Curiouser and Curiouser!

Curiouser and Curiouser! on security http://matt.blogs.it/ RSS feed for topic security Copyright 2006 Matt Mower Squib/0.1 self@mattmower.com self@mattmower.com en-gb Plugging leaks in Radio security Thu, 15 Aug 2002 11:59:11 +0100 <A href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0109150/2002/08/14.html#a462">Protecting Radio Folders</A>. A simple Meta tag to keep prying eyes from browsing weblog folders you don't want people to see. [<A href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0109150/">Blunt Force Trauma</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » Another example of the security theme that is developing.  This is obviously going to become more important as Radio seeks to be the de facto <A href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0107808/2002/08/15.html#a275">PKP</A> tool.</BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000330.html Personal VPN's without Windows Thu, 15 Aug 2002 12:05:16 +0100 <A href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0109150/2002/08/14.html#a457">Next Step -- The Personal VPN</A>. I'm off into another area I don't know anything about -- VPNs. [<A href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0109150/">Blunt Force Trauma</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » Since you've probably got more than one computer at home anyway I would be inclined to look into one of the cable/DSL switches that also provides VPN.  For example, the cable router that I could end up buying is the <A href="http://www.linksys.com/Products/product.asp?grid=23&prid=433">LinkSys BEFSX41</A> which includes built in VPN capability.  At the back of my mind not running this through Windows hopefully exposes you to less risks. I'd appreciate more informed opinions though.</BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000331.html More bureaucracy? Yeah that'll work. Wed, 20 Nov 2002 10:57:38 +0000 <A href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/2494223.stm">Tories push for UK security chief</A>. A new cabinet post of head of homeland security should be created to provide a clear focus against terrorism in the UK¸ say the Tories. [<A href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/default.stm">BBC News | UK</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » Why is this necessary?  Why is terrorism not adequately represented by either the home office (MI5) or the department of defence (MI6)?  What does having one extra bureaucrat achieve?</BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000833.html Sounds like $40bn well spent Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:01:54 +0000 <A href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/americas/2493929.stm">Congress approves US security body</A>. The US Senate votes decisively in favour of creating a huge new Department of Homeland Security - long advocated by President Bush. [<A href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/default.stm">BBC News | WORLD</A>] <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> » "The new department will merge 22 agencies with a combined budget of about $40bn to deal with the threat of international terrorism on American soil." Of course merging them all together is bound to create one super-efficient, focused body acting in unison to defeat the threat of anti-American terrorism (it's Homeland security after all). Sounds like $40bn well spent if you ask me.  Wouldn't want to go wasting that money on health care, feeding people or (god forbid) teaching them how many beans make five would you?</BLOCKQUOTE> http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00000835.html Damn the torpedos? Tue, 18 Mar 2003 14:48:55 +0000 <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <A href="http://aspnetweblog.com/posts/3964.aspx">Six Reasons why InfoPath is DOA</A>. <DIV class=entry id=When:9:28:32AM title="Six Reasons why InfoPath is DOA" link="http://aspnetweblog.com/posts/3964.aspx"><A href="http://aspnetweblog.com/posts/3964.aspx">Six Reasons why InfoPath is DOA</A>: <Q lang=en-us cite=http://aspnetweblog.com/posts/3964.aspx> Although he hasn't yet used it, <A href="http://www.tallent.us/weblogx/">Richard Tallnet</A> has posted an article, "<A href="http://www.tallent.us/weblogx/PermaLink.aspx/672f734f-a8af-4248-b58e-4baa12eb9ba1">Six Reasons why InfoPath is DOA</A>". They are all very valid reasons. I have a post to make later on the subject, but Richard is dead on with his take, this is not a tool for developers (but that does not mean its not a good tool in general).</Q>Source: <A href="http://DotNetWebLogs.com">.NET Weblogs</A> <A title="Permanent link to this item in the archive." href="http://archipelago.phrasewise.com/2003/03/18#When:9:28:32AM" rel=bookmark>*</A></DIV> [<A href="http://archipelago.phrasewise.com/">Archipelago</A>]</BLOCKQUOTE> An interesting rebuttal of the pro-InfoPath view.  All the reasons given are valid but I think the best are: 1. No security.  This is likely to be a killer in any real deployment scenario. 2. No infrastructure. <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> But they forgot one thing: what company in their right mind already has all of these key XML data formats defined, business logic developed, web services deployed, and lacks only a useful interface?. </BLOCKQUOTE> If there are no good answers to these questions then I think InfoPath is going to struggle to be anything more than a hype success a la XBox. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001299.html Confusticated apache Wed, 23 Jul 2003 10:11:32 +0100 I'm not sure if you'll see it but I wanted to say Thank You to all those who responded to my <A href="http://matt.blogs.it/2003/07/12.html#a1020">question</A> about Apache security for a specific GET request and also to <A href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0103807/">ScottJ</A> for putting the word out. In the end I capitulated and modified the CGI.  I appreciate learning about the mod_rewrite approach.  It's neat and would definitely have worked... if this copy of Apache had mod_rewrite installed.  Which it doesn't.   It's on an old RH7 box, there is no source available.  It's brittle.  Bleuch! On balance of pain, and as much as I didn't want to, modifying the CGI made more more sense. Thanks anyway though. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001529.html 4 passwords has to be more secure than 1 doesn't it? Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:50:26 +0000 <div style="margin-left: 40px;"><a href="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/2003/11/19.html#a1031">D'ohLTish Security Illustrated</a>. </div> Tog, UI expert who escaped Apple long time ago, <a href="http://www.asktog.com/columns/058SecurityD%27ohlts.html">illustrates</a> how more security often lead to less security. Read it and weep. This is why when someone tells me about some elaborate security scheme, I often find myself sighing. <div style="margin-left: 40px;"> [<a href="http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/">Don Park's Daily Habit</a>] </div> Great article. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001742.html Exposing "secret" laws Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:55:03 +0100 <a href="http://www.weblogsky.com/archives/000188.html">Gilmore vs Ashcroft</a> [<a href="http://www.weblogsky.com/">Weblogsky</a>] http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002451.html