I can't help but feel that Proofpoint missed out when enumerating only 5 products in it's Nexus line of cybersecurity defenses... though... perhaps they're still working on Nexus VI.
Every project starts with a clear idea of the end goal... now it's time to boil the ocean!
People frequently call something a "science" when what I think they mean is "engineering". This seems to happen when folks refer to something complicated... but they aren't talking about rigorous testing of a hypothesis.
The response to a wellness check of an aged parent being, "Sorry, I was hiking in the mountains and out of cell range," can result in an immediate release of slowly built up tension... too bad you can't bottle that energy for when you need it.
I won't be surprised if today's soundtrack of Windows constantly re-booting drives some folks to develop a phobia of the boot sound, breaking into a cold sweat whenever they hear it.
If you're participating in an IETF WG developing a specification... it's much more helpful to propose draft changes than to (endlessly) argue why what's already drafted is wrong.
Amazing launch of Starliner! Godspeed Suni and Butch!! Go Calypso, go!!!
Photos by Cosmic Perspective photographer John Pisani
It's a delicate balance when reviewing a document... everyone has their own voice, and it's important to honor it while trying to provide useful feedback for overall improvement of clarity and efficacy.
Oh... and in case anyone's keeping score... yes, Vixie was right. So... yeah. I guess we can all sleep soundly again. :)
The best thing about running DNS experiments? ... being forced to take a break every thirty minutes between tests. :)
My daughter packed an on-theme lunch for 80's day at school... ten points to anyone who knows who she's dressing as today. :)
Best comment I've heard at a security conference in a while...
"I authored the RFC you mentioned. Thanks for the comment... but you're a tad late to final call. By more than a decade."
This is the moment civilization died.
What's funny is when a sales call tries selling you on a technology you helped develop. Do your homework!!
When going into "Fancy Bear Goes Phishing" by @scottjshapiro, I was interested in his unique take on "hacking". I was hoping to learn something from his perspective as a law & philosophy professor at Yale. Unfortunately, he stumbles when trying to make his points leading me to disregard many of his conclusions.
I was fine with his glossing over the more technical details... an expert in a field can't get hung up when a writer for popular audiences skips the complicated bits... but what bugged me was when he got technical details flatly wrong. These lead to mistaken conclusions in his reasoning about the behavior and psychology related to various attacks he discussed.
In the end, I'd suggest skipping this book. Experts will likely be annoyed with the mistakes, while non-experts might come away with an inaccurate understanding about how malicious attacks (and associated defenses) actually work.
When writing a paper about security standards, I don't assume folks will read the entire piece, but rather sample what's of interest to them (e.g. the intro, figures, and conclusion)... but I'm eternally grateful for editorial reviewers that provide feedback on each statement and every comma (even though it takes a lot of time to address them all).
Here's to the reviewers!
Interesting article in Scientific American discussing barriers to permanent human colonization of space... with a great writeup about our annual Analog Astronaut Conference we put on at Biosphere2!
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-well-never-live-in-space/