Skip to main content
I can't stand up from falling down..."
Elvis Costello

Thirty-seven holes! – One vulnerability in your software is bad enough but ‘thirty-seven’? It’s almost as if the company in question, was Microsoft not it’s arch-rival Oracle.

You see, once upon a time there was this fabulously opinionated? Software baron called Larry who wished to snatch control of the software industry from his complete opposite, a modest unassuming megalomaniac called Bill. Both men were in the very expensive Enterprise database business and both aimed to be the biggest and the best in a crowded applications market.

Bill was very close to achieving his own dream of world domination but struggled to release software that was anywhere close to 100% proof against the attacks of rats and weasels, This was a serious and on-going worry for many customers and enough to encourage many of them to flock to Larry’s product, which he smugly boasted was "unbreakable" and utterly and completely weasel proof. By coincidence, if you search for "bug" on the Microsoft knowledgebase, it returns twenty-five results.

Unfortunately, Larry in his enthusiasm to put one over on the ghastly swot Bill, may have been telling the kind of fibs a Transport Secretary would have been proud of, because according to the Internet security watchdog CERT, Larry’s "unbreakable" database and application server software lets in the rain and quite possibly thirty-seven weasels too!

Over the last five years or so, many of us in the industry have started taking Larry’s predictions and statements with a pinch of salt. He leads a huge and successful business, one that has the confidence and respect of thousands of customers. When dazzling Larry stands up on stage and bets a million dollars that his software is better than Bill’s or that the Network Computer will kill the PC, you just know it’s all going to go dreadfully pear-shaped on him. Security is another problem altogether because the issue is very much one of trust. Like Larry, you might claim that your box is smarter, faster, cheaper, prettier than the other chap’s but at a time when security of any kind is a principal concern of business or government, making any wildly unsupported claims for the integrity of any mission-critical product is not a good idea, in a world that feels increasingly threatened and vulnerable by the potential for attack on its commercial infrastructure.

Personally, I’m in favour of starting my own “Honest Computing” campaign. It’s an award I’ll make every year to the company whose software does exactly what it says in the box. Unfortunately, after twenty years writing about and reviewing products and technology trends, I doubt that I’ll find anyone to give the award to. It’s all rather like magician, James Randi’s offer of a million dollars to anyone, including Uri Geller, who can demonstrate unequivocal evidence of the paranormal in front of him. Perhaps he and Oracle should get together soon!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.


In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…