28 Feb 2010 at 18:07
I think that the Rugged Software Manifesto has to be a parody.
I am rugged… and more importantly, my code is rugged.
Ok some of the statements are reasonable,
I recognize that software has become a foundation of our modern world.
but overall the whole thing is so over the top that it has to be a parody.
I am rugged, not because it is easy, but because it is necessary… and I am up for the challenge.
07 Feb 2010 at 17:26
Sometimes it seems that while we were not looking, things changed.
Not too many years ago -
- Hardware was the largest part of any software project budget. Now, unless you are working at a massive scale, the cost of the computing hardware is a rounding error on the bottom line.
- Scripting languages were too slow for use on real projects, but the web has well and truly demonstrated that this is false.
Not too sure how this is happening, but it seems that when we first learn about something, those ideas stick and it is hard to change what we know to match the current reality. When I started commercial software development, it was common to build systems on a PDP-11 with under 512KB of RAM. These days a laptop comes with at least 2GB of RAM, an increase of main memory of a factor of 4,000, but sometimes I still catch myself trying to save a few bytes when designing some aspect of a system.
The open question for now is how to detect this type of slow change (even if the pace of technological change is not all that slow compared to other changes.) This is an important question because many societies and groups have been hit by surprises that in hindsight are obvious, and the consequences were catastrophic;
- When cutting down trees in an area, when does the population realize that there is a serious problem with deforestation?
- When does a drought become a climate shift that means the area is no longer amenable to the current mode of agriculture?
- When does the exploitation of fish in a fishery result in the collapse of the stocks in that fishery?
On the technology side, when do the desktop application developers get hit overtaken by the web applications running in a browser? Functionality wise, we can deliver nearly equivalent functionality over the web provided we have the bandwidth, so maybe it is time to recreate departmental applications as web applications?
06 Feb 2010 at 10:14
This is old news to europeans, but Canada has just started to move to this technology, and it looks like the same systems that are deployed in Europe. With that in mind, here are a few links to known problems in the European model
Chip and Spin is a site that looks at the overall context of the Chip and PIN model, but most interesting of all is that of all places to be doing this type of research, the University of Cambridge is investigating Banking security.
The main issue is that with a credit card containing a chip and the customer providing the PIN, it is going to be a lot harder for the account holder to prove that the transaction is fraudulent. But as the study shows, cloning a card containing a chip is not that hard, and obtaining the pin is not much harder (even before we get into the social engineering possibilities).
Money quote from the Banking security study:
We demonstrate how fraudsters could collect card details and PINs, despite the victims taking all due care to protect their information. This means that customers should not automatically be considered liable for fraud, simply because the PIN was used. Even though a customer’s PIN might have been compromised, this is not conclusive evidence that he or she has been negligent.
Update from the same source - How Not to Design Authentication talks about the problems of using credit cards for online transactions (card not present transactions).
Yet another update from the same team: Chip and PIN is broken
The flaw is that when you put a card into a terminal, a negotiation takes place about how the cardholder should be authenticated: using a PIN, using a signature or not at all. This particular subprotocol is not authenticated, so you can trick the card into thinking it’s doing a chip-and-signature transaction while the terminal thinks it’s chip-and-PIN. The upshot is that you can buy stuff using a stolen card and a PIN of 0000 (or anything you want). We did so, on camera, using various journalists’ cards. The transactions went through fine and the receipts say â€œVerified by PINâ€.