CCIA report - another opinion

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Nathan Mercer, Oct 7, 2003.

  1. Remember that CCIA report called "CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly" the
    Linux freaks were crowing about the other week.

    Well there is always 2 sides to the story

    John makes excellent points as he takes the CCIA to task.

    http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5086379.html

    Anyone with a brain and who isn't a religious zealot must agree with some of
    the points he makes. The CCIA are so biased its not funny.
    Nathan Mercer, Oct 7, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Nathan Mercer

    Mainlander Guest

    In article <Octgb.170459$>, nathan@4757979!!!
    SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz says...
    > Remember that CCIA report called "CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly" the
    > Linux freaks were crowing about the other week.
    >
    > Well there is always 2 sides to the story
    >
    > John makes excellent points as he takes the CCIA to task.
    >
    > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5086379.html
    >
    > Anyone with a brain and who isn't a religious zealot must agree with some of
    > the points he makes. The CCIA are so biased its not funny.


    It's all politics, and you have stated your political allegiance, this
    post should be in the politics newsgroup.
    Mainlander, Oct 7, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Mainlander" <*@*.*> wrote in message
    news:...
    > > John makes excellent points as he takes the CCIA to task.
    > >
    > > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5086379.html
    > >
    > > Anyone with a brain and who isn't a religious zealot must agree with

    some of
    > > the points he makes. The CCIA are so biased its not funny.

    >
    > It's all politics, and you have stated your political allegiance, this
    > post should be in the politics newsgroup.


    Shall I just go and hide under a rock and let the Linux nutters go at it by
    themselves then?
    I'm happy enough not to keep posting this stuff here, but someone else did
    post the opposing drivel first
    Nathan Mercer, Oct 7, 2003
    #3
  4. Nathan Mercer

    steve Guest

    Nathan Mercer allegedly said:

    > Remember that CCIA report called "CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly"
    > the Linux freaks were crowing about the other week.
    >
    > Well there is always 2 sides to the story
    >
    > John makes excellent points as he takes the CCIA to task.
    >
    > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5086379.html
    >
    > Anyone with a brain and who isn't a religious zealot must agree with some
    > of
    > the points he makes. The CCIA are so biased its not funny.


    They have a view shaped by years of fighting Microsoft's monopoly behaviour.
    Just as the French Resistance were 'biased' against the Nazis.

    In this article, John Carroll merely points out the obvious - such as
    diversified OS environment can lead to additional costs.

    Those are on-going, plannable, costs. Having your compuiting environment
    brought to its knees for hours or days is not a plannable cost.

    Any company considering the CCIA's advice will have to weigh up the two.

    His reference to "commodity OSes" is interesting - as it applies only to
    Microsoft's largest customers.

    People like me, with numerous PCs, can't hope to afford Windows even if we
    wanted to. Windows would cost me literally thousands of dollars each year -
    nothing cheap or "commodity" about it.

    ....and so on we could go through the points. Each one involves a decision by
    the user as to what their priorities are.
    steve, Oct 7, 2003
    #4
  5. Nathan Mercer

    AD. Guest

    On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 19:40:03 +1300, Nathan Mercer wrote:

    > Remember that CCIA report called "CyberInsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly"
    > the Linux freaks were crowing about the other week.
    >
    > Well there is always 2 sides to the story
    >
    > John makes excellent points as he takes the CCIA to task.
    >
    > http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1107_2-5086379.html
    >
    > Anyone with a brain and who isn't a religious zealot must agree with
    > some of the points he makes. The CCIA are so biased its not funny.


    All his points seemed to be along the lines of "There is truth in that,
    but...." style excuses and justifications for "the too hard basket" style
    whining. Nowhere did he actually rebut or refute any findings, he just
    justified the status quo.

    He also presents quite a few straw man arguments in that column, as do
    many other critics of the report.

    The monoculture arguments were aimed at the global tech market not at
    specific companies. Diversity is all about making it harder for an exploit
    to reach a global critical mass. A more diverse global software ecosystem
    doesn't have to be reflected within a specific organisation. An
    organisation could still standardise, but if their choices are a bunch of
    platforms with 20% market share than than one platform with 90% market
    share, overall security would be better.

    He talked about Linux and Java becoming monocultures, but that isn't a
    very good argument. The common x86/Windows/IE/Office/Outlook or
    x86/Windows/IIS/SQL Server setups generally end up being almost identical
    vertical software stacks from company to company worldwide. An exploit in
    any layer is almost guaranteed to know what is running on the other layers
    and can take advantage of that.

    For instance a Java monoculture would still be running on different OS and
    hardware platforms, which makes it much harder for a JVM exploit to reach
    critical mass. OK so the author talked about still having the problems in
    the apps written for the Java platform (eg SQL injection type attacks),
    but realistically what kind of 3rd party java app is ever going to get
    that kind of market share?

    And talking about a Linux monoculture is exaggeration - unless you also
    turn the mail clients, databases, hardware platforms etc into a vertically
    stacked monoculture too.

    Frankly these "diversity is too hard" complaints tend to come from the
    Microsoft camp where interoperability is deliberately made difficult -
    that was Schneiers main point. If open standards were more widely
    supported, things would be a lot easier.

    The report was pointing out global problems that people should be more
    aware of. In my opinion it shouldn't be taken as a specific set of steps
    for individual companies to address - I reckon it was a useful awareness
    raiser.

    And before anybody claims I'm a Linux freak, I do have MS certs and set up
    and manage Windows networks. And if MS promoted interoperability and open
    standards more I wouldn't have any problem with them at all. I use Linux
    myself out of choice, but I don't try to ram it down others throats. I
    also think W2K is a good OS, and SQL Server 2000 is a great product -
    conversely I think IE and Outlook aren't. But I would like to see more
    diversity and open standards out there rather than defacto 'choices'.

    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Oct 7, 2003
    #5
  6. Nathan Mercer

    m00se Guest

    Nathan Mercer wrote:

    > Shall I just go and hide under a rock and let the Linux nutters go at it by
    > themselves then?



    Take Bill with you too please.
    m00se, Oct 8, 2003
    #6
  7. Nathan Mercer

    T.N.O. Guest

    "m00se" wrote
    > > Shall I just go and hide under a rock and let the Linux nutters go at it

    by
    > > themselves then?


    > Take Bill with you too please.


    Bill who?
    T.N.O., Oct 8, 2003
    #7
  8. Nathan Mercer

    steve Guest

    Nathan Mercer allegedly said:

    > Shall I just go and hide under a rock and let the Linux nutters go at it
    > by themselves then?


    No way.

    You play an important part in this newsgroup. Keep up the good work.

    (I'm serious).

    --
    defenestrate: The act of replacing Windows on your PC with some other
    operating system.
    steve, Oct 8, 2003
    #8
  9. Nathan Mercer

    ~misfit~ Guest

    "steve" <> wrote in message
    news:DQLgb.7042$...
    > Nathan Mercer allegedly said:
    >
    > > Shall I just go and hide under a rock and let the Linux nutters go at it
    > > by themselves then?

    >
    > No way.
    >
    > You play an important part in this newsgroup. Keep up the good work.
    >
    > (I'm serious).


    Agreed.
    --
    ~misfit~


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 6/10/2003
    ~misfit~, Oct 8, 2003
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Windows XP

    getting rid of error report/ dont send error report

    Windows XP, May 9, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    10,206
  2. joevan
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    841
    ImhoTech
    Jun 4, 2004
  3. Lee
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,978
  4. Bowzah

    Film vs Digital: another opinion

    Bowzah, Apr 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    53
    Views:
    1,188
    John Navas
    Apr 11, 2004
  5. jojo

    another Canon 5D opinion/review...

    jojo, Feb 24, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    253
Loading...

Share This Page