained.
Big pharma has long portrayed these foreign made pharmaceuticals as dirty and dangerous.
The quandary is that if as John Horton noted that they are indeed indistinguishable from those sold by approved pharmacies; then US pharma is selling a drug at 10x the price.
It would place them in a PR nightmare they could not get out of.
International lawsuits terrify management. As these lawsuits are distracting, time consuming and extremely expensive.
While libel is extremely hard to prove, no firm wants to be on the receiving end of a subpoena. The Washington Post is somewhat risk adverse, which is why they backed off on the story.
::::First and foremost, the cloud is not in any way shape or form secure.Any thing you put there is there to share.
It’s as secure as you want to make it.
Many firms that take security seriously use the cloud.:::::Second, it is a buzzword that is used to get gullible suits to think that they can get rid of their IT depatments.
:::::Will an experienced admin (20+ years *NIX) that's currently using RackSpace (dedicated and cloud) learn anything from this book? It's so hard to tell from this review.
I think so.:::I've been using RackSpace for a few months now and I find that it's not much different than hosting the servers myself except I don't have to deal with things like router/switch configuration and hardware replacements.
From a hosting and sys admin perspective, it is not a radical difference.
But from a cloud application perspective, there is a lot to learn.
:::entrust their data to some unknown and unmonitored external entity such as the 'cloud'.
Do you really consider Amazon Web Services unknown and unmonitored?
The granularity of what they can report on shows their monitoring capabilities are quite sophisticated.:::Until that time, safe and productive cloud computing is just a fantasy. It's a solution in search of problem. Avoid it.
I think the facts speak for themselves. There are thousands of examples of safe and productive instances of cloud computing,
But there are also tens of thousands of examples of insecure and unproductive instances of cloud computing,
The book doesn’t deal with acceptable use per se, as much of acceptable use is determined by the specific user of the cloud.
As I wrote about “almost any security regulation or standard can be met in the cloud. As none of the regulations and standard dictates where the data must specifically reside”.
So if you define what the with acceptable use is and build that into your cloud policy and contract, that would be acceptable.
Slashdot Mirror
For those that want to buy used equipment on eBay, they can get it rather cheap.
For those that don’t need cutting edge hardware, there is a lot available at near giveaway prices.
thanks. Let me see if I can find his book where (I am pretty sure) he said that.
My use of 'mathematically impossible' was incorrect. A different term would have proven better. Thanks.
I recollect Penzias making that statement that the math simply does not work in his book: Digital Harmony: Business, Technology & Life After Paperwork
http://www.amazon.com/Ideas-In...
Thanks. You are correct, that should have been Vietnam, not Iran.
That does seem to be the point he makes.
I don’t know the laws. But Krebs was explicit that the Washington Post lawyers put the kibosh on many of his stories due to those lawsuit fears. And when they didn’t, it took months of review to finally to get the story out.
Krebs writes that he had people at The University of Alabama at Birmingham ready to do the testing. But they couldn’t get the necessary sign off, both from the school administration and the FDA.
And even if they did, imagine if CNN got hold of the story. They would plaster the headlines with: University testing illegal Russian drugs for potency.
Agreed, but they still have turned a blind-eye to the foreign illegal pharma. The amount important is not insignificant, and pharma has gone after smaller fish in the past.
Such tests require sophisticated testing equipment.
Those with the equipment are not going to risk getting their labs shut down for testing illegal drugs.
The book notes that The University of Alabama at Birmingham was ready to do the testing; but the necessary approval from the FDA and university administrations simply could not be obtained.
Big pharma has long portrayed these foreign made pharmaceuticals as dirty and dangerous.
The quandary is that if as John Horton noted that they are indeed indistinguishable from those sold by approved pharmacies; then US pharma is selling a drug at 10x the price.
It would place them in a PR nightmare they could not get out of.
International lawsuits terrify management. As these lawsuits are distracting, time consuming and extremely expensive.
While libel is extremely hard to prove, no firm wants to be on the receiving end of a subpoena. The Washington Post is somewhat risk adverse, which is why they backed off on the story.
SSL is subject to vulnerabilities, weaknesses and misconfiguration like every other protocol and piece of software.
It’s for the most part all we have until a SSL replacement is found.
With that, you can maximize its usefulness by deploying it correctly, as per the 2nd half of the book.
Sorry.... this web site provides a good overview: http://www.cxoware.com/what-is...
I guess a better term would have been ‘uninterested’.
The fact that a few people have died to Ebola makes it a novelty.
The fact that 10,000+ people have been killed annually in DUI related offences has jaded the media.
Bruce Schneier has a good essay on this topic - Virginia Tech Lesson: Rare Risks Breed Irrational Responses - https://www.schneier.com/essay...
He sums it up with novelty + dread = overreaction.
Ebola fits that. From a public heath perspective for the US, Ebola is for the most part a non-issue.
Thanks. Will see if the editor can make the change.
If you start a dialogue with a sales rep at AWS, they have a log of diagrams and detailed technical material they will share.
You can also look around at http://aws.amazon.com/document..., as there is a lot of good technical material there.
The use of Netflix on AWS is well documented.
Start here: http://aws.amazon.com/solution...
::::First and foremost, the cloud is not in any way shape or form secure.Any thing you put there is there to share.
It’s as secure as you want to make it.
Many firms that take security seriously use the cloud. :::::Second, it is a buzzword that is used to get gullible suits to think that they can get rid of their IT depatments.
You do have a good point there.
You are correct about my not getting the first sentence right.
With that, don’t let defective sentence stop you from reading a very good book.
:::::Will an experienced admin (20+ years *NIX) that's currently using RackSpace (dedicated and cloud) learn anything from this book? It's so hard to tell from this review.
I think so. :::I've been using RackSpace for a few months now and I find that it's not much different than hosting the servers myself except I don't have to deal with things like router/switch configuration and hardware replacements.
From a hosting and sys admin perspective, it is not a radical difference.
But from a cloud application perspective, there is a lot to learn.
Excellent point.
Lack of standardization is one of the biggest problems facing cloud computing.
It’s inevitable a few standards will eventually emerge. But until then, there’s a lot of uncertainty.
:::entrust their data to some unknown and unmonitored external entity such as the 'cloud'.
Do you really consider Amazon Web Services unknown and unmonitored?
The granularity of what they can report on shows their monitoring capabilities are quite sophisticated. :::Until that time, safe and productive cloud computing is just a fantasy. It's a solution in search of problem. Avoid it.
I think the facts speak for themselves. There are thousands of examples of safe and productive instances of cloud computing,
But there are also tens of thousands of examples of insecure and unproductive instances of cloud computing,
The book doesn’t deal with acceptable use per se, as much of acceptable use is determined by the specific user of the cloud.
As I wrote about “almost any security regulation or standard can be met in the cloud. As none of the regulations and standard dictates where the data must specifically reside”.
So if you define what the with acceptable use is and build that into your cloud policy and contract, that would be acceptable.