My Notes to Myself and Others... : Rants

The age of distraction

Erik Rozman — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:38:55 GMT

We live in an age of distraction. It seems that everything is geared towards getting our
attention,everywhere you turn information is poured upon you. Personally, I find it very
hard to concentrate on a specific topic these days because of that. When working
on something it seems that temptation lurks everywhere, all of a sudden we are surrounded
by other “things” that seem more interesting at that moment…is this due to a flaw in the
human psyche,or is it, that today we do actually live in the age of distraction?

Look at the Internet,from a small network it has turned into a mammoth of information. You
can find your friends, see what they are doing, update them about what you are doing, watch a
movie (or TV series),listen to music, research a topic, read the news, watch sports, read
a book, read magazines, participate in forums, track your workouts, compare them with others,
log-on and play a massive multiplayer online role playing games,chat with your friends, chat
with strangers…I guess you get the point-now add in other more traditional media devices
such as TV and radio, how much time will there be left for you to simply ponder and think?

We might even end up blaming all of these distractions for turning us into dumber people
since we just sit in front of a screen and we stare like hypnotized minions of a greater evil.
When I look at my parents, I actually do feel dumber-they know a lot more than I do,
they know physics, mathematics, chemistry and geography…Even though I was in school just
a few years ago (ok,a bit more then a few) I couldn’t find Micronezia on a map even if my life
depended on it…

An interesting claim was raised by A.J. Jacobs in his article:”You (We) Are Not Stupid”
in this months Esquire (American edition). Jacobs says that even though past generations
have managed to memorize more information then we have we are actually smarter. He also
claims that we are less handy but we solve problems better, since we can think and we have tools
at our disposal that can help us remember instead of having to memorize (Internet and a
search engine…say Google).

The claim itself is a reasonable one,why should we bother with memorizing information if
that information can be recorded for us and accessed whenever we need it…?
In my opinion this is the catch of the claim – we have to trust that fact that the source
of information that we have used to memorize the information for us will still be there when
we need and that it will still be valid.
Basically by becoming totally dependent on these information guardians we might actually be
turning into those hypnotized zombies – we would have no way of knowing wether someone
changed the information in their favor (Moses said that we should all buy brand A…)…

After writing quite a few words, all I wanted to ask is how do you filter the information flow
towards you (to keep focused) and how do you know wether what you do process is valid or not?

Love my mobile phone

Erik Rozman — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:14:26 GMT

In my line of work, I find myself having to coordinate between different people (from
different companies) to complete tasks. This seems to be a fairly simple issue, yet as it
turns out, what seems to be simple isn’t necessarily so…

When coordinating between people that have dependent tasks, some people have
the tendency to entrench themselves in counterproductive positions while blaming
the other side for the failure. This is emphasized when dealing with each party at the
singular level. (As you may or mat not know,every story has three sides,mine, yours
and the truth…)

One remedy for such issues is to call a meeting. You bring everyone in (accommodating
everyone's schedule), you provide refreshments, you listen to everyone and in my humble
opinion, you waste a lot of time…

So how do I solve this problem?

Well,quite simply by using the conference option on my mobile phone. Instead of calling
together a meeting-I simply get everyone that is involved on the line (which doesn’t allow
them to prepare) and create a natural confrontation between the sided. Oddly enough,
most conflicts, as by magic, disappear. People are so surprised and shocked when they are
directly confronted without having time to dig in that they prefer to resolve the issue
and leave the discussion as soon as possible.

You might say that this is solution is too blunt-yet from my experience it is as effective
as it is blunt…

Experience over Theory

Erik Rozman — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:10:13 GMT

In the past I used to work as a trainer. As a trainer you need to have a grasp
of the subjects that you teach. Your knowledge needs to be in-depth as you are
constantly surprised by the questions of delegates. To be able to grasp the material
you need to understand the theory behind what you are attempting to teach.

During the time that I taught I used to take on consulting jobs, to keep my hands
dirty. At some stage I decided to stop training and I started to look for work in the field. A theme
that used to come up in most of my interviews was that I had the theoretical knowledge
yet I may be lacking in experience (previously, I used to hear this from my delegates). This used
to drive me crazy, specifically when it came from people that built themselves (and took
pride of) having nothing but experience. I had better knowledge then they did of the subject
yet I was judged due to "lack of experience".

Doing some reading I found the following sentence I would like to quote from a text book
on negotiation by Gavin Kennedy:

"A purely anecdotal approach to practical problems is limited in three ways: the manager might
forget the appropriate anecdote to guide him in his current circumstances; he might apply
the an inappropriate anecdote to his problem; he might never have covered the appropriate anecdote
in his training and be at loss as to what to do"

I feel that I can relate to this, especially to the last sentence.
As a consultant I used to see this happening every time one such so called "experienced" person
would encounter an issues that he has never encountered before. He would go blank.
In most of the cases by applying some theoretical knowledge of how things work, the theoretician
was able to solve the problem...and then be scolded for not having enough experience... :)

Ok,so at this stage you might be asking yourself- what exactly is he trying to say here?
Two points to keep in mind:

A professional is a person that has both:theoretical knowledge and experience. In my opinion
the balance should be 65-35 towards theory.
Don't laugh at people that actually sit down and learn!
[They may be bigger then you]

Windows Live OneCare 2.0 to feature Online Photo Backup

Erik Rozman — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 13:21:01 GMT

A post on the Windows Vista team blog promises that the new OneCare will come with 10GB of
online storage to be used as a backup location for digital photographs(at a cost). The post provides
a short demonstration of the feature.

Wow,10GB. Online backup,kind of blows you away and makes you think about how everything
is going online. If network connections speed keeps growing you will no longer need local storage
and your data will follow you...Ok,I can't be that positive, think of the ramifications though,your
personal files will be stored on a location that you do not control...

Phishing Sites and IE7

Erik Rozman — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 20:05:44 GMT

Technorati Tags: IE7, rants, general computing

I am an Ebay user. As an Ebay user I am a target for phishng attacks. About a week ago I have made a purchase
and I forogt to leave feedback for the seller. A few minutes ago,I received an e-mail saying that I have received
a message from a seller(nothing special for someone who uses Ebay). I was a bit distracted so I pressed the
hyperlink found in the e-mail.

In a second I was transported to a message from IE7 saying that I am trying to reach a site that is reported as
a known site that is used for phishing:

Moral of the story,watch what you click on and good work IE7!

Playing games on a widescreen

Erik Rozman — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:21:00 GMT

I have just purchased a new wide screen. I am really happy with it as it provides a very clear
and BIG picture. So after installing my new computer (using my new screen) I though that it
was time to give it a run for it's money with a few games I like. To my surprise I found that some games
were not able to use the 16:10 ratio and instead of running smoothly I got a stretched out image.

After searching the web I have found the following website that tries to help:
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

WSGFW (in short) will try to provide unofficial (and obviously unsupported) solutions. Worked for my
games...I am still surprised that game companies neglect wide screen users.

Events and Errors Message Center

Erik Rozman — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:25:00 GMT

When one of the systems that you manage fails one the best ideas for troubleshooting is
looking at the logs. If the OS you are using is from Microsoft the main location for logs is
the event viewer.

The only problem with logs is that at times they provide very cryptic messages. In order to figure
out what the entry in the log means or what remedies can be used I personally use the following
website:
http://www.eventid.net

A couple of day ago I have noticed a KB article announcing that an "Events and Errors Message Center"
has been opened. This center will enable you to search for specific events (using the filters provided)
and once you do find the event you can also browse potential solutions/explanations.
The URL is:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/support/ee/ee_advanced.aspx

Gold iPod...

Erik Rozman — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:04:00 GMT

If your hearts wish is an iPod made of gold,well then you got it!

A company that goes by the name of XEXOO provide iPods made of gold:
http://www.xexoo.com/
http://uk.gizmodo.com/2007/07/20/shuffle_those_feet_with_a_gold.html

Simplicity at the price of obscurity

Erik Rozman — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 16:12:00 GMT

Buying a new computer is a happy event. Faster processing times, smoother running graphics
a general feel of joy. You start planning the installation, you customize the environment and then
bad things start to happen.

As we enter the age of simple computing, most applications can be easily installed by running
a setup file then pressing a couple of next buttons and you are done(well there is a short wait
while staring at a progress bar). Now this is very simple if everything succeeds-yet what happens
when the application fails to install?

Specifically what happens if the application fails to install and this happens during the time that you
are staring at the progress bar? Enter frustration. Since there is no meaningful progress indicator(except the bar
which can not be called meaningful) you have no clue as to what is happening to your system during the
installation.

In my humble opinion while striving to simplify(or make computing less scary) we should keep in mind that hiding "complexity"
may be the simple path yet it may not be the best path. I prefer to see meaningful information (scary as it may be)
instead of having to guess what wen wrong or at what position my application failed.

Oh,and yes-I bought a new computer,I am installing it and I have not time to breathe...

Windows 2008 Impressions: Attended Installation

Erik Rozman — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:36:00 GMT

The attended installation process of Windows 2008 has been simplified.

Until Windows 2008, the process of installing a Windows system included the basic configuration of the system.
In other words the installer was asked a bunch of question he had to answer and once he was done he had a running
system. The system still needed to be configured but a basic system was up and running.

Windows 2008 changes this, (the installation no longer provides a running system) in order to simplify the installation
process almost all configurative questions have been removed and we are left with the bare necessities. The installation
process (very similar to Vista’s installation process) is comprised of the following questions:

1. Location (locale and time zone)

2. Disk partitioning-note that you do not have to create a partition, you can simply choose empty space and the
installation procedure will configure it for you

3. Product Key-by entering the correct key the correct version of the OS is chosen, if no key is entered the installer is
warned yet he is allowed to choose the version of the installation and he has to provide the key later on.

That’s it.

To Windows veterans this may seem a bit strange, you may be asking yourself, where is the part in which we configure
networking, you may also be asking yourself where do I chose the components I want installed…the answer is that they
have been removed from the installation process for the sake of simplicity.

When you are done with the installation all you get is a system with a very basic installation of Windows 2008 Server. System
configuration has been moved from the installation further down the line. Do not fear though, it has not been moved too far down
the line, you actually configure your server just after you have installed it with two new tools provided by the system (I will write
about them in my next post on the subject).

I am not sure how to treat this change or how I feel about it. On one hand there is no doubt that this change simplifies the installation
process of the OS which in turn allows quicker installations due to it’s “fire and forget” style, yet on the other hand it provides less
flexibility during the installation phase and it makes it seem a lot simpler to deploy a server. In addition to that it also makes it seem simpler
to deploy the OS. You may be asking why does that seem problematic?

Begin rant: The field of IT is being treated with less respect due to the fact that everyone feels that they can get involved with IT,
they understand IT and they can do IT since IT is simple. When all you need to deploy and OS is to click a mouse things
will get a lot worse…
Obviously this isn't the root of all evil yet deploying a server correctly isn't as simple as clicking on a button and in my opinion
the impression that it is as simple as clicking on a button shouldn't be created...after all perception is everything.

Disclaimer- The experiences and the ideas expressed in this post are my personal experiences. If you feel that they are inaccurate
or incorrect feel free to contact me about them.

TCP Header Checksums Displayed as Corrupted (using Network Monitor)

Erik Rozman — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:12:00 GMT

OK,so I was troubleshooting and odd issue with an FTP server and one of the things
that caught my attention while using Network Monitor (on a Windows 2000 server)
was that some(actually almost all) of the TCP checksums (originating from the server)
were found to be incorrect.

At first I thought I was having a networking problem,yet someone pointed out the fact
that since the calculation was being offloaded to the NIC Network Monitor may be
calculating the checksums incorrectly.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/243294

Funny article about iPhone...

Erik Rozman — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 18:56:00 GMT

I have no opinion or clue about the accuracy of the article titled "Ten Reasons Why You Shouldn't Buy an iPhone"by Jim Lynch
published at extremtech.com, yet it managed to make me laugh(read through it,until the end-and I hope you will understand
what I found amusing):

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2151961,00.asp

-- Erik Rozman

Exchange 2003 OWA and Vista

Erik Rozman — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 11:28:00 GMT

An oldie but I see it coming up in the newsgroups...my guess is that some sysadmins forgot to
fix the problem and the users (specifically home users) trying to access their mailboxes are
surprised and convinced that something is wrong with their own system(which to some extent is
true...):

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/911829

April 1st RFCs

Erik Rozman — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 18:16:00 GMT

There are a couple I really like:

IP over Avian (check out the diagrams)
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2549

Electricity over IP
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3251

Still playing with RAM

Erik Rozman — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 09:38:00 GMT

I can't really say what happened since I don't understand it yet it works,so I guess that is important.

After losing one memory bank on my system(one of two 1GB sticks) and forgetting about it
I was awakened when my virtual machines would not start...Now looking for 133 memory sticks
is quite a challenge but I found a few that might be good.

So I tried to install it, two new sticks...system counts the memory and verifies it and then simply
freezes...I replace the old stick,it works...

I put the old one and then new one together-doesn't work(which is logical).

Switched between the slots and presto...two memory sticks from different manufacturers
with different speeds and it works...
Why ask questions...

Testing Memory (RAM)

Erik Rozman — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 19:39:00 GMT

OK,
So why I remembered this is a long and odd story which includes myself forgetting
that I have faulty memory installed on my laptop, wanting to install Fedora Core 6 inside
VMware on the same laptop and ending up recompiling the kernel in order to be able to
install VMware tools and failing...

Anyways Microsoft have a nifty tool that allows you to test your memory modules
by burning a CD:

http://oca.microsoft.com/en/windiag.asp

Yes I know,it has been there for long and might have even mentioned it in the past but
but it's still useful (and I am getting old...).

A new (or maybe not so new) market [Vulnerability market,that is]

Erik Rozman — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 08:32:00 GMT

To be honest I was very surprised when I was reading an article about what is called the
"vulnerability market".
It seems that currently there is a thriving(possibly an overstatement) market for vulnerabilities.
In other words a person or group discovers a vulnerability and it offers it to the highest bidder.

Why would someone want to buy a vulnerability?

This is a good question- I think that there might be several reasons for buying a vulnerabilities:

If you are in the business of corporate espionage, you might want to have it in your arsenal.
If you are in the business of just doing bad things for fun, you might want to have it in your arsenal.
If you want the publicity for being the one that "discovered" the vulnerability, you might want to have it in your arsenal.

The first and the third reasons intrigue me:
If you are a shadow dweller that makes money by stealing information from corporate information systems
obtaining knowledge about undiscovered/unexploited vulnerabilities has to be worthless. Your target
can not, and does not expect you to use that angle of attack since he is not aware that he is vulnerable-this might
provide you with the edge you need.
Obviously it would be in your best interest to keep the vulnerability to yourself and leave it undisclosed for
as long as possible.

As for the publicity-by being the firm that has "discovered" such a vulnerability you might gain a better perception
in the publics eye as being proactive and identifying vulnerabilities-for a security company this might be worthless.
The issue to debate here is what happened to ethics?

Tech-ED 2006 (Eilat)

Erik Rozman — Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:54:00 GMT

After one year of absence(no Tech-ED in 2005) Tech-ED is back in 2006.
The details are minimal but based on the information I have it's going to be
a great one...

Take a look at:
http://www.microsoft.com/israel/teched/

Why sandboxes are important...or in other words don't shoot yourself in the leg

Erik Rozman — Mon, 19 Sep 2005 20:23:00 GMT

Why not you ask?
Well since it may be painfull...

Microsoft released a patch for Exchange 2003(888619). I read the documentation and it seemed to be relatively harmless...so I decided to apply it to my environment.

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=888619

[Yes,I know that it is extremely important to test patches before they are applied to production servers
but I guess I like living on the edge...yea,right!]

My environment has a front-end/back-end configuration-after the patch was applied to one of my servers OWA
stopped working for the users homed on it.

To make it even worse when I tried applying the patch(before understanding that I have an issue) to my other servers,
I got an error message stating that my server does not have SP1 for Exchange 2003 installed so I can't install the patch.
I have SP1 installed as far as I can tell.
[I start to get that sinking feeling...]

After removing the patch from the problematic server the service was resumed.

I don't really know what happened since I didn't have time to investigate it. I don't blame anyone for this(nor do I imply that there is a problem with the patch) but myself for not testing the patch and in addition to that it is possible that I have a problem in my environment that caused this.

Be sure to test the effects of a patch to your environment...

Zotob,or worms that you get punished by...

Erik Rozman — Sat, 20 Aug 2005 21:16:00 GMT

Hmmmm...
This one really got me going(on the other hand this shouldn't be a usrprise since it had me
up unttil 3am).

What makes a vulnerability more dangerous/famous then another?
How come there are dozens of vulnerabilities yet you really remmember only some of them
such as Blaster?

The answers may vary:

No high profile exploit was created.
No high profile company was hit.

So what is it this time?