Comments on: CanSecWest Day One Highlights http://www.veracode.com/blog/2007/04/cansecwest-day-one-highlights/ Application security testing, analysis, and metrics Thu, 09 Feb 2012 11:59:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Chris Eng http://www.veracode.com/blog/2007/04/cansecwest-day-one-highlights/comment-page-1/#comment-447 Chris Eng Mon, 23 Apr 2007 13:47:58 +0000 http://www.veracode.com/blog/?p=37#comment-447 Hmm, that last comment came from an IP in France... thanks guys! BTW, the demo you did to show off the physics modeling engine was pretty sweet. Hmm, that last comment came from an IP in France… thanks guys! BTW, the demo you did to show off the physics modeling engine was pretty sweet.

]]> By: Flat Slides http://www.veracode.com/blog/2007/04/cansecwest-day-one-highlights/comment-page-1/#comment-446 Flat Slides Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:02:57 +0000 http://www.veracode.com/blog/?p=37#comment-446 http://www.secdev.org/conf/IPv6_RH_security-csw07.pdf http://www.secdev.org/conf/IPv6_RH_security-csw07.pdf

]]> By: Chris Eng http://www.veracode.com/blog/2007/04/cansecwest-day-one-highlights/comment-page-1/#comment-445 Chris Eng Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:39:44 +0000 http://www.veracode.com/blog/?p=37#comment-445 I agree that the content of the talk sounded quite interesting, and I honestly do look forward to reading the slides once they're online. But you can't ignore the fact that you lost a sizable chunk of the audience before the talk was half-over. For a topic this significant (based on your comment), it would have been more effective to forego the 3D gimmick in the interest of communicating the content clearly. I guess if I were on the screening committee, I would have accepted the talk on its technical merits but suggested the content be presented in a more traditional format for the sake of clarity. Actually, I was chatting with one of the committee members afterwards and he was pretty much in agreement. Great con though. This was the first year I've made it out for CSW and I will definitely be back. I agree that the content of the talk sounded quite interesting, and I honestly do look forward to reading the slides once they’re online. But you can’t ignore the fact that you lost a sizable chunk of the audience before the talk was half-over. For a topic this significant (based on your comment), it would have been more effective to forego the 3D gimmick in the interest of communicating the content clearly.

I guess if I were on the screening committee, I would have accepted the talk on its technical merits but suggested the content be presented in a more traditional format for the sake of clarity. Actually, I was chatting with one of the committee members afterwards and he was pretty much in agreement.

Great con though. This was the first year I’ve made it out for CSW and I will definitely be back.

]]> By: Dragos Ruiu http://www.veracode.com/blog/2007/04/cansecwest-day-one-highlights/comment-page-1/#comment-444 Dragos Ruiu Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:04:54 +0000 http://www.veracode.com/blog/?p=37#comment-444 If you would have stayed for the rest of the presentation... you would have seen that that talk is likely to be remembered as the most significant problem covered at this years conference. The IETF's recent mistake will soon filter to the news stories... the traffic amplification effects of the source routing issues they point out are stunning. cheers, --dr (yes, we will post a flat slide deck.) If you would have stayed for the rest of the presentation… you would have seen that that talk is likely to be remembered as the most significant problem covered at this years conference. The IETF’s recent mistake will soon filter to the news stories… the traffic amplification effects of the source routing issues they point out are stunning. cheers, –dr (yes, we will post a flat slide deck.)

]]>