The new Federal Desktop Core Configuration standard just kicked in. This standardized configuration for government computers should help to limit some of the crazy misconfigurations we see in many government computers. For more info on the FDCC and the sister project Security Content Automated Protocol (SCAP) you can go to these web-sites:
* FDCC
* SCAP
Disregarding the fact that fear is emotional by nature, I recently engaged my students in a discussion of whether our fears are based on:
Bruce Schneier linked to an interesting factoid about the Department of Homeland Security. Seems they are funding scans of a number of open source software project codebases to check for flaws and defects. Coverity is providing the scanner and the software packages include some big ticket items...including a number of items that form the backbone of the Internet (Apache, Linux, etc). Because of the scans, over 7,000 flaws have been fixed to date. The comments by the readers are pretty insightful. I posted my own comment in the mix, just for good measure.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/02/a_good_security.html
eWeek.com posted a great list of 12 applications that are in common use but suffer from an assortment of vulnerabilities. The list has some applications that will surprise you. Don't be surprised that Internet Explorer is not on the list...for good or bad, they do have a reason.
Chalmer
For the astute readers who are looking for a future in expert testimony or may be pursuing to advance your career, some words of advice: be cautious about what you post online in online forums, especially about what questions you ask. During expert testimony, if the opposing counsel can't discredit your facts, they will attempt to discredit you. One method that has been used to do this is to Google your online activity and then try to use that against you. For example, if you post a perfectly innocent question early on in your career that any skilled professional should know the answer to, the opposing counsel can try to make you out to be a bumbling fool.
An associate of mine, in the forensics field, uses several online identities to bolster and protect his reputation. He uses his "professional identity" to answer other newbies' questions and present himself as an expert in the field and he uses his "throw away identities" to ask questions.
Chalmer
Very interesting tool that helps show how subjects are linked with other subjects on the web. This is particularly useful for seeing how people are characterized on the web.
Try TouchGraph and see for yourself.
Chalmer
This article from CBS News outlines the potential for malicious code to be found in online media sources, such as the video files served up by YouTube and similar video websites.
The take home message here is not so much that videos are getting corrupted...we knew that it was only a matter of time. The real story is the focus on how creative and ingenius the cracker community is at spreading their malware.
Chalmer
Interesting article: Going Undercover in the Slimy World of Phishing in eWeek, that describes the criminal business of phishing.
Don't doubt that cyber crime is big business.
Chalmer
Interesting podcast on eWeek.com about IcePack, a hacking toolkit and the spread of hacking tool kits in general.
Some points that stuck out to me include:
* the value associated with malware...meaning the money that people will spend to buy malware
* the interplay between hackers in the community, who buy a toolkit and then modify it to spy on the hackers that they sell or give it to
* the growth in the malware industry in general
Chalmer
