Re: University of Calgary: Malware class stays on the sked (May 27)

It will be interesting to read in a future issue about the upcoming multi-million dollar lawsuit against the University

of Calgary for the willful and deliberate creation of the ‘X’ Virus which escaped their laboratory and wreaked untold havoc on computers worldwide.

Sometimes making predictions is all too easy.

Peter de Jager

Re: University of Calgary: Malware class stays on the sked (May 27)

I guess those idiots think that because a computer is not on the Internet or a local network it is completely safe. Have they never heard of diskettes? Will they guarantee that every system used for generating malware won’t have a diskette drive, won’t have a CD-RW drive, and can’t in ANY way be connected to other PCs or have data copied from it? Will there be a security guard in the lab 24/7 to prevent people from temporarily installing hardware and software that will allow the malware to be copied?

This malware course is akin to teaching doctors how to treat diseases by giving them the techniques to design their own deadly bacteria and viruses. Please people, show some common sense!

Howard Russo
Senior software developer
Keycorp Canada Inc.

Re: University of Calgary: Malware class stays on the sked (May 27)

How else are we to train competent anti-viral techs without courses as these?

Donnie Werner

Re: University of Calgary: Malware class stays on the sked (May 27)

Send me the e-mail address for the University department head. I’ll give him a virus that can’t be cured by Advil. What a bunch of idiots!

Dave Craik

Re: University of Calgary: Malware class stays on the sked (May 27)

I would like to thank John Aycock for his forward thinking!

I simply don’t understand the logic of those “”security experts”” who believe that learning about malware doesn’t translate to the defence side.

Most of the viruses that hit enough people to be reported in the mainstream media are malware that attack basic design flaws in popular software and operating systems (primarily those from Microsoft).

This is a pretty obvious case where the skills that Aycock will be offering are badly needed.

Russell McOrmand

Re: Class action (May 22)

Why do you want to encourage students to enroll in computer science? There aren’t enough jobs to go around now, and as the lead article about autonomic systems makes clear, there will be fewer in future. Students have sensed this and chosen accordingly.

A. Rocker

Re: You’ve got evidence! (May 20)

I found your article “”You’ve got evidence”” interesting and an enjoyable read. I must, however, take issue with this one statement from the seventh paragraph: “”right before the company upgraded its network from Macintosh to Windows . . .””

It should be unnecessary to point out to professionals like yourselves the booby-trap in this clause. Leaving aside the fact that many of us would consider ANY Mac-to-Windows transition the opposite of an “”upgrade,”” let’s just stay objective and consider the meaning.

Try substituting other product brands: Right before the executive upgraded his car from a Ford to a Chevrolet . . . right before the bar upgraded its beer from Molson to Labatt . . . right before the pianist upgraded his instrument from a Steinway to a Yamaha.

The message here is that, in all cases, one brand is inherently inferior and the other superior. This kind of rhetoric is best left to paid advertising.

I really appreciate the information you provide, and look forward to each newsletter.

Miles Durrie

Letters to the editor must include the writer’s name and company name along with an e-mail address or other contact information. All letters become the property of Editors reserve the right to edit submissions for length and content.

Share on LinkedIn Share with Google+