Re: [SC-L] Any software security news from the RSA conference?

2004-03-02 Thread Mark D. Rockman
Any software change is bound to inconvenience sombody.  With Microsoft, I
find the problem is not that they make changes but that they make changes
WITHOUT properly announcing them.  For example, if they do make a change and
announce it at some conference, that gets the message to some small
percentage of the people who NEED to get the message.  Grandma and her
e-mail client and pictures of her grandkids is totally clueless and possibly
hostile towards detailed change information.  I'm not grandma.  I take pride
in knowing what is going on and can do so if only I am enabled to do so.

Mark Rockman, B.S., MCP
- Original Message - 
From: Alun Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'ljknews' [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 18:58
Subject: RE: [SC-L] Any software security news from the RSA conference?


  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ljknews
  Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:51 AM
 
  You must be thinking of a different Bill Gates than the one familiar
  to me.  I am thinking of the one who announced a few years ago that
  Microsoft would stop other activities for a month and fix
  their security.

 I wonder if this is the same Bill Gates who then doubled that time off new
 development (note - he doesn't talk about security as a finished job), and
 mandates the reading of the book Writing Secure Code, amongst other
 things.

 But Bill isn't the only person at Microsoft, and it's really important
that
 a large number of people at Microsoft get it.  Bill's job, when he turns
 up to these things, is essentially to say whatever Microsoft's game plan
is,
 currently, not to impress us that he has found religion.  What's key is
the
 number of other people within Microsoft that get security.  As a
Security
 MVP, I get to spend time with some of these people, and they really do
seem
 to have a clue - I should know, I fill their inboxes with whatever my
latest
 pontifications on security are, and I read the responses I get back very
 carefully.

 Microsoft has a lot of code to contend with, and much of it is old - so a
 lot of it has had to be scrubbed clean of imperfections, and some has had
to
 be re-written.  And yet, they're actually _doing_ it.  How many people are
 howling about the decision to remove the non-RFC http format that's used
by
 so many scammers and spammers?  How many people are going to howl that
 enabling the firewall by default in SP2 makes life harder for them?
There
 are some very tough decisions being made in the right direction here, I
 think.

 Alun.
 
 -- 
 Texas Imperial Software   | Find us at http://www.wftpd.com or email
 1602 Harvest Moon Place   | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cedar Park TX 78613-1419  | WFTPD, WFTPD Pro are Windows FTP servers.
 Fax/Voice +1(512)258-9858 | Try our NEW client software, WFTPD Explorer.










RE: [SC-L] Any software security news from the RSA conference?

2004-03-01 Thread Alun Jones
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ljknews
 Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:51 AM
 
 You must be thinking of a different Bill Gates than the one familiar
 to me.  I am thinking of the one who announced a few years ago that
 Microsoft would stop other activities for a month and fix 
 their security.

I wonder if this is the same Bill Gates who then doubled that time off new
development (note - he doesn't talk about security as a finished job), and
mandates the reading of the book Writing Secure Code, amongst other
things.

But Bill isn't the only person at Microsoft, and it's really important that
a large number of people at Microsoft get it.  Bill's job, when he turns
up to these things, is essentially to say whatever Microsoft's game plan is,
currently, not to impress us that he has found religion.  What's key is the
number of other people within Microsoft that get security.  As a Security
MVP, I get to spend time with some of these people, and they really do seem
to have a clue - I should know, I fill their inboxes with whatever my latest
pontifications on security are, and I read the responses I get back very
carefully.

Microsoft has a lot of code to contend with, and much of it is old - so a
lot of it has had to be scrubbed clean of imperfections, and some has had to
be re-written.  And yet, they're actually _doing_ it.  How many people are
howling about the decision to remove the non-RFC http format that's used by
so many scammers and spammers?  How many people are going to howl that
enabling the firewall by default in SP2 makes life harder for them?  There
are some very tough decisions being made in the right direction here, I
think.

Alun.

-- 
Texas Imperial Software   | Find us at http://www.wftpd.com or email
1602 Harvest Moon Place   | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cedar Park TX 78613-1419  | WFTPD, WFTPD Pro are Windows FTP servers.
Fax/Voice +1(512)258-9858 | Try our NEW client software, WFTPD Explorer.






RE: [SC-L] Any software security news from the RSA conference?

2004-03-01 Thread ljknews
At 5:58 PM -0600 2/27/04, Alun Jones wrote:

Microsoft has a lot of code to contend with, and much of it is old - so a
lot of it has had to be scrubbed clean of imperfections, and some has had to
be re-written.

A few years ago I heard the problem described as the opposite - that for
Windows V.something about 30% of the existing code was entirely replaced
(compared to corrected), which is more than _any_ organization can handle
safely on a project of that size.






RE: [SC-L] Any software security news from the RSA conference?

2004-02-27 Thread Dave Paris
http://www.dean.usma.edu/socs/ir/ss478/General%20Gordon%20Bio.pdf

What John Gordon is doing giving a keynote at the RSA conference is utterly
and completely beyond my ability to comprehend.  If you read his bio at the
link above, you'll find he has absolutely zero background in software or
computer systems.  He's obviously a smart cookie (ex-physicist at Air Force
Weapons Lab, a stint at Sandia, etc) but he's not in any position to
authoritatively say jack sqat about software vulnerabilities - unless
there's something I'm not reading about his background.

I love his perspective though .. Sure John, it's the DEVELOPERS fault that
MANAGEMENT makes the promises and DEMANDS product be shipped two weeks
before it's even spec'd.  God, I sure do wish I had though of just spending
more time debugging when the CEO was screaming at me.. either you ship *IT*
or I ship *YOU*.  This also tells me he's completely unfamiliar with the
concept of offshore outsourcing.  psss.. hey, John .. A LOT OF THE CODE'S
NOT EVEN WRITTEN HERE, BUDDY! :-)

I'm glad I didn't go .. I would have felt cheated out of my admission fee by
hearing the blathering of someone like this.

Kind Regards (and in somewhat of a cranky mood),
-dsp

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Behalf Of Mark Curphey
 Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 7:33 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [SC-L] Any software security news from the RSA conference?


 Looks like the link I was pointing to didn't make it

 Here it is again

 http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39147413,00.htm

 And the text below

 Software makers could eliminate most current security issues if
 they only tried harder, according to a Homeland Security advisor


 An advisor to the US' Homeland Security Council has lashed out at
 software developers, arguing their failure to deliver secure code
 is responsible for most security threats.

 Retired lieutenant general John Gordon, presidential assistant
 and advisor to the Homeland Security Council, used his keynote
 address at the RSA Security conference in San Francisco on
 Wednesday to question how much effort developers are putting into
 ensuring their code is watertight. This is a problem for every
 company that writes software. It cannot be beyond our ability to
 learn how to write and distribute software with much higher
 standards of care and much reduced rate of errors and much
 reduced set of vulnerabilities, he said.

 Gordon's keynote followed a day after that of Microsoft chairman
 Bill Gates.

 According to Gordon, if developers could reduce the error and
 vulnerability rate by a factor of 10, it would probably
 eliminate something like 90 percent of the current security
 threats and vulnerabilities.

 Once we start writing and deploying secure code, every other
 problem in cybersecurity is fundamentally more manageable as we
 close off possible points of attack, he said.

 Gordon also criticised wireless network manufacturers for making
 encryption too difficult to deploy, even for technically
 competent users. He made the comments after explaining that he
 had spent a long weekend trying to set up a Wi-Fi network at his house.

 One manufacturer got to invest an entire man-day of tech support
 and about eight hours of telephone charges. At the end of the
 day, I still had not accomplished a successful installation,
 said Gordon, who eventually managed to get the network running by
 taking some steps that were not in the documentation.

 However, he said the documentation didn't make it clear how to
 secure his network: The industry needs to make it easy for users
 like me -- who are reasonably technically competent -- to employ
 solid security features and not make it so tempting to simply
 ignore security.



  Mark Curphey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I thought this was interesting. I missed it but I am sure the
 message will
  please many on this list (myself included)
 
   Bill Cheswick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   Bill Gates gave a keynote on their current approach to security, and
   the contents of SP2, due out 1H 2004.  From what I heard, Bill
   gets it.  He addressed about 4 of my top 6 complaints and
 remediations.
   Quite a change from the rhetoric of five years ago.
   But it is an Augean stable, and they have a long way to go.
  
   Of course, the devil is in the details, and we will have to see.
  
   On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 02:38:32PM -0500, Kenneth R. van Wyk wrote:
Greetings,
   
It's been a rather quiet week so far here on SC-L.  I guess
 that everyone
is either at the RSA conference (http://2004.rsaconference.com/) or
otherwise too busy.  I've been watching some of the reports
 that have been
appearing in the trade press regarding announcements and
 such at the RSA
conference
   
(http://news.com.com/2009-7355_3-5163628.html?part=rsstag=feedsubj).
   Most of the announcements seem to me to focus on new and upcoming