Return-Path: <sentto-279987-1101-986550027-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com> Delivered-To: fc@all.net Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Fri, 06 Apr 2001 02:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 3178 invoked by uid 510); 6 Apr 2001 08:41:33 -0000 Received: from jj.egroups.com (208.50.144.82) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 6 Apr 2001 08:41:33 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-1101-986550027-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.4.55] by jj.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Apr 2001 09:40:27 -0000 X-Sender: vstagg@deakin.edu.au X-Apparently-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_1); 6 Apr 2001 09:40:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 75127 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2001 09:40:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Apr 2001 09:40:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO deakin.edu.au) (128.184.136.2) by mta3 with SMTP; 6 Apr 2001 10:41:22 -0000 Received: from marmadas (marmadas.cm.deakin.edu.au [128.184.80.75]) by deakin.edu.au (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id f369eGL23249 for <iwar@yahoogroups.com>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:40:16 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <006601c0be7d$95bec1f0$4b50b880@cm.deakin.edu.au> To: <iwar@yahoogroups.com> References: <NDBBJBDJCGCKGDILPNNEIEDFGAAA.junkmail@barnowl.com> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "Vernon Stagg" <vstagg@deakin.edu.au> Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:40:15 +1000 Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Subject: [iwar] Difference between IW and RA and Comp Sec etc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, One of the problems I am facing during my research is a lot of the traditional comp sci people dont understand or disregard the issue of Information Warfare. There also tends to be similar apathy in the commercial arena with managers, execs, etc. Most consider it another form of computer security or that a Risk Analysis will fix everything up. I was interested what some of the views from people here think to this - agree/disagree? I personally disagree, and consider IW at a higher level where computer security and RA can be incorporated into the concept but are certainly very different methods. I also think that computer security and RA these days have simply been tweaked to include a lot of elements that fall outside their traditional scope, often with unwanted or unexpected results. Just interested in a few opinions and maybe a little healthy debate. Vernon _____________________________________ Vernon Stagg B.Sc(Hons) - PhD Candidate Department of Computing and Mathematics Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria Australia, 3217 email : vstagg@deakin.edu.au web1 : http://deakin.infowar.com.au/~vstagg web2 : http://www.infowar.com.au/ _____________________________________ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~> Do you have 128-bit SSL encryption server security? Get VeriSign's FREE Guide, "Securing Your Web Site for Business." Get it now! http://us.click.yahoo.com/EVNB7A/c.WCAA/bT0EAA/kzAVlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-06-30 21:44:06 PDT