In a bit of fun and interesting timing it turns out I’ll be going to flocon in New Orleans this January.

Since I’ve spent the past 2-3 years doing business risk and security architecture, national sector level strategy, policy, etc….but now find myself getting into the technical details of building a CERT (ICS-CERT, specifically)…it’s suddenly time to get more up to speed on flows and how people are using them these days (Especially since I’d previously spent most of my time with firewalls and IDS data and not netflow / SiLK stuff).

My work on and release of pkviz this past weekend has helped a bit to get me re-focused on data analysis and playing with correlation tools and methodologies, but I’m still finding it odd going back to my earlier technology-centric security role  – which I’d thought I’d given up.  My head space has to be completely different than it was and I have to work around what some have called my fatalistic belief that technical security measures and analysis are doomed to fail in the face of our complete lack of interest in doing business risk architectures.

What scares me a little, though, is when I’ve been talking to people and doing research lately, it seems the state of the art of IDS, Flows, SEMS, SIEMS, network data analysis, etc. hasn’t changed all that much in the past few years. More vendors have sold more products, but they still do the same (questionable) things it seems. What gives? Am I off base?

Still, I’m pretty excited to get back into this type of thing and about the con. Who’s going to be there?

I heard something
You then have a moment just to stretch the sound and fit a fixed point
When I did this I suddenly realised that the lights had stopped
In fact
He had stopped
And even though I held onto the thin metal rods
And screamed
It could not, would not, bring him back.
If I could go back I would change history, break the infinite paths and talk him out of it
Such an honour has left this earth
And when colour is dominant and risk, like fragile veins fades, my eyes remain
For
Ever fixed on a hybrid view
A smile and a gash in the head
Glued in my retina memories
Like the holding of a new hand and a person turning into the invisible corner
I feel like I am stepping into a private scene
Uninvited and yet the obvious guest
At best
I also jump and together we lie burdened by little except the weight of the sky.

http://keenertechnologies.com (808) 792-7530 Hawaii security systems can range from residential to commercial and government in complexity, but regardless of your requirements, always choose quality equipment and service. Tom Keener shows some of the intergrated security equipment installed at DR Fortress, one of the more security concious businesses in Hawaii. Check out iris recognition access control units along with digital ccd cameras, intrusion detection and other integrated systems.

With Election Day nearing, the pollsters are calling my home like crazy. It?s like a game every time the phone rings. Who?s next? I even got a call this week from a company inquiring about my knowledge of fake finger nails. Turns out I have no such knowledge. Do I wear them? No. How do I feel about the statement, ?Fake fingernails can be classy?? Strongly disagree. (I know that makes me an anomaly among New Jersey women, but Adriana from The Sopranos I?m not.)

It?s the pollster that got away, however, that?s haunting me. I came home to a voice mail the other day from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). Contrary to what the name might lead you to believe, it is actually not pro-marriage but pro-heterosexual marriage. I know because I was intrigued enough by the cheery message to go to the Web site. Apparently NOM is working on voter outreach in New Jersey and, well, it certainly brought the thrust of the anti-same-sex marriage movement more into focus for this voter.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am single and heterosexual. I have nothing against marriage, but do believe way too many people think it?s some kind of prize instead of a sacred institution. I have coached some of those people. That said, how I would have loved to have had that conversation with NOM. It might have gone something like this:

NOM: Ma?am, how do you feel about this ?suggested talking point? taken straight from our Web site?

Do we want to teach the next generation that one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant? Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let?s not confuse them further.

Me: News flash, sir. Allowing two people of the same sex to marry isn?t going to make a hoot of difference to heterosexual children. But it will greatly improve the emotional and legal lives of gay children. Sorry to be the one to drop the big news, but yes, many of you who oppose gay rights have gay children whose health and self-esteem will be compromised by your lack of openness to their sexuality. Perpetuating a societal stigma that will not only affect your gay child, but those who he or she chooses to be in love relationships with, is kind of despicable, isn?t it?

NOM: Ma?am? I was just asking if you strongly agree or strongly disagree.

Me: I believe you insinuated yourself and your organization into my home this evening, so do you want my opinion or not?

NOM: Yes, ma?am. But ?

Me: You know, you have me reminiscing about when I was a kid. Back in high school, there wasn?t a law in the land that could convince me to take my eyes off the sight of John Grochala?s hulking broad shoulders in swimming class. They were mesmerizing. My only ?confusion? was why my gawky self didn?t have the confidence to do anything about it. Having Ms. Smith?s marriage to Ms. Jones legally binding wasn?t going to send me to fantasies of the girl who sat next to me in history class, let alone give me ideas of marrying her.

NOM: Well, ma?am ?

Me: Truth be told, though, this is not really about the children at all, is it? It?s about some adults? discomfort with homosexuality. Because, in reality, children are already exposed to classmates who have gay parents, to gay relatives, and to gay characters in television shows and film. Today?s children are growing up more open to other cultures, religions, races and sexual preferences because they are bombarded from every direction with images of our diverse, changing world. Most of them are not resistant to it; you and the adults in your organization are.

NOM: (clears throat) If we could change direction, please, NOM would like your reaction to a few of the ?Seven Scientific Reasons Why Marriage Matters.? This is from the Catholic version. We also have Protestant and Jewish talking points.

Marriage reduces the risk of poverty for children and communities. The majority of children whose parents don?t get or stay married experience at least a year of poverty.

Me: Um, this is an argument FOR same-sex marriage. And kudos for embracing something ?scientific,? by the way.

NOM: Marriage protects children?s physical and mental health. Children whose parents get and stay married are healthier and also much less likely to suffer mental illness, including depression and teen suicide.

Me: Another argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Just living together is not the same as marriage ?Children whose parents cohabit are at increased risk for domestic violence and child abuse and neglect. Children born to parents who were just living together are also three times more likely to experience their parents? breakup by age 5.

Me: Again, a really compelling argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Parents who don?t get or stay married put children?s education at risk.Children whose parents divorced or never married have lower grade point averages, are more likely to be held back a grade, and to drop out of school. They are also less likely to end up college graduates.

Me: Holy mackerel, I?ve heard enough. Let?s get these gay people legally married already!

NOM: (sighs) Thank you for your time, ma?am.

Me: Thanks for calling. It?s been an education.

Nancy Colasurdo is a practicing life coach and freelance writer. Her Web site is www.nancola.com. Please direct all questions/comments to FOXGamePlan@gmail.com.

Home Intrusion and MarriageFranklin may make parents pay if kids do graffiti

With Election Day nearing, the pollsters are calling my home like crazy. It?s like a game every time the phone rings. Who?s next? I even got a call this week from a company inquiring about my knowledge of fake finger nails. Turns out I have no such knowledge. Do I wear them? No. How do I feel about the statement, ?Fake fingernails can be classy?? Strongly disagree. (I know that makes me an anomaly among New Jersey women, but Adriana from The Sopranos I?m not.)

It?s the pollster that got away, however, that?s haunting me. I came home to a voice mail the other day from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). Contrary to what the name might lead you to believe, it is actually not pro-marriage but pro-heterosexual marriage. I know because I was intrigued enough by the cheery message to go to the Web site. Apparently NOM is working on voter outreach in New Jersey and, well, it certainly brought the thrust of the anti-same-sex marriage movement more into focus for this voter.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am single and heterosexual. I have nothing against marriage, but do believe way too many people think it?s some kind of prize instead of a sacred institution. I have coached some of those people. That said, how I would have loved to have had that conversation with NOM. It might have gone something like this:

NOM: Ma?am, how do you feel about this ?suggested talking point? taken straight from our Web site?

Do we want to teach the next generation that one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant? Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let?s not confuse them further.

Me: News flash, sir. Allowing two people of the same sex to marry isn?t going to make a hoot of difference to heterosexual children. But it will greatly improve the emotional and legal lives of gay children. Sorry to be the one to drop the big news, but yes, many of you who oppose gay rights have gay children whose health and self-esteem will be compromised by your lack of openness to their sexuality. Perpetuating a societal stigma that will not only affect your gay child, but those who he or she chooses to be in love relationships with, is kind of despicable, isn?t it?

NOM: Ma?am? I was just asking if you strongly agree or strongly disagree.

Me: I believe you insinuated yourself and your organization into my home this evening, so do you want my opinion or not?

NOM: Yes, ma?am. But ?

Me: You know, you have me reminiscing about when I was a kid. Back in high school, there wasn?t a law in the land that could convince me to take my eyes off the sight of John Grochala?s hulking broad shoulders in swimming class. They were mesmerizing. My only ?confusion? was why my gawky self didn?t have the confidence to do anything about it. Having Ms. Smith?s marriage to Ms. Jones legally binding wasn?t going to send me to fantasies of the girl who sat next to me in history class, let alone give me ideas of marrying her.

NOM: Well, ma?am ?

Me: Truth be told, though, this is not really about the children at all, is it? It?s about some adults? discomfort with homosexuality. Because, in reality, children are already exposed to classmates who have gay parents, to gay relatives, and to gay characters in television shows and film. Today?s children are growing up more open to other cultures, religions, races and sexual preferences because they are bombarded from every direction with images of our diverse, changing world. Most of them are not resistant to it; you and the adults in your organization are.

NOM: (clears throat) If we could change direction, please, NOM would like your reaction to a few of the ?Seven Scientific Reasons Why Marriage Matters.? This is from the Catholic version. We also have Protestant and Jewish talking points.

Marriage reduces the risk of poverty for children and communities. The majority of children whose parents don?t get or stay married experience at least a year of poverty.

Me: Um, this is an argument FOR same-sex marriage. And kudos for embracing something ?scientific,? by the way.

NOM: Marriage protects children?s physical and mental health. Children whose parents get and stay married are healthier and also much less likely to suffer mental illness, including depression and teen suicide.

Me: Another argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Just living together is not the same as marriage ?Children whose parents cohabit are at increased risk for domestic violence and child abuse and neglect. Children born to parents who were just living together are also three times more likely to experience their parents? breakup by age 5.

Me: Again, a really compelling argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Parents who don?t get or stay married put children?s education at risk.Children whose parents divorced or never married have lower grade point averages, are more likely to be held back a grade, and to drop out of school. They are also less likely to end up college graduates.

Me: Holy mackerel, I?ve heard enough. Let?s get these gay people legally married already!

NOM: (sighs) Thank you for your time, ma?am.

Me: Thanks for calling. It?s been an education.

Nancy Colasurdo is a practicing life coach and freelance writer. Her Web site is www.nancola.com. Please direct all questions/comments to FOXGamePlan@gmail.com.

Franklin may make parents pay if kids do graffitiHome Intrusion and Marriage

With Election Day nearing, the pollsters are calling my home like crazy. It?s like a game every time the phone rings. Who?s next? I even got a call this week from a company inquiring about my knowledge of fake finger nails. Turns out I have no such knowledge. Do I wear them? No. How do I feel about the statement, ?Fake fingernails can be classy?? Strongly disagree. (I know that makes me an anomaly among New Jersey women, but Adriana from The Sopranos I?m not.)

It?s the pollster that got away, however, that?s haunting me. I came home to a voice mail the other day from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). Contrary to what the name might lead you to believe, it is actually not pro-marriage but pro-heterosexual marriage. I know because I was intrigued enough by the cheery message to go to the Web site. Apparently NOM is working on voter outreach in New Jersey and, well, it certainly brought the thrust of the anti-same-sex marriage movement more into focus for this voter.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am single and heterosexual. I have nothing against marriage, but do believe way too many people think it?s some kind of prize instead of a sacred institution. I have coached some of those people. That said, how I would have loved to have had that conversation with NOM. It might have gone something like this:

NOM: Ma?am, how do you feel about this ?suggested talking point? taken straight from our Web site?

Do we want to teach the next generation that one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant? Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let?s not confuse them further.

Me: News flash, sir. Allowing two people of the same sex to marry isn?t going to make a hoot of difference to heterosexual children. But it will greatly improve the emotional and legal lives of gay children. Sorry to be the one to drop the big news, but yes, many of you who oppose gay rights have gay children whose health and self-esteem will be compromised by your lack of openness to their sexuality. Perpetuating a societal stigma that will not only affect your gay child, but those who he or she chooses to be in love relationships with, is kind of despicable, isn?t it?

NOM: Ma?am? I was just asking if you strongly agree or strongly disagree.

Me: I believe you insinuated yourself and your organization into my home this evening, so do you want my opinion or not?

NOM: Yes, ma?am. But ?

Me: You know, you have me reminiscing about when I was a kid. Back in high school, there wasn?t a law in the land that could convince me to take my eyes off the sight of John Grochala?s hulking broad shoulders in swimming class. They were mesmerizing. My only ?confusion? was why my gawky self didn?t have the confidence to do anything about it. Having Ms. Smith?s marriage to Ms. Jones legally binding wasn?t going to send me to fantasies of the girl who sat next to me in history class, let alone give me ideas of marrying her.

NOM: Well, ma?am ?

Me: Truth be told, though, this is not really about the children at all, is it? It?s about some adults? discomfort with homosexuality. Because, in reality, children are already exposed to classmates who have gay parents, to gay relatives, and to gay characters in television shows and film. Today?s children are growing up more open to other cultures, religions, races and sexual preferences because they are bombarded from every direction with images of our diverse, changing world. Most of them are not resistant to it; you and the adults in your organization are.

NOM: (clears throat) If we could change direction, please, NOM would like your reaction to a few of the ?Seven Scientific Reasons Why Marriage Matters.? This is from the Catholic version. We also have Protestant and Jewish talking points.

Marriage reduces the risk of poverty for children and communities. The majority of children whose parents don?t get or stay married experience at least a year of poverty.

Me: Um, this is an argument FOR same-sex marriage. And kudos for embracing something ?scientific,? by the way.

NOM: Marriage protects children?s physical and mental health. Children whose parents get and stay married are healthier and also much less likely to suffer mental illness, including depression and teen suicide.

Me: Another argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Just living together is not the same as marriage ?Children whose parents cohabit are at increased risk for domestic violence and child abuse and neglect. Children born to parents who were just living together are also three times more likely to experience their parents? breakup by age 5.

Me: Again, a really compelling argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Parents who don?t get or stay married put children?s education at risk.Children whose parents divorced or never married have lower grade point averages, are more likely to be held back a grade, and to drop out of school. They are also less likely to end up college graduates.

Me: Holy mackerel, I?ve heard enough. Let?s get these gay people legally married already!

NOM: (sighs) Thank you for your time, ma?am.

Me: Thanks for calling. It?s been an education.

Nancy Colasurdo is a practicing life coach and freelance writer. Her Web site is www.nancola.com. Please direct all questions/comments to FOXGamePlan@gmail.com.

Franklin may make parents pay if kids do graffitiHome Intrusion and Marriage

With Election Day nearing, the pollsters are calling my home like crazy. It?s like a game every time the phone rings. Who?s next? I even got a call this week from a company inquiring about my knowledge of fake finger nails. Turns out I have no such knowledge. Do I wear them? No. How do I feel about the statement, ?Fake fingernails can be classy?? Strongly disagree. (I know that makes me an anomaly among New Jersey women, but Adriana from The Sopranos I?m not.)

It?s the pollster that got away, however, that?s haunting me. I came home to a voice mail the other day from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). Contrary to what the name might lead you to believe, it is actually not pro-marriage but pro-heterosexual marriage. I know because I was intrigued enough by the cheery message to go to the Web site. Apparently NOM is working on voter outreach in New Jersey and, well, it certainly brought the thrust of the anti-same-sex marriage movement more into focus for this voter.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am single and heterosexual. I have nothing against marriage, but do believe way too many people think it?s some kind of prize instead of a sacred institution. I have coached some of those people. That said, how I would have loved to have had that conversation with NOM. It might have gone something like this:

NOM: Ma?am, how do you feel about this ?suggested talking point? taken straight from our Web site?

Do we want to teach the next generation that one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant? Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let?s not confuse them further.

Me: News flash, sir. Allowing two people of the same sex to marry isn?t going to make a hoot of difference to heterosexual children. But it will greatly improve the emotional and legal lives of gay children. Sorry to be the one to drop the big news, but yes, many of you who oppose gay rights have gay children whose health and self-esteem will be compromised by your lack of openness to their sexuality. Perpetuating a societal stigma that will not only affect your gay child, but those who he or she chooses to be in love relationships with, is kind of despicable, isn?t it?

NOM: Ma?am? I was just asking if you strongly agree or strongly disagree.

Me: I believe you insinuated yourself and your organization into my home this evening, so do you want my opinion or not?

NOM: Yes, ma?am. But ?

Me: You know, you have me reminiscing about when I was a kid. Back in high school, there wasn?t a law in the land that could convince me to take my eyes off the sight of John Grochala?s hulking broad shoulders in swimming class. They were mesmerizing. My only ?confusion? was why my gawky self didn?t have the confidence to do anything about it. Having Ms. Smith?s marriage to Ms. Jones legally binding wasn?t going to send me to fantasies of the girl who sat next to me in history class, let alone give me ideas of marrying her.

NOM: Well, ma?am ?

Me: Truth be told, though, this is not really about the children at all, is it? It?s about some adults? discomfort with homosexuality. Because, in reality, children are already exposed to classmates who have gay parents, to gay relatives, and to gay characters in television shows and film. Today?s children are growing up more open to other cultures, religions, races and sexual preferences because they are bombarded from every direction with images of our diverse, changing world. Most of them are not resistant to it; you and the adults in your organization are.

NOM: (clears throat) If we could change direction, please, NOM would like your reaction to a few of the ?Seven Scientific Reasons Why Marriage Matters.? This is from the Catholic version. We also have Protestant and Jewish talking points.

Marriage reduces the risk of poverty for children and communities. The majority of children whose parents don?t get or stay married experience at least a year of poverty.

Me: Um, this is an argument FOR same-sex marriage. And kudos for embracing something ?scientific,? by the way.

NOM: Marriage protects children?s physical and mental health. Children whose parents get and stay married are healthier and also much less likely to suffer mental illness, including depression and teen suicide.

Me: Another argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Just living together is not the same as marriage ?Children whose parents cohabit are at increased risk for domestic violence and child abuse and neglect. Children born to parents who were just living together are also three times more likely to experience their parents? breakup by age 5.

Me: Again, a really compelling argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Parents who don?t get or stay married put children?s education at risk.Children whose parents divorced or never married have lower grade point averages, are more likely to be held back a grade, and to drop out of school. They are also less likely to end up college graduates.

Me: Holy mackerel, I?ve heard enough. Let?s get these gay people legally married already!

NOM: (sighs) Thank you for your time, ma?am.

Me: Thanks for calling. It?s been an education.

Nancy Colasurdo is a practicing life coach and freelance writer. Her Web site is www.nancola.com. Please direct all questions/comments to FOXGamePlan@gmail.com.

Franklin may make parents pay if kids do graffitiHome Intrusion and Marriage

With Election Day nearing, the pollsters are calling my home like crazy. It’s like a game every time the phone rings. Who’s next? I even got a call this week from a company inquiring about my knowledge of fake finger nails. Turns out I have no such knowledge. Do I wear them? No. How do I feel about the statement, ‘Fake fingernails can be classy’? Strongly disagree. (I know that makes me an anomaly among New Jersey women, but Adriana from The Sopranos I’m not.)

It’s the pollster that got away, however, that’s haunting me. I came home to a voice mail the other day from the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). Contrary to what the name might lead you to believe, it is actually not pro-marriage but pro-heterosexual marriage. I know because I was intrigued enough by the cheery message to go to the Web site. Apparently NOM is working on voter outreach in New Jersey and, well, it certainly brought the thrust of the anti-same-sex marriage movement more into focus for this voter.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am single and heterosexual. I have nothing against marriage, but do believe way too many people think it’s some kind of prize instead of a sacred institution. I have coached some of those people. That said, how I would have loved to have had that conversation with NOM. It might have gone something like this:

NOM: Ma’am, how do you feel about this ‘suggested talking point’ taken straight from our Web site?

Do we want to teach the next generation that one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant? Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let’s not confuse them further.

Me: News flash, sir. Allowing two people of the same sex to marry isn’t going to make a hoot of difference to heterosexual children. But it will greatly improve the emotional and legal lives of gay children. Sorry to be the one to drop the big news, but yes, many of you who oppose gay rights have gay children whose health and self-esteem will be compromised by your lack of openness to their sexuality. Perpetuating a societal stigma that will not only affect your gay child, but those who he or she chooses to be in love relationships with, is kind of despicable, isn’t it?

NOM: Ma’am? I was just asking if you strongly agree or strongly disagree.

Me: I believe you insinuated yourself and your organization into my home this evening, so do you want my opinion or not?

NOM: Yes, ma’am. But …

Me: You know, you have me reminiscing about when I was a kid. Back in high school, there wasn’t a law in the land that could convince me to take my eyes off the sight of John Grochala’s hulking broad shoulders in swimming class. They were mesmerizing. My only “confusion” was why my gawky self didn’t have the confidence to do anything about it. Having Ms. Smith’s marriage to Ms. Jones legally binding wasn’t going to send me to fantasies of the girl who sat next to me in history class, let alone give me ideas of marrying her.

NOM: Well, ma’am …

Me: Truth be told, though, this is not really about the children at all, is it? It’s about some adults’ discomfort with homosexuality. Because, in reality, children are already exposed to classmates who have gay parents, to gay relatives, and to gay characters in television shows and film. Today’s children are growing up more open to other cultures, religions, races and sexual preferences because they are bombarded from every direction with images of our diverse, changing world. Most of them are not resistant to it; you and the adults in your organization are.

NOM: (clears throat) If we could change direction, please, NOM would like your reaction to a few of the “Seven Scientific Reasons Why Marriage Matters.” This is from the Catholic version. We also have Protestant and Jewish talking points.

Marriage reduces the risk of poverty for children and communities. The majority of children whose parents don’t get or stay married experience at least a year of poverty.

Me: Um, this is an argument FOR same-sex marriage. And kudos for embracing something “scientific,” by the way.

NOM: Marriage protects children’s physical and mental health. Children whose parents get and stay married are healthier and also much less likely to suffer mental illness, including depression and teen suicide.

Me: Another argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Just living together is not the same as marriage …Children whose parents cohabit are at increased risk for domestic violence and child abuse and neglect. Children born to parents who were just living together are also three times more likely to experience their parents’ breakup by age 5.

Me: Again, a really compelling argument FOR same-sex marriage.

NOM: Parents who don’t get or stay married put children’s education at risk.Children whose parents divorced or never married have lower grade point averages, are more likely to be held back a grade, and to drop out of school. They are also less likely to end up college graduates.

Me: Holy mackerel, I’ve heard enough. Let’s get these gay people legally married already!

NOM: (sighs) Thank you for your time, ma’am.

Me: Thanks for calling. It’s been an education.

Nancy Colasurdo is a practicing life coach and freelance writer. Her Web site is www.nancola.com. Please direct all questions/comments to FOXGamePlan@gmail.com.

This story just wont go away..

Last Wednesday this appeared in the clouds above Moscow

The official explanation is that :

 ” Several fronts have been passing through Moscow recently, there was an intrusion of the Arctic air too, the sun was shining from the west – this is how the effect was produced.”

I prefer this little gem i found in a comment section somewhere:

“its a giant celestial bung hole”

Ha… here’s the video incase you havn’t seen it.

Why does sh*t like this never happen in Cape Town.

…if you go to Old Holborn and read this stuff.

David Davis

Once again, patching isn’t just about plugging holes in Windows.  Most if not all applications have security vulnerabilities if someone looks hard enough.  Up until now, however, finding those vulnerabilities was harder than just whacking the OS.  But Microsoft has settled into a patch release routine that, when followed, pretty well hardens servers and user workstations.  And although there are still vulnerabilities, the level of effort required to find and exploit them has become harder—more difficult than shifting focus to widely installed user applications.

Adobe is experiencing attacker-love now.  They are a good target because their reader is everywhere. 

Adobe’s software has increasingly come under attack in recent years as hackers have come to realize that it can be easier to find flaws in popular software that runs on top of Windows than to dig up new vulnerabilities in the operating system itself.

That’s led to a round of new attacks that exploit bugs in products such as Adobe’s Reader, Apple’s QuickTime, and the Mozilla Firefox browser, for example.

It’s a reality that Adobe Chief Technology Officer Kevin Lynch freely acknowledged Monday in a press conference at the company’s annual Adobe MAX developer conference, held in Los Angeles.

Source:  After attacks, Adobe patches now come faster, Robert McMillan, Computerworld, 6 October 2009

But Adobe isn’t the only end user application on your endpoints.  It’s critical to get ahead of the attack curve by developing an overall patch process today, BEFORE that new user productivity tool becomes a target.

The IBM Institute for Business Value has a new study out suggesting that the traditional intrusive, one-to-many advertising model is dying, to be replaced by interactive, one-to-one ad formats. Executive summary here.

The next 5 years will hold more change for the advertising industry than
the previous 50 did. Increasingly empowered consumers, more self-reliant
advertisers and ever-evolving technologies are redefining how advertising is
sold, created, consumed and tracked. Our research points to four evolving
future scenarios – and the catalysts that will be driving them. Traditional
advertising players – broadcasters, distributors and advertising agencies
– may get squeezed unless they can successfully implement consumer,
business model and business design innovation.

As the pithy Lisa Hickey says, “Today, brands are judged by the quality of their conversation. Brands are people, and people are brands.”

A recent statistic I read stated that over 70% (SEVENTY PERCENT) of new infections come from surfing to legitimate sites that are infected. A recent case was the New York Times (full story here):

Here’s a front-page story the New York Times (NYT) would rather not be running: The paper is warning readers to be aware of bogus ads running on its Web site. The paper says “some readers” have seen unauthorized pop-up ads promoting antivirus software on NYTimes.com, and warns visitors who see the ad not to click on it but to restart their browsers instead. While the Times doesn’t spell this out, the newspaper has likely had its site hijacked by a “malware” scammer who is trying to trick visitors into installing pernicious software onto their hard drives

Thus, to get infected, it is perfectly enough to just hit your legitimate web sites. You do not have to browse to any questionable content anymore to get compromised.

In light of this, lots of people have been asking me what in my opinion is to reliably secure a Windows machine and protect it from the threats that are out there – viruses, worms, trojans, etc.

I recommend multiple layers of defense to be setup on a Windows machine. Below items are listed in order of importance, highest listed first.

1. Keep your Windows machine current with the latest patches.
Ensure that Windows Update is turned on and configured to automatically download and install patches. Make sure that when you put your machine into standby mode (instead of turning it off every day), that you pay attention to whether patches need to be installed and the machine need to be rebooted. I encounter a lot of installations that never get turned off, where the patches never get installed (although they are downloaded and ready to go).

2. Install a Anti-virus scanner.
This can be one of the big names out there: AVG (free), Norton, Trend Micro, McAfee. Get one of their package offerings that include phishing protection, link scanning, encrypted password storage. DO NOT BELIEVE that this is the only thing you need. Although they want to make you think that this is all you ever need, it is not true. Even the best AV scanners cannot keep up with the ever-changing strains of viruses that are out there (strains change hundreds or even thousands of times a day), therefore you need to have multiple layers of scanners to get a higher rate of protection.

Make sure that the ‘auto-protect’ features are turned on, i.e. the AV scanner runs ‘resident’ in memory. That means that live protection is turned on and viruses do not make it through.

IMPORTANT: YOU STILL NEED TO DO WEEKLY FULL SYSTEM SCANS.

Some people believe that they can leave auto-protect on but never scan their systems. The caveat with this is that auto-protect may miss a new strain of a virus and let it through. While the signatures get updated, auto-protect never detects it.

Therefore, a scan then may find it, but you need to make sure to run these scans.

Product-wise, I have been using Norton Internet Security for a long time, but I will let the license expire and try out a different AV scanner next year. Norton has disappointed me recently with the failure rate it has, i.e. viruses that do not get caught by it. Ideally, you use at least 2 different virus scanners, but this may get costly if you are looking to purchase solutions.

I am currently trying out the new Microsoft Essentials ‘AV and Malware’ scanner that was released on 9/30/09. I believe that AV and Malware protection should be free and included in a Operating System, but the MS AV scanner still may need some tuning to be comparable to any $$- solution.

3. Install a separate Malware scanner. This is important.

You NEED to have a backup scanner to whatever AV solution you are using. This increases the rate of detection and your total exposure significantly.

I recommend Malwarebytes’ Anti-Malware for this. It has worked well for me. There is a freeware and a commercial version for it. The major difference between the freeware and the paid version is that in the free version you have to run manual scans and it does not run in the background protecting you from new threats. I recommend you spend the $25 and purchase it. It is worth it. The interface is simple and structured in a no-nonsense kind of way, focusing on scanning, updating its database and showing you results of the last scans.

If you do not want to shell out the money to buy the full version, I recommend you use the Windows Task Scheduler to run this software daily to update the database and at least weekly to do a full scan of your system. It supports command-line arguments. Shoot me an email at info (AT) gansec.com if you want to have instructions on how to do that.

4. Install Secunia Personal Inspector to keep your applications up to date

Install Secunia PSI to keep your third party applications (Adobe PDF Reader, Flash Player, Shockwave, Real Audio Player, any other stuff you use besides Microsoft Software) current. It scans your system and matches it up with an always current database of new versions for the applications you use. It is an extremely handy tool that you will not want to miss once you get used to it. You would not believe how many third party applications can severely compromise your system security if exploits are used against vulnerabilities that they have (example). Secunia PSI is Freeware.

5. Install a firewall on your Windows machine.

This usually comes with Windows (Windows Firewall) or with one of the ‘Internet Suites’ of the commercial AV vendors. This is to block annoying connection attempts, Malware that tries to communicate outbound across other ports than your standard web port (80), potential inbound hacking attempts. Make sure it is enabled. When you first enable a firewall you may have to permit standard ports (e.g. outbound Web for iexplore.exe, firefox.exe, etc), but this will settle down after the initial turn-up. Yes, it is extra work, but you need to invest it.

6. Keep backups.

Keep backups of your Windows installation. You can burn the data on DVDs or external storage solutions. If you would like to look into external storage (especially important if you own a small business), I recommend Netgears’ ReadyNAS storage solution: About $1K for a fully redundant 1 TeraByte of storage. It is extremely trivial to setup (takes about 10 minutes to configure it to be ready for backups from the time you turn it on). Data will not be lost on this one.

These are 6 simple steps to get going on Windows Security. It takes some work to get there, but believe me, it beats the ‘man, my system is lost because of infections, I lost my documents, my bank account information got stolen and people write checks in my name via my Online-Banking access‘ by far.

- Sven Olensky.

The door from the inner sanctum of the doctors’ offices opened and the nurse spoke.

            “James?”

That was it.  Was that a first name?  A last name?  Nobody moved.

I got up and went over to the nurse.

            “I’m James…”

            In a whisper the nurse interrupted to ask, “Wagner?”

            “Yes,” I replied.  With that, I was ushered to an examining room inside.

            I asked why the whispering.  The nurse explained that a new HIPPA regulation.  The doctors’ offices must photocopy both a patient’s insurance card and photo i.d. and return them in the examing room, after verifying that the person matches the photo i.d.  Once done, the insurance card and photo i.d. are returned to the patient.

            As for the waiting room, the staff are no longer permitted to say a patient’s last name.  There is even a reminder on the inside of the door reminding staff to say only the patient’s first name.

            Why?  To protect a patient’s privacy.  Someone named James had been called two patients before me.  Had I realized what was going on, I would have responded then and let the nurse sort it out – except it isn’t the nurse’s fault that the policy is so screwy.  Or perhaps next time, a bit of civil disobedience.  She will speak my first name, and I will respond for all to hear, “Is that James Wagner?”

             Or perhaps we should lobby Congress that even uttering our first name is too much an invasion of privacy.  Perhaps a bar code tattooed in the palm of one’s hand?

            Carried too far, good ideas become ridiculous.  HIPPA may have crossed the line.

For the the average non-political person taking a look around the Libertarian blog world can be one hell of a eye-opener into another world or domestic political view.
From the politically paranoid and bizarre through to those with well thought-out argument. It is sad that the bizarre seem to be getting the upper hand. It is also sad that many supposed Libertarians, whilst rightly condemning much of what the UK Labour Government have done to undermine freedom in the UK, are also intent on forgetting the former Tory Gov’t and it’s own dogmatic intrusion into private lives, use of police as storm troopers, attacks on different lifestyles and attacks on those that it perceived were not conforming.
I think we need to explain ourselves, our ideas need to be matched by reasoned argument not paranoia. We need to show people we are not of the right or the left, but Libertarian. Our arguments and ideas are good enough on their own!

Echoes swirl
Through hallowed
Halls

Bouncing off doors
Inside my
soul

Meaningless words
Wrapped in
Illusion

A singular voice
Bent on spiritual
Intrusion

Bolt the door
Against his
Dark

Shut my eyes
Seek thy
Light

http://twitter.com/mejiamiguel
http://twitter.com/foroseguridad

O deja tus inquietudes en este blog, para ser abordadas oportunamente

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/18/sjc_oks_secret_use_of_gps_devices/

Palin Addresses Asian Investors
Former Governor Touches on Budget Deficit, Health Care and China
Source: WallStreet Journal

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, in what was billed as her first public-speaking engagement outside North America, blamed the world financial crisis on government excesses and called for a new round of deregulation and tax cuts for U.S. businesses.

“We got into this mess because of government interference in the first place,” the former Republican U.S. vice presidential candidate said Wednesday at a conference sponsored by investment firm CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets. “We’re not interested in government fixes, we’re interested in freedom,” she added.

On the foreign-policy front, she told the room full of bankers and executives of the importance of the global fight against terrorism and of finding ways to engage China as a global power. She said China “rightfully makes a lot of people nervous.”

Her speech marks an effort to reach out to an international audience and define her political identity since resigning from office earlier this year. Ms. Palin is among a handful of high-profile Republicans seeking a path back to power for a party that lost control of both houses of Congress and White House in last year’s U.S. elections.

Ms. Palin’s address, which drew strong applause at the end, was officially closed to the media. The Wall Street Journal reviewed a recording of the speech.

In the wide-ranging address, Ms. Palin touched on the rising U.S. budget deficit, the debate over a proposed health-care overhaul, the war in Afghanistan and China’s role in world affairs.

She described her political philosophy as a “common-sense conservatism,” and said the free-market policies of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher should be guides for how to get out of the current economic situation. “Liberalism holds that there is no human problem that government can’t fix if only the right people are put in charge,” she said.

She’s absolutely right. It took Reagan to fix the damage done by Carter. Can anyone name ONE problem that FREE CITIZENS, such as Americans, have faced that has been fixed by the government? Wait; let me rephrase that… Can anyone name ONE problem that Americans have faced that have SUCCESSFULLY been fixed by the government?

Ms. Palin didn’t refer to President Barack Obama by name, but said his promise for change during the election hasn’t taken hold. She called his campaign promises “nebulous, utopian sounding…Now 10 months later, though, a lot of Americans are asking: more government? Is that the change we want?“

In an echo of last year’s presidential campaign, she criticized government policies that result in what she called a redistribution of wealth. “There is no justice in taking from one person and giving to another,” she said. “History shows it simply does not work.”

And she’s absolutely RIGHT. At the risk of hurting BHussein’s pride, I’m going to bust out the good ol’ dictionary.

Theft
In the criminal law, theft (also known as stealing) is the illegal taking of another person’s property without that person’s freely-given consent. As a term, it is used as shorthand for all major crimes against property, encompassing offenses such as burglary, embezzlement, larceny, looting, robbery, mugging, trespassing, shoplifting, intrusion, fraud (theft by deception) and sometimes criminal conversion. In some jurisdictions, theft is considered to be synonymous with larceny; in others, theft has replaced larceny.

Ms. Palin blamed the U.S. Federal Reserve’s low interest-rate policy of previous years for setting the stage for last year’s global financial crisis. She opposed appointing the Fed as the chief overseer of systemic risk in the U.S. financial system. “The words ‘fox’ and ‘henhouse’ come to mind. The Fed’s decisions have created the bubble,” she said.

She called for tax cuts as well as the elimination of the capital-gains and estate tax. Then, she said, the world will “watch the U.S. economy roar back to life.”

Yeah, It’ll roar back to life; as soon as BHussein Obama is taken care of and his idiocy has been wiped clean. It wasn’t easy to clean the remains of the poopie diaper that was Jimmy Carter; and BHussein is TEN TIMES POOPIER than Carter.

On health care, Ms. Palin defended her previous criticisms that the health-care overhaul proposed by Democrats would lead to health-care rationing and what she called “death panels.” “It’s just common sense that government attempts to solve problems like health care problem will just create new problems.” She called for “market friendly” health care reform that gives tax breaks to individuals to buy health insurance.

God. It’s refreshing to see someone in the public eye that’s actually PROUD of their country. One that doesn’t feel like America is the biggest sack of shit on the face of the Earth. One that understands freedoms, individual liberties, our God given rights, and that government interference isn’t the answer – and the more government gets involved in our every day lives, the less freedoms we HAVE.

She acknowledged the economic rise of both China and India but called for a vision of Asia in which no one country would dominate.

“We all hope to see a China that is stable and peaceful and prosperous,” she said. But she added that the U.S. must work with Asian allies in case “China goes in a different direction.”

She said greater political openness in China could help soothe tensions. “Many believed that with China liberalizing its economy, greater political freedom would follow, but that hasn’t happened,“ she said. “The more open [China] is, the less we’ll be concerned about its military buildup and its intentions.”

On U.S.-China trade relations, Ms. Palin called for more openness and warned against protectionism. “We need China to improve its rule of law, and protect our intellectual property,” she said. “On our part, we should be more open to Chinese investment where our national security interests are not threatened.”

She talked about the recent protests of ethnic minority Muslim Uighurs, Chinese labor conditions, and Tibet. Ms. Palin mentioned Charter 08, a document signed by prominent academics and dissidents calling for greater democracy and openness in China.

In other areas, she criticized Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for speaking skeptically about the need for more troops in Afghanistan. “Afghanistan is where the 9/11 attacks were planned and if we are not successful there, al Qaeda will find a safe haven there again,“ she said.

ALalalaalalayayayaya ALL HEIL OUR LORD BHUSSEIN OBAMA. OUR MUSLIM BROTHER. HE WHO SYMPATHIZES WITH US. HE WHO LOVES ALLAH AND HE WHO WILL HELP US DESTROY AMERICA.

That’s right, I said it. BHussein Obama LOVES the terrorist Muslims. He frees them from GITMO and gives them a life of luxury and paradise in Bermuda on OUR DIME, after they massacred THREE THOUSAND of our American brothers – and he constantly puts our American troops in danger. He slobs terrorist Muslim knob, and he does it with a smile on his face.

Ms. Palin warmed up the crowd with her impressions of Hong Kong, one of the densest urban areas in the world. “The wildlife-to-human ratio is different from Alaska, but I could get used to it,” she said.

She also spoke about how Alaska once shared a land bridge with Asia. And she noted that her husband’s Eskimo ancestors crossed that bridge. “To consider that connection that allowed sharing of peoples and bloodlines and wildlife and flora and fauna, that connection to me is quite fascinating,” she said.

Melvin Goodé, a 49-year-old New York-based property consultant who attended the speech, said he voted for Mr. Obama in last year’s election but was curious to hear what Ms. Palin had to say. He shrugged his shoulders when asked his thoughts on the speech but said that she generally did all right, given that she “wasn’t supposed to know anything about the continent.” “Now, let’s see what the critics say,” he said.

Her critics are the worst. She hasn’t done ANYTHING wrong, her ideas are solid, majority of Americans support her pro-life, pro-freedom beliefs. She knows who she is, she knows where she stands. She is a strong woman, mother, wife, politician – and it drives the liberals crazy. What female leader in the “democratic” party is a woman who can say all of these are true for them? Hillary? Yeah, we’ll ask Monica about that. MicHELLe Obama? She’s not a leader. Nancy Pelosi? BWuuahahahaha. No, really. I laugh at your idiocy.

Well done, Sarah.

The new corporation differs from the old in both goals and basic assumptions. In the industrial era, when the strategic resource was capital, the goal of the corporation could only have been profits. In the information era, however, the strategic resource is information, knowledge, creativity. There is only one way a corporation can gain access to these valuable commodities—that is, through the people in whom these resources reside.

So the basic assumption of a re-invented company is that people—human capital—are its most important resource. What used to be one of the radicals’ favorite slogans, “People before Profits,” is finding its way into the boardroom and being transformed into a more businesslike but equally humanistic “People and Profits.”

In an information age society, human resources are any organization’s competitive edge.

One expression of the importance of human capital is the new corporate preoccupation with health and fitness. Corporations are treating their human assets with new concern, encouraging their people to stop smoking, lose weight, exercise, and learn to manage stress. What might have been considered an intrusion into one’s personal life in the past is fair game when people are a company’s strategic resource.

The new re-invernted corporations stress inordinate regard for the two most important types of people in an enterprise: employees and customers.

They have discovered that by being both pro-people and pro-profits, a company can earn more than it it had targeted profits as its only goal.

It is not a question of being nice to people. It is simply a recognition that human beings will make or break a company.

My Consultancy–Asif J. Mir - Management Consultant–transforms organizations where people have the freedom to be creative, a place that brings out the best in everybody–an open, fair place where people have a sense that what they do matters. For details please visit www.asifjmir.com, Lectures, Line of Sight