Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #3271

Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked

Show all headers | View raw

"Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> writes:
> OK, I'm stupid.
>
> So my next questions are:
>
> 1) why wasn't security designed in from the start?
>
> 2) why isn't this everywhere?
>
> Oh, yeah, the answer is probably "The original designers of the
> Internet didn't pay attention to security".
>
> Which is part of the reason why I stopped paying attention to network
> protocols years ago - in frustration because of thtche lousy security.
>
> (The first US company worked at, The Little Software House on the
> Prairie, (a) was where I learned a lot about hardware and OS, (b) had
> been the Illiac networking group, (c) was a pioneer in secure OSes and
> secure networking.   They made part of the living adding security as
> an afterthought to networking.   It always annoyed me that security
> had not been designed in from scratch.)

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#63 Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#65 Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked

other trivia ... the person that originally created DNS in the early
80s, had done work at the science center a decade earlier
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech

most of the internet was done with little or no thought about attacks
and countermeasures ... or sevice level quality. I've made numerous
references to work on "electronic commerce" ... that it took nearly ten
times the original effort ... to take well designed, well coded, and
well tested code and turn it into "service" quality ... being able to
handle large category of failures, including those resulting from
attacks (in general I've found it takes 4-10 times the effort to take
well crafted "application" code and make it "service" quality).
Part of the issue was that I had final sign-off on the implementation
between the webserver and something called the "payment gateway"
(sat between the internet and payment networks) ... some past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#gateway

but didn't have similar authority regarding the client/server side (even
relative trivial stuff was claimed to be "too complicated")

another problem was the whole issue of any sort of encryption technology
during most of the period (both patent and heavy licensing barrier as
well as gov. opposition) ... in the 80s, I was so vociferous on the
subject, that some guy from 3-letter gov agency dropped by my office to
discuss my concerns.

I've frequently mention that the internal network was larger than
the arpanet/internet from just about the beginning until possibly
late '85 or early '86 ... and the company required link encryptors
on all links
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet

There was claim that in the mid-80s, the internal network had half of
all the link encryptors in the world. Even tho these were
commerical-off-the-shelf hardware, there was frequently still gov.
opposition when links crossed national boundaries. It is in this period,
that i claim I learned that there was three kinds of encryption: 1) the
kind they don't care about, 2) the kind you can't do, and 3) the kind
you can only do for them.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-28 19:49 -0700
  Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2011-08-28 23:32 -0400
  Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2011-08-28 23:49 -0400
    Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 08:59 -0700
      Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2011-08-29 12:40 -0400
        Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 12:00 -0700
        Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 12:00 -0700
          Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-08-29 21:31 -0400
          Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-29 22:12 -0400
            Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-30 09:38 -0400
            Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-30 10:51 -0400
          Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-30 13:53 +0200
            Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-30 06:59 -0700
              Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-30 10:23 -0400
                Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2011-08-31 08:04 -0500
                Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-31 10:26 -0400
                Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-31 18:58 +0100
              Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-30 14:58 +0100
              Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-31 10:25 +0200
                Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-31 10:01 -0400
                Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2011-08-31 12:15 -0400
    Re: Somewhat off-topic: comp-arch.net cloned, possibly hacked "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 08:59 -0700

csiph-web