Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-12 Thread Fernando Schapachnik
En un mensaje anterior, Blue Boar escribió: Fernando Schapachnik wrote: I smell a discusion going nowhere. What is the point of teaching a languague? Teach them to program in a paradigm (better, in all of them, and give them the tools to make educated choices about which is better for each

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-09 Thread Peter Amey
-Original Message- From: Crispin Cowan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 July 2004 04:27 To: Peter Amey Cc: ljknews; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content) Peter Amey wrote: What is wrong

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-09 Thread Crispin Cowan
Peter Amey wrote: What is wrong with this picture ? I see both of you willing to mandate the teaching of C and yet not mandate the teaching of any of Ada, Pascal, PL/I etc. Makes sense to me. what is the point of teaching dead languages like Ada, Pascal, and PL/I? Teach C, Assembler, and

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-09 Thread Crispin Cowan
Peter Amey wrote: Firstly a tactical one: Ada is by no means a dead language. There is a great tendency in our industry to regard whatever is in first place at any particular point in life's race to be the winner and everything else to be dead. Ada was pushed hard enough by the DoD for a decade

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-09 Thread David Crocker
Crispin Cowan wrote: In programming language terms, Ada is grossly primitive. Its object orientation mechanisms are crude at best. A *great* deal of progress in language technology has been made since Ada was developed. For just about any kind of concept or safety feature, students and

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-09 Thread Wall, Kevin
David Crocker wrote... There is a tendency to regard every programming problem as an O-O problem. Sometime last year I read a thread on some programming newsgroup in which contributors argued about the correct way to write a truly O-O Hello world program. All the solutions provided were

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-09 Thread ljknews
At 2:26 PM +0100 7/9/04, David Crocker wrote: And much as I dislike Ada, I have to admit that if you don't intend to use dynamic binding and don't need the low-level features of C,... Which are those low-level features not available with Ada ? The C compilers I have used claim to be

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread der Mouse
I see both of you willing to mandate the teaching of C and yet not mandate the teaching of any of Ada, Pascal, PL/I etc. This seems like the teaching of making do. And is not making do an important skill? More seriously, as long as Unix variants maintain their position of importance

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Julie JCH Ryan, D.Sc.
Another perspective on the education problem, keeping in mind that this is a global issue (as most are): How Professor Hawking computes Posted June 10, 2004 in ALS News http://www.rideforlife.com/archives/001014.html Copyright 2003: Indian Express Group (Mumbai, India). . extract

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread James Walden
ljknews wrote: What is wrong with this picture ? I see both of you willing to mandate the teaching of C and yet not mandate the teaching of any of Ada, Pascal, PL/I etc. This seems like the teaching of making do. You read more into my post than I wrote, as I did not mandate that the students

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Dana Epp
What is wrong with this picture ? I see both of you willing to mandate the teaching of C and yet not mandate the teaching of any of Ada, Pascal, PL/I etc. This seems like the teaching of making do. Hmmm, interesting point. In a particular set of learning objectives required to complete a

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Peter Amey
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Crispin Cowan Sent: 07 July 2004 23:29 To: ljknews Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content) ljknews wrote: What

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Fernando Schapachnik
En un mensaje anterior, ljknews escribió: At 1:56 PM -0700 7/7/04, Dana Epp wrote: I don't pick C for C's sake. I choose C because ON AVERAGE, most students will be exposed to C more than the languages you suggest. Especially in the majority on industries hiring students out of university.

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Peter Amey
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of der Mouse Sent: 08 July 2004 03:47 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content) I see both of you willing to mandate

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Blue Boar
Jose Nazario wrote: rather than talking in a vacuum, make sure you've read the latest ACM/IEEE-CS curriculum guidelines: http://www.acm.org/education/curricula.html http://sites.computer.org/ccse/ Hrm. I checked both pages, and searched for secur, and got nothing. I didn't click

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-08 Thread Blue Boar
Fernando Schapachnik wrote: I smell a discusion going nowhere. What is the point of teaching a languague? Teach them to program in a paradigm (better, in all of them, and give them the tools to make educated choices about which is better for each context), and choose any language as an *example*

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-07 Thread James Walden
Dana Epp wrote: I'd be interested to hear what people think of the two approaches (separate security courses vs. spreading security all over the curricula). Regards. Fernando. I don't think it's an either/or question; we need both approaches. Students should study security wherever it's

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-07 Thread James Walden
Crispin Cowan wrote: Another perspective (overheard at a conference 12 years ago): * Scientists build stuff in order to learn stuff. * Engineers learn stuff in order to build stuff. I think that's about as accurate a summary of the distinction as you can make in 16 words. What makes it

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-07 Thread ljknews
At 9:40 AM -0400 7/7/04, James Walden wrote: Dana Epp wrote: Of course, I also think students should have to take at least one course in ASM to really understand how computer instructions work, so they can gain a foundation of learning for the heart of computer processing. And I think they

RE: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-07 Thread Wall, Kevin
Fernando Schapachnik wrote... I've considered 'secure coding' courses, and the idea always look kind oversized. How much can you teach that students can't read themselves from a book? Can you fill a semester with that? I'm interested in people's experiences here. I suppose that depends

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-06 Thread Fernando Schapachnik
En un mensaje anterior, der Mouse escribió: I think over the past 40 years or so, as a discipline, we've failed rather miserably at teaching programming, period. Right. But on the other hand, that's not surprising - [because we've mostly not even _tried_ to teach programming, as opposed

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-06 Thread Mark Rockman
You are not nuts. Your course outline is a very substantial step in the right direction. - Original Message - From: Dana Epp [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Fernando Schapachnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 16:42 Subject: Re: [SC-L] Education and security

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-06 Thread Crispin Cowan
der Mouse wrote: Care to explain what do you think a 'programming course' should have that is not covered in SE or CS courses (or curricula)? A computer scientist is a theoretician. A software engineer is a designer. A programmer is an implementer. A computer scientist can prove you can't,

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-05 Thread Fernando Schapachnik
En un mensaje anterior, der Mouse escribió: In general, I don't think this is an issue that is unique to _secure_ programming (coding, design, etc.). I think over the past 40 years or so, as a discipline, we've failed rather miserably at teaching programming, period. Right. But on the

Re: [SC-L] Education and security -- another perspective (was ACM Queue - Content)

2004-07-05 Thread der Mouse
I think over the past 40 years or so, as a discipline, we've failed rather miserably at teaching programming, period. Right. But on the other hand, that's not surprising - [because we've mostly not even _tried_ to teach programming, as opposed to computer science or software engineering].