A more fundamental issue..

From: Jeroen van Drie (jeroen_at_3va.net)
Date: 11/06/03

  • Next message: Alexandre Sieira: "RE: bill gates' claim about security vulnerabilities per LOC inUnix versus Windows" 
    To: <secprog@securityfocus.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 00:20:33 +0100

    A more fundamental issue...

    As computing become ever more powerful and oop scripting languages ever more
    prevalent and simple, more and more programmers will know less about OS &
    library component fundamentals. As computing becomes ever more pervasive,
    the security of code in the OS & library components will over the years only
    become more important while becoming the domain of an ever more exclusive
    club (because their members are mainly highly experienced C/C++ programmers).

    While it seems that we'll be stuck with fairly primitive interfaces (keyboard,
    mouse and two dimensional screen) for at least another decade, more intimate
    interfacing such as 3d displays and tacile feedback are on the horizon; the
    sensors and feedback devices some scientists have implanted into living
    tissue are on the radar. These new interfaces have the potential of
    revolutionizing our computing experience. If at this point we were to add the
    convergence of the computing and bio/genetic sciences that seems imminent
    over the next few decades to the mix, the result will most likely be a
    computing experience that is almost as if not more intimate as any level of
    human social intercourse. This century will most likely see advanced,
    intimate human interface technologies introduced, and once they are available
    their benefits will most likely mandate their use. These technologies will
    most likely aim to wire us directly into the computer.

    And so we program in ever higher scripting abstractions, we interface ever
    closer to and into our skins and minds, we integrate systems ever closer to
    rely on and reuse of each other. All this is built on increasingly complex
    layers in the OS and in library toolkits.

    As computing becomes ever more pervasive, even intimate, exploits can lead to
    increasing disaster.

    Our mode of thinking about security may have kept up to date with the
    requirements but isn't yet really taking the foreseeable evolution and
    convergence of computing and other sciences into account. Computing security
    is becoming a political concern but that concern is still too shallow and
    mainly has to do with issues such as 'bundling', 'sharing' and 'digital
    rights'. The OS and library components are becoming open, public
    infrastructure but the trend is at risk from the current political focus on
    private instead of public ownership protection.

    Security socially is about accountability and transparency. Programmers and
    the politicians now are setting the mold for other sciences to follow.
    Especially the science of genetic and bioengineering requires a much more
    accountable mold before its products can become as ubiquitous as our
    handywork. If we are to see the same lack of security professionalism and a
    similar level of expediency in bioindustries as we see in the software
    industry we have a lot more to fear from vulnerabilities and exploits and
    lack of patches there. Hopefully in the nearby future we have enough OS &
    library knowhow of our own internals so that we can patch something like Sars
    quickly. The need for that knowhow to be "open source" is evident otherwise
    we as a species could be ransom to profiteering.

    ps: I've gone through a couple of drafts, don't mean to cry wolf, but we are
    on the eve of our development model spilling over into other sciences that
    increasingly use computing in development and manufacturing. It's a fairly
    alarming trend considering that we as a society seem to spend more media time
    on security issues within our computers than in our biosphere. It's also
    alarming that after so much public scrutiny and debate we are still on the
    religious discourse of good and evil.

  • Next message: Alexandre Sieira: "RE: bill gates' claim about security vulnerabilities per LOC inUnix versus Windows"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: "The New Geek"
      ... > "Davenport is one of the New Geeks, ... > personify the future of computing as its impact spreads further. ... (not grandiose, "artificially intelligent" "search engines") ... manipulation tools, from full-time programmers (not new geeks, not ...
      (comp.programming)
    • Re: Information Technology Vs Computer Science
      ... mathematical and scientific aspects of computing. ... At the same time there was a huge demand for commercial programmers ... and many universities and colleges initiated courses that basically ... It is likely that a CS course will include some compulsory mathematics ...
      (comp.lang.java.programmer)
    • Re: Old broken COBOL programs from the 70s and 80s
      ... were available during the early days of business computing. ... that data and programs from those early applications would still be around ... so it was not unreasonable for early programmers to expect that to ...
      (comp.lang.cobol)
    • Re: [OT] Re: Whats the name for this?
      ... how many of us could design a modern CPU. ... programmers were able to specify the "architecture" of a simple CPU ... terms of the highly limited computing culture of micro hacking a sort ...
      (comp.programming)
    • Re: A more fundamental issue..
      ... JvD> As computing become ever more powerful and oop scripting languages ever more ... JvD> the security of code in the OS & library components will over the years only ... JvD> club (because their members are mainly highly experienced C/C++ programmers). ...
      (SecProg)
    • Quantcast