OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: Terry Lambert (tlambert2mindspring.com)
Date: Wed Mar 06 2002 - 21:00:38 CST

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    Mike Meyer wrote:
    > While Heisenberg's uncertainty doesn't apply as described to macro
    > events, the concept certainly works. If you instrument a kernel to
    > find performance problems, you've just slowed the kernel down, and
    > changed what routines get used when. And I'm sure we've all had the
    > experience of adding a print to try and catch a bug, and the bug
    > vanishes.

    This only happens if you don't know what you are doing.
    It's very easy to do instrumentation which subtracts
    itself out of the overall count, if the instrumentation
    is for profiling. For debugging of timing sensitive
    problems, you have to use non-invasive techniques in
    order to avoid changing the timing. It isn't rocket
    science.

    As to the idea that the observer always changes the thing
    being observed, that's silly. It's only true if the
    observer isn't copetent, until you get down to the quantum
    level.

    > Given that computers are so blasted cheap these days, and the
    > availability of open source software, there's a lot of learning that
    > can be done without stealing cycles from someone else.

    Actually, the use of individual equipment is one of the
    things that's wrong with todays CS classes. If you do
    your work on your own machine at home, rather than using
    shared resources, you never learn to "play nice" with
    other software on the system that you didn't plan on.
    It's one of the reasons Windows Systems are so fragile
    these days, when programs from different vendors are loaded
    on them: the programmers responsible never had to learn
    to "play nice with the other kids".

    > No, they'll just slow them donw, possibly screw up the accounting, and
    > similar things that can make peoples lifes miserably. Read the book by
    > the guy at LBL who helped track down a couple of crackers, even though
    > they mostly used a "look but don't touch" methodology on his
    > computers. His web site seems to be gone, or I'd send over there to
    > order a Kleine bottle from him as well.

    You mean Clifford Stoll's "The Cuckoo's Egg: Tracking a Spy
    Through the Maze of Computer Espionage", in which he used
    non-invasive observational teqniques that did not impact
    what he was observing? 8-).

    I think his neo-luddite books "Silicon Snake Oil: Second
    Thoughts on The Information Highway" and "High Tech Heretic:
    Why Computers Don't Belong in the Classroom and Other
    Reflections by a Computer Contrarion" are a lot more telling,
    don't you?

            "Ultimately, though, Stoll contradicts himself too
             often: in one sentence, he fears the demise of
             libraries; in the next, he states why book-based
             libraries won't disappear. What's more, he
             undermines his argument's seriousness with comic
             footnotes and deliberately improper grammar. Still,
             his book signals the first wave in the backlash
            against the race to the future that computer
             technology now represents." -- Benjamin Segedin

    PS: The people he was writing about in "The Cuckoo's Egg"
    we definitely not just observers...

    -- Terry

    To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomoFreeBSD.org
    with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message