1994-02-24 - Re: CERT funding

Header Data

From: smb@research.att.com
To: Mark Hittinger <bugs@netsys.com>
Message Hash: b94f9f831b215738b7075c80b19f97a6bbdacd7fbd83867c63f9ec7f393fc9a5
Message ID: <9402241221.AA26019@toad.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-24 12:21:26 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 24 Feb 94 04:21:26 PST

Raw message

From: smb@research.att.com
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 94 04:21:26 PST
To: Mark Hittinger <bugs@netsys.com>
Subject: Re: CERT funding
Message-ID: <9402241221.AA26019@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Thanks, Mark, for an interesting posting about CERT.  Let me add just
one or two comments about the place.

That CERT should be interested in software engineering is a very
good sign.  What do you think causes most security holes?  It *isn't*
lack of cryptography, for the most part, though this last big incident
is an obvious exception.  The answer, of course, is bugs in the
code -- and to that, software engineering is the only answer from
computer science as a whole.  (Bob Morris Sr's keynote address
at the last UNIX Security Conference was entitled ``if your software
is full of bugs, what does that say about its security?'')

As for the database stuff -- from what the folks at CERT have told me
(and yes, I know some of them quite well), they're having a problem
managing the tremendous volume of bug reports, incident reports, etc.
They need to do their own tool-building.

Finally, there are some folks at CERT who are *extremely* sharp.  I don't
know who you talked to, but there are people there I'd hire in an instant
if they were available.





Thread