SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Friday October 04 2019, @04:50AM
from the the-counting-of-network-attack-types-shall-be-three dept.
from the the-counting-of-network-attack-types-shall-be-three dept.
Cybersecurity is becoming more of a common tongue term in today's industry. It is being passed around the executive meetings along with financial information and projected marketing strategies. Here are some common attack vectors plaguing the industry when it comes to network infrastructure. It does not really matter the infrastructure type you have. If there is value to the data you are transferring within, someone wants to get it.
- Reconnaissance Attacks
- Access Attacks
- Denial of Service Attacks
It is a pipe dream to believe a network infrastructure is invulnerable; however, the possibility of being protected is within grasp. Fundamentally, it comes down to knowledge of what can happen to your network, knowing your equipment and training up the staff.
Source: Tripwire.com
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Three Types of Network Attacks to Watch For
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 17 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Hand me a pair of leather pants and a CASIO keyboard -- I'm living for today!
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday October 04 2019, @06:48PM (3 children)
You sound like the typical sour grapes college dropout, pooh poohing degrees as being of no value in assessing a job candidate, only serving to impress credulous HR types, as you put it. I'm surprised you didn't mention a particularly famous and rich college dropout, Bill Gates. Does our university education system work, or not? Do university graduates come out of there with superior understanding of their field, or not?
Now, I do think that universities have gotten a little too narrow, hammer a little too much on the technical details, and as a result, students can miss the forest for the trees. Nevertheless, the education that universities strive to provide is intended to convey the skills and knowledge to do that much talked about thing known as "critical thinking". For example, a degree in Computer Science does not mean the graduate knows most of the arcane and esoteric details of any particular programming language or library, it means they can (or should be able to) define the problems at hand, find and choose appropriate algorithms, and encode them in the programming language of choice. If management does not understand that they are asking the impossible or asking for nonsense, the university graduate should be able to figure that out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 04 2019, @08:15PM (2 children)
I'm not pooh-poohing degrees at all. They give a graduate at least a basic understanding of certain knowledge areas. They also show that the graduate has the ability to set goals (pass classes, get a degree) and work to achieve them.
Did you just ignore what I wrote, or do you just want to stir things up:
Is that a rejection of degrees or a matter-of-fact assessment of people? I meant it as the latter, as that's been my experience over the past 30 years.
Superior to what? To some random person off the street who never studied the subject matter? One would certainly hope so.
Superior to someone (whether an auto-didact or not) with the motivation and drive to learn and experiment? That depends. Especially since most degree programs are relatively broad. Does an EE or CompE graduate (with no other experience) have superior knowledge about practical networking or InfoSec than someone who has built and secured networks? Probably not.
One would hope that their studies have given them a background which will make learning the stuff they need to know easier, but that's not necessarily the case.
And not having a degree doesn't imply a lack of such a background. I've met many folks with university degrees who couldn't reason their way out of a paper bag. I've met many folks *without* a university degree who are quite similar.
I've also met many folks (with or without degrees) who are bright, inquisitive and have strong reasoning skills.
While a university degree does signal a number of positive things, it is absolutely not a guarantee that the recipient of same is qualified to scrub my toilet, let alone design a network, an application or implement secure computing environments.
That said, not having a university degree isn't *better*. But it's also *not* a clear signal that someone is incapable of constructive/critical thinking and valuable contributions of an intellectual nature.
Absolutely. That's the intent. YMMV.
Are you claiming that only someone with a university degree is able to think critically? Does that comport with either logic or your own life experience?
But we've departed from your initial attempt at "classifying" me. Let's discuss, You *appear* to be making assumptions about my statements that are outside the boundaries of the information and opinions I conveyed.
In fact, you've ignored relevant portions to support the assumptions you appear to have made about me. This *seems* to have caused you to draw unfounded conclusions concerning my person, meaning and intent.
Critical thinking requires that one take the evidence *available*, then drawing on logic, specific knowledge and an understanding of the parameters impacting the particular situation, and arrive at a conclusion(s). Additional, where appropriate to create a plan of action.
You have not displayed those qualities in this conversation. Rather, you assumed bias on my part based on your own views and biases. That's not critical thinking, it's wishful thinking. I presume you can tell the difference.
Should I also make assumptions about you, your life experience and educational attainment based on the few sentences in your reply? I won't, because there isn't enough information to draw an informed conclusion.
You might try it sometime.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday October 04 2019, @09:18PM (1 child)
What I'm asking is whether you think university degrees have much value. It "signals a number of positive things", eh? Like what?
You're engaging in what sure looks like a fake "fair and balanced", let's "have it both ways" argument. Of course there are people who figured it out on their own, and can think critically, without the benefit of a university education. Likewise, there are university graduates who are idiots. The question is, do the degrees help sort the idiots from the smarter folks? Does the fact that someone earned a degree at least increase the odds that they are not an idiot?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 04 2019, @10:43PM
Did you not read the *first sentence* of the post you just replied to? I said:
That is, at a *minimum*, the value of a university degree.
Out of curiosity, why have you (twice now) asked me questions that required me to repeat what I've already said? That *appears* to be rather dismissive of you, as if what I write isn't worth reading. If that's the case, why respond at all?
Your interpretation is not backed up by my statements. I suggest you reconsider what I've said.
For your convenience, let's back up a second. My initial comment was that degrees and certifications (and especially certifications, although I didn't stress that) are no *guarantee* of expertise.
I also said that the marketable value of such things is usually shown in preference during job searches and to burnish the bios of consultants.
Further, I stated that there are those with degrees and/or certifications that are, if not incompetent, then not very competent. And that some without such things can be quite competent.
The important part was that *results* are what make the difference.
in the section of your comment that I quoted immediately above, you pretty much agreed with all of that, except the bit about results.
Given all that, you've attempted to belittle me as "sour grapes," implied that I was somehow poorly educated and/or lacking critical thinking skills and given the strong impression (through lack of a thorough reading or by design) that you dismiss my statements out of hand.
Despite that, I will answer your question even though it's way outside anything I've said. And you're not going to like it either, as it will explode the completely inaccurate image of me that you've created for yourself.
On the whole, a university education is a positive experience that is a boon to many. The opportunities, not just for learning things associated with an expected career, are varied. With the right attitude, it can broaden your horizons and allow you to indulge your intellectual curiosity and hone your critical thinking skills. But, like everything else, you get out of it what you put into it.
I'd also point out that, with the proper motivation, a person can do those things *without* a university education too. The tools and resources to do so just aren't as concentrated as they are at a university. However, the knowledge obtained isn't always as broad, nor is a self-designed curriculum necessarily as structured or comprehensive. In fact, it takes the rare person who is disciplined, motivated and willing to work *extra* hard to do so well.
As an aside almost all of my family have *at least* bachelor's degrees and many have advanced degrees as well. In fact, if I could go back and do it all over again, I'd likely choose to be an academic rather than a technologist.
That said, my life experience has taught me a couple of things (I've said them already but you seem to have an issue picking up on things the first time, so here it is -- again):
1. Academic credentials are no *guarantee* of competence or expertise;
2. Auto-didacts *can* be at least as or more competent than those with certifications or degrees;
4. (1) and (2) above aren't blanket statements. Knowledge and competence vary widely, regardless of degree status;
3. (1) and (2) above are observations based on nearly 30 years of work experience and more than 50 years of life experience;
4. Was *anything* I said an indictment of a university education? No.
I'd be happy to discuss this with you further.
That said, I'd prefer that, in future, you actually read and understand what I write, rather than jumping to unfounded conclusions about me and making insulting and dismissive comments.
Hmm, have a reasoned and thoughtful dialogue without jumping down the other guy's throat? There's an (apparently) novel idea.