Communications of the ACM (March)

92 Pages·2004·2.753 MB·English

Editorial Pointers
This month marks my 17th result, particularly as they pertain to intelligence gath-
year with Communications. During ering, protecting the global network infrastructure,
that time this magazine has chroni- and enhancing emergency response. Guest editor John
cled the evolution of practically Yen says such protective efforts require “tremendous
every known—and heretofore science” and that major challenges remain, given the
unknown—discipline within com- secretive nature of terrorist activities and daunting
puter science. Indeed, we watched environmental constraints. We hope this section
the computing field itself evolve prompts the IT community—worldwide—to help
into a global arena of unprecedented triumphs and develop the solutions together.
erratic spirals. But with it all, it’s still difficult to accept Also in this issue, Wang et al. contend the criminal
that events would one day warrant the coverage we mind is no match for a new record-linkage method
feature here—U.S. homeland security. designed to match different, deceptive criminal identi-
Naïve? Perhaps. ACM is indeed a global village; we ty records. And Escudero-Pascual and Hosein argue
are well aware there are many readers of and authors that government attempts to create a one-size-fits-all
in this magazine who live in parts of the world where technology policy to protect communications infra-
homeland security—or lack thereof—has always been structures do not translate on an international scale.
a tangible part of everyday life. For many more of us, Dalal et al. describe a framework for enterprise
however, terrorism on home soil is fresh ground. In its process modeling that should enhance the design of
aftermath, governments worldwide have turned to the next generation of ERP systems. Kim and
their science and technology communities to build the Schneiderjans offer a unique interpretation of distance
tools and intelligence capabilities to better secure their learning, asserting success of Web-based education
citizens and defend their borders against attack. programs may depend on the personality characteris-
The U.S. government has drawn upon a vast uni- tics of employees. And Sethi interprets a series of stud-
verse of technologists from all disciplines to develop ies on stress among IS professionals and how it affects
new digital techniques for defending national borders productivity and costly employee turnover.
and interests. Although homeland security incorpo-
rates myriad research branches, this month’s special
section introduces some of the information and com-
munications technologies that have emerged as a Editor
OF THE ACM • A monthly publication of the ACM Publications Office
ACM, 1515 Broadway, New York, New York 10036-5701 USA [phone] FAX: [phone]
Editor: Diane Crawford Advertising Communications of the ACM
Managing Editor: Thomas E. Lambert ACM Advertising Department (ISSN 0001-0782) is published monthly by the
Senior Editor: Andrew Rosenbloom 1515 Broadway, New York, NY 10036-5701 ACM, 1515 Broadway, New York, NY
Editorial Assistant: Mailyn Chang [phone]; Fax: [phone]-5701. Periodicals postage paid at
Copyright: Deborah Cotton Account Executive: New York, NY 10001, and other mailing
William R. Kooneyemail: [email protected] offices. POSTMASTER: Please send address
Contributing Editors changes to Communications of the ACM, 1515
Phillip G. Armour; Hal Berghel; For the latest media kit—including rates—contact: Broadway, New York, NY 10036-5701 USA
Michael Cusumano; Peter J. Denning; Graciela Jacome: [email protected]
Robert L. Glass; Seymour Goodman;
Printed in the U.S.A.
Meg McGinity; Rebecca Mercuri; Contact Points
Peter G. Neumann; Pamela Samuelson CACMeditorial: [email protected]
aaccmm
Copyright permission:[email protected]
PRESS
Art Director: Caren Rosenblatt Calendar items:[email protected]
Production Manager: Lynn D’Addesio Change of address:[email protected]
COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACMMarch 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 5
ACM
The Association for Computing Machinery
ACM (founded 1947) is an international scientific and educational organization dedicated to advancing The art, science, engineering, and
application of information technology, serving both professional and public interests by fostering the open interchange of information and by
promoting the highest professional and ethical standards.
Executive Director and CEO: John White Board Chairs and Standing Committees
Associate Director, Office of Education Board: Russell Shackelford; SGB Board: Alan Berenbaum;
Director, ACMU.S. Public Policy Office: JeffGrove MembershipBoard: Terry Coatta; Mike Macfaden;
Publications Board: Robert Allen USACM Committee:
Deputy Executive Directorand COO: Patricia Ryan
Director, Office of Information Systems: Wayne Graves Eugene Spafford, Barbara Simons
Director, Office of Financial Services: Russell Harris
Financial Operations Planning: Darren Ramdin
SIG Chairs
Director, Office of Membership: Lillian Israel SIGACT:Harold Gabow; SIGAda:Currie Colket;
SIGAPL: Robert G. Brown; SIGAPP:Barrett Bryant;
Director, Office of Publications: Mark SIGARCH:Norman Jouppi;SIGART:Maria Gini;
Mandelbaum
SIGBED:Janos Sztipanovits; SIGCAPH: John Goldthwaite;
Deputy Director: Bernard Rous
Deputy Director, Magazine Development: Diane Crawford SIGCAS: TomJewett; SIGCHI: Joseph Konstan;
Publisher, ACM Books and Journals: Jono SIGCOMM: Jennifer Rexford; SIGCSE: Henry Walker;
Hardjowirogo SIGDA: Robert Walker; SIGDOC: Scott Tilley;
SIGecomMichael Wellman; SIGGRAPH: Alain Chesnais;
Director, Office of SIG Services: Donna Baglio SIGGROUP: Wolfgang Prinz; SIGIR: Jaime Callan;
Assistant Director, Office of SIG Services: Erica Johnson SIGITE: Edith Lawson; SIGKDD: Won Kim;
Program Director: Ginger Ignatoff SIGMETRICS: Leanna Golubchik; SIGMICRO: Kemal Ebcioglu;
SIGMIS: Janice Sipior; SIGMOBILE: Victor Bahl;
ACM Council SIGMOD:M. Tamer Ozsu; SIGMULTIMEDIA: Ramesh Jain;
President Maria Klawe SIGOPS: Keith Marzullo; SIGPLAN: Michael Burke;
Vice-President David S. Wise SIGSAC: Sushil Jajodia; SIGSAM: Emil Volcheck;
Secretary/Treasurer Telle Whitney SIGSIM: John Tufarolo; SIGSOFT: Alexander Wolf;
Past President Stephen R. SIGUCCS: Robert Paterson; SIGWEB: Peter Nuernberg
Bourne
Chair, SGB Board Alan Berenbaum
Chair, Publications Board Robert Allen
For information from Headquarters:[phone]
Members-at-Large:Roscoe Giles (2002–2006); Denise Gürer ACM U.S. Public Policy Office:
(2000–2004); David S. Johnson (1996–2004); Michel Beaudouin- Jeff Grove, Director
Lafon (2000–2004); Edward Lazowska (2000–2004); Barbara Ryder 1100 Seventeenth St., NW
(2002–2004); Gabriel Silberman (2002–2006) Suite 507
SGB Council Representatives: Stuart Feldman (2002–2004); Washington, DC 20036 USA
Mark Scott Johnson (2001–2005); JimCohoon (2001–2005) [phone]—office
[phone]—fax
[email protected]
OF THE ACM • A monthly publication of the ACM Publications Office
ACM, 1515 Broadway, New York, New York 10036-5701 USA [phone] FAX: [phone]
Editorial Advisory Board Copyright for components of this work owned by Single Copiesare $8 to members and $17 to
Gordon Bell; Hal Berghel; Grady Booch; others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with nonmembers. Please send orders prepaid plus $7 for
Nathaniel Borenstein; Vinton G. Cerf; credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, shipping and handling to ACM Order Dept., P.O.
Kilnam Chon; Jacques Cohen; Larry L. Constantine; to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires Box 11414, New York, NY 10286-1414 or call
Jon Crowcroft; Peter J. Denning; Mohamed E. Fayad; prior specific permission and/or fee. Request permis- [phone]. For credit card orders call
Usama Fayyad; Christopher Fox; Ravi Ganesan; sion to publish from: Publications Dept. ACM, Inc. [phone]. Order personnel on duty 8:30-4:30
Don Gentner; Don Hardaway; Karen Holtzblatt; Fax [phone] or email <permissions@ EST. After hours, please leave message and order
Barry M. Leiner; Pattie Maes; Eli Noam; acm.org> personnel will return your call.
Cherri Pancake; Yakov Rekhter; Douglas Riecken; For other copying of articles that carry a code at
Ted Selker; Dennis Tsichritzis; Ronald Vetter the bottom of the first or last page or screen display, Notice to Past Authors of
copying is permitted provided that the per-copy fee ACM-Published Articles ACM intends to
Publications Board indicated in the code is paid through the Copyright create a complete electronic archive of all articles
Chair: Robert Allen; Gul Agha; Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, and/or other material previously published by ACM.
Michel Beaudouin-Lafon; Ronald F. Boisvert; MA 01923, 508-750-8500, 508-750-4470 (fax). If you were previously published by ACM in any
Adolfo Guzman-Arenas; Wendy Hall; journal or conference proceedings prior to 1978, or
Carol Hutchins; Mary Jane Irwin; M. Tamer Ozsu; Subscriptions any SIG newsletter at any time, and you do not
Holly Rushmeier Annual subscription cost is included in the society want this work to appear in the ACM Digital
member dues of $99.00 (for students, cost is included Library, please inform [email protected], stating
ACM Copyright Notice in $40.00 dues); the nonmember annual subscription the title of the work, the author(s), and where and
Copyright © 2004 by Association for Computing is $179.00 See top line of mailing label for subscrip- when published.
Machinery, Inc. (ACM). Permission to make tion expiration date coded in four digits: the first two
digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for are year, last two, month of expiration. Microfilm and
personal or classroom use is granted without fee microfiche are available from University Microfilms aaccmm
provided that copies are not made or distributed for International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Dept. PR, Ann
profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear Arbor, MI 48106; [phone].
this notice and full citation on the first page.
6 March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 32 COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM
News Track
Blurred Vision vacy and security. Now major employers are banning
The U.S. Government, bowing to repeated Secret Ser- camera phones on the job amid growing fears these
vice requests, is now deliberately obscuring its highest- devices pose serious threats to company secrets and
quality aerial photographs over Washington in an effort worker privacy, reports USA Today. Firms worry
to hide visible objects on the roofs of the White House, employees will use the phones to send images of new
Capitol, and Treasury products or other company information,
departments. The or else take pictures of unsuspecting co-
Associated Press workers in locker rooms or bathrooms,
reports this blurring which may lead to business or legal risks.
policy also includes General Motors, Texas Instruments,
views of the Naval DaimlerChrysler, BMW, and Samsung are
Observatory where a few of the recent corporations to issue
the Vice President “no camera phone” zones in the work-
lives. Experts are con- place. U.S. courthouses are also starting to
cerned the unusual adopt the ban fearing camera phones can
decision reflects a be used to photograph jurors or under-
troublesome move cover agents serving as witnesses.
toward new govern-
Love/Hate Relationship
ment limits on com-
mercial satellite and In other phone news, the cell phone topped
aerial photography. the list of the annual Lemelson-MIT Inven-
Moreover, the effec- tion Index as the invention users love to
tiveness of blurring hate. Unlike recent U.K. surveys that found
one set of govern- the majority of users developing a strong,
ment-funded photos is questionable since tourists can sentimental attachment to their phones, the U.S.-
see the roofs of these noted buildings from dozens of based study concluded that cell phones have become a
taller buildings in downtown D.C. Secret Service necessary part of life, but the devices in fact drive most
spokesperson John Gill explained the agency worried users crazy. “The interconnections you get from the
that high-altitude photographs, so detailed that pedes- cell phones is a very positive thing. The downside is
trians can been seen on crosswalks, “may expose security that you sometimes want to be alone,” explained
operations.” Interestingly, the policy does not extend to Lemelson Center Director Merton C. Fleming.
detailed pictures of the Pentagon, Supreme Court, Jus- Among the other inventions getting a collective rasp-
A tice Department, or FBI and CIA headquarters. berry: the alarm clock, television, razor, microwave
BAT oven, computer, and answering machine.
E
O
K
ASA (Keep) Phone Home Image Makeover
M
Y
NS B An increasing number of companies are joining the The image of the stereotypical Internet user, long
O ban on camera phones. Health clubs and popular characterized as an antisocial geek with no friends
ATI
R gambling casinos were quick to forbid the discrete pic- and no interest in the real world, has been shattered
UST
ILL ture-taking devices for obvious reasons of patron pri- by a new survey that finds the typical Web surfer one
COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 9
News Track
wrong key at one point.
The robot was also
more sensitive in finan-
cial concerns; human
players were penalized
for overspending. Ron
Chrisley, University of
Sussex, is quick to point
out that having robots
work in research labs is
that shuns TV and is quite the social animal. The really nothing new. “We’ve had robot scientists for
UCLA World Internet Project (ccp.ucla.edu/pages/ a long time now. But in the past we’ve always called
internet-report.asp), a three-year survey of Net and them ‘grad students’.”
non-Net users in 14 countries, produced global
Rooms with a View
comparisons data on social, political, and economic
effects of the Net. The survey shows a digital gen- A million-dollar two-story home constructed of
der gap in all participating countries and surpris- walls made mostly of windows that turn from clear
ingly high levels of online use among the poorest to opaque, or to computer screens, to speakers, or
citizens of the surveyed countries. The gender gap to television screens was a main attraction at the
is most prevalent in Italy where 41.7% of the users recent Sundance Film Festival. The 6,000 square-
were men; 20.1% women. The lowest gap was in foot prototype house, built in Park City, UT, is the
Taiwan (where user makeup is 25% men, 23.5% creation of Anderson Windows and Time Warner
women). Internet users in all surveyed countries and considered by both a research project. The
spend more time socializing and exercising. In fact, windows, found inside and out including the roof,
Net surfers also read more books (except in Ger- between rooms, stacked atop each other in bed-
many and the U.S.). South Koreans rooms and bathrooms, are
trust Net info the most; Swedes are the fitted with a microfiber LCD
most skeptical. And China boasts the screen, which makes them
most active Net socializers. opaque or able to display
light from a TV projector.
Robot Scientist
Touch-screen computer mon-
A robot that can formulate theories, itors are fully integrated into
perform experiments, and interpret each window, allowing them
results (and does all more cheaply than to receive and display infor-
its human counterpart) has been cre- mation without projection.
ated by a team of scientists at the Uni- Architect Michael James
versity of Wales in Aberystwyth, U.K. Plutz designed the abode
Nature magazine reports the Robot with “wall plans,” not floor
Scientist isn’t as intelligent as, say, the plans. Of the resulting struc-
leading chess-playing computer, but ture, he says: “We are a mul-
combining the smarts of a computer with the titasking species. We want to do everything in
agility to perform real scientific problems is a major every room. We should expect our windows to do
engineering feat. In a recent test against human the same.” c
competitors, the robot worked out which genes in
yeast are responsible for making vital amino acids;
even beating out a biologist who claims he hit the Send items of interest to [email protected]
10 March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM
Principles of Logical Thought
Before Technical Details
S
imone Santini’s comment I have found that people using ardous object ... that can be
(Forum, Dec. 2003) brought their brains get ahead further and expected to attract children to
to mind something I con- faster than people who know only investigate or play.” In the case of
stantly tell my students: There is technical details. In the end, it is classroom computers, the hazards
nothing new about computers; not the computer that is impor- are encouragement for superficial
they simply mechanize the applica- tant but the results they help thinking, facilitation of general
tion of logical principles that have achieve. Knowing what to do with academic laziness up to and
been around since Socrates, a logic the machine is far more important including plagiarism, ease of access
that can be formally expressed than knowing how to do things to materials children ought not to
through the mathematics invented with the machine. Well-consid- see, and general time wasting,
by George Boole. ered definitions of what things to including game playing and aim-
The two best courses I ever do inspire us to greater accom- less Web surfing.
took for learning to work with plishments than trivial applica- As Santini pointed out, com-
computers were formal logic and tions. Applying basic principles of puters are useful in a school
Boolean algebra. The former was logical thought shields us from library, but their value in the class-
taught by the philosophy depart- being overwhelmed by technical room is far from proven. If Aristo-
ment, the latter by the mathemat- detail. tle, Newton, and Einstein were
ics department. Neither professor Peter G. Raeth educated without computers, how
knew much about computers. Fairborn, OH much of a handicap is not having
Indeed, the subject of computers one?
T
never came up. Yet my experience he notion that we’re My one disagreement with
suggests that everything a com- going to fix, or even help, Santini concerns is over the issue
puter does is based on the princi- U.S. educational problems of school funding. I do not
ples expressed in these two by putting a computer on every lament “the idea that public fund-
courses. desk or even in every classroom is ing of education is destined to
Thus, Santini’s assertion ridiculous. Simone Santini’s decrease.” I embrace it. When it
appears to be correct: The mind Forum comment (Dec. 2003) was decreases to zero, children now
should be developed first; techni- eloquent on this point. confined to public schooling will
cal details should come later. It’s a Computers in the classroom are finally get the same chance to
mistake to sit people in front of a what the law calls an “attractive excel as the U.S.’s seven million
N
O computer as the first step in teach- nuisance,” like a swimming pool private school and home-schooled
WATS ing them how to program it to do in your neighbor’s backyard. The children have had for decades.
AUL something useful. definition is “any inherently haz- The best alternative to public
P
COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 11
Forum
funding is not corporate sponsor- Still Seeking Software ((cid:1)18%) had the greatest gains.
ship but self-funding. Productivity Software was last ((cid:2)1%).
I
For decades, government has n our article “Measuring These facts continue to support
brainwashed parents into trusting Software Productivity in the our observations, measures, and
the bureaucrats to educate their Software Industry” (Nov. rationale about low productivity
children. The result has been a 2003), we developed a rationale using current software technology,
disaster. The only way they can for measuring the productivity of as well as the steps needed to turn
take back control is to pay fully development and support environ- it around. This has not seemed to
for their children’s schooling ments as a first step toward solving stop the software industry from
themselves. the problem of software produc- continuing to put itself further
Mark Wallace tivity. behind in the productivity race
Irvine, CA A 1995 BusinessWeek article sur- each year.
veyed productivity in 25 indus- Donald Anselmo
Why Reinvent When We tries, deriving percent productivity Phoenix, AZ
Have Open Source? change over the previous five years Henry Ledgard
R
obert L. Glass’s Practical while reaching some astounding Toledo, OH
Programmer column “A conclusions outlined in another
Sociopolitical Look at Open article in Software Developer & Spare Me the Self-Service
T
Source” (Nov. 2003) discounted the Publisher(July 1996). Computers he News Track item
(cid:1)
practicality of users fixing their own (hardware) were first ( 153%), “Checked Out” (Jan. 2004)
(cid:1)
source, since the only users capable semiconductors second ( 84%), cited the skyrocketing use of
(cid:2)
of doing so are interested only in and software dead last ( 11%). self-service kiosks. I, for one, am
system programs. Application end Independently, the Standish not convinced that the 14.5 mil-
users hire consultants to do the fix- Group in Feb. 1995 published a lion passengers statistic really
ing for them, and open source report on the software industry, means what it suggests. As a recent
works out very nicely indeed. further supporting the negative first-class passenger on a major air-
I’d like to understand the rea- productivity findings. line, I was directed to the self-ser-
sons software developers insist on These facts were at odds with vice kiosk. Glancing at the
reinventing the wheel despite the the implications of a 1991 Busi- counter, I noticed that all passen-
availability of open source solu- nessWeekarticle “Software Made gers were being directed to the
tions. As pointed out in Eric Simple,” which interviewed key “self-service” line; there was no
Steven Raymond’s The Art of players in the world of object-ori- personal service. This is just
Unix Programming ented programming. The article another way station on the road to
(www.faqs.org/docs/artu/), the cited the naysayers who compared eliminating personal (but costly)
notion of “not invented here” is OOP to artificial intelligence as face-to-face service without lower-
not simply a response to the lack just another computer industry ing the price to the consumer. It
of transparency in proprietary buzzword. Defending this com- didn’t cost me any less in effort
solutions. The consequence in the parison, the authors wrote that, (checking in) or money (ticket
open source world of program- unlike AI, object technology price), but it most certainly saved
mers’ roll-your-own tendencies is would have “an immediate, practi- the airline some of both.
that, except for a few areas with cal payoff.” Personally, I would prefer if the
category-killer solutions, most Much more recently, Business- self-serve kiosks at airlines and
problems are covered with Week (Jan. 12, 2004) discussed the grocery stores (along with tele-
haystacks of partial solutions of annual percent productivity gains phone menu systems corporations
questionable utility. of various major industries from use to punish us) would go away.
David Hawley 1998 to 2001. Computer chips Dwayne Nelson
Tokyo, Japan ((cid:1)19%) and consumer electronics Washington, D.C.
12 March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM
Lineage of the Internet’s came out in 1983. What is the The lineage of the individual
Open Systems Foundation basis for the authors’ claim? protocols in the TCP/IP stack
I
’d like to point out an Alex Simonelis clearly predate the concept of the
important contradiction in Montreal, Canada standardized and layered stack
Coskun Bayrak’s and Chad itself; TCP itself dates to the
Davis’s “The Relationship Authors Respond: 1960s. However, the notion of
T
between Distributed Systems and hough we acknowledge the TCP/IP protocol stack isn’t
Open Source Development” our semantic error we were the same as the individual proto-
(Dec. 2003), which stated: “The lax not to catch prior to cols themselves. It wasn’t until
original specifications of a layered publication, it shouldn’t be 1989 that the architecture of
protocol stack upon which het- viewed as an indictment of the Internet communications was
erogeneous distributed systems general line of our argument. A written into RFCs 1122 and
could build their communication key part of our purpose, and of 1123, long after OSI and other
systems, and upon which TCP/IP this citation in particular, was to projects brought attention to the
was closely modeled, is of course highlight the open system nature significance of openness and
the Open Systems Interconnect of the Internet’s technological interoperability.
model [5].” Reference 5 is Peter- foundations, at the core of which We appreciate the opportunity
son’s and Davie’s Computer Net- is the TCP/IP suite. to revisit these issues. The history
works: A Systems Approach, which From a historical perspective, of these systems had been on the
stated: “The Internet and the evolution of OSI vs. TCP/IP margins of our thinking prior to
ARPANET were around before is a subjective issue. One may be this reexamination of our topic.
the OSI architecture, and the interested in the invention of We thank Gottlieb and Simonelis
experience gained from building specific protocols or, alternatively, for initiating this dialogue,
them was a major influence on the invention of open system encouraging us to delve further
the OSI reference model.” concepts, including layering and into the genealogical elements of
Though this obvious contra- interoperability. However, the our topic. We also hope to hear
diction was made by the authors, citation reinforced the openness more about our discussion of the
a thorough review should have of the Internet’s core communi- Internet’s fundamental reliance on
caught it. cations mechanisms. The notion communication systems demon-
Yitzchak Gottlieb of what won—OSI or TCP/IP— strating high levels of openness.
Princeton, NJ is not relevant in this sense. Rele- Concerning the mechanisms
vant is the nonproprietary, open of development utilized by open
T
he article by Coskun system qualities of the Internet source projects, including Linux
Bayrak and Chad Davis protocol suite. itself, we were unable in the con-
would have been more We do not support the sugges- text of the article to fully explore
informative and more interesting tion that the protocols within the the inner structures of the open
had it let us in on the mechanisms TCP/IP suite were derived from source development model and
the Linux community uses to sort OSI. We would, however, like to its intriguing similarities to the
the good from the bad features know whether anyone finds fault inner structures of distributed
and code so we “can bet the prod- with our characterization of the software systems.
uct will be substantially better in TCP/IP stack as an essentially Coskun Bayrak
only a few weeks,” as they say. and significantly open system. In Chad Davis
Moreover, the authors assert regards to history and our discus- Little Rock, AR
that TCP/IP was closely modeled sion of openness, the OSI project
on ISO’s OSI. Vinton Cerf and was meant to clarify the role of
Please address all Forum correspondence to the
Robert Kahn began their work openness in the Internet’s devel-
Editor, Communications, 1515 Broadway, New
on TCP in 1973, whereas OSI oping infrastructure. York, NY 10036; email: [email protected].
COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 13
Security Watch
Rebecca T. Mercuri
Superscaled Security
Exponential increases in computational speed, memory capacity, and
bandwidth impose futuristic security demands and challenges.
A
dvances in high-perfor- in the same amount of time) has “Moore’s Law, coupled with the
mance computing have continued to endure. It is likely to business imperative to be more
found their counterpart surpass even Gordon Moore’s competitive, is driving vendors to
in new security threats. own 1997 prediction [5] that it build systems of exponentially
Yet there is an interesting twist in will “run out of gas” around increasing complexity without
that computational expansion 2017, as new materials and fabri- making security experts exponen-
tends to be relatively pre- cation technologies emerge tially smarter to compensate.”
dictable, whereas security chal- (including those intro- “The current trend is to build sys-
lenges are typically duced through tems that conceptually are secure,
introduced and mitigated the recur- but in practice and probability
(when possible) in a sive appli- the systems’ ability to resist the
more chaotic fashion. cation of efforts of a creative attacker are
Few would have improved less,” said Kocher in a pre-
surmised, for computers USENIX 2002 interview. “The
example, that spam would into the manu- idea is that security should be get-
have exceeded facturing ting better, however, design flaws
60% of all process). In 2003, are becoming an increasingly cata-
email trans- Moore told the Inter- strophic problem” [2].
missions by the national Solid- Some believe that cryptography
end of 2003, nor States Circuit can help reverse this trend, and
that detection Conference “I cryptosystems are playing a signif-
software would require remember thinking icant role in providing security
sophistication approaching Tur- one micron (a milestone the assurances. Yet each generation of
ing Test intelligence levels. It is industry passed in 1986) was as computers brings with it an obso-
useful, therefore, to consider far as we could go because of the lescence of some earlier crypto-
some of the impacts of scaled-up wavelength of visible light used graphic methods, usually
computing on our overall secu- at the time. Engineers then considerably sooner than has been
rity environment. switched to ultraviolet light.” predicted. This will likely con-
Certain rules continue to apply But as advancements in hard- tinue to be the case, and may
to computational evolution. ware continue to occur, security even accelerate as new paradigms
Moore’s Law (which anticipates appears to be declining (although for algorithmic attacks, including
Y processing power doubling not necessarily at an equivalent distributed techniques, evolve. So
E
O
H approximately every 18 months rate). As Paul Kocher of Cryptog- this implies that if cryptography is
R
E
ET while the equivalent price halves raphy Research, Inc. asserted, used to sign and protect data and
P
COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 15
Security Watch
software (especially for archival vast quantities of information also against us.” Whether the negatives
purposes) then a systematic increases the likelihood that this will eventually outweigh the posi-
method for updating these wrap- data will eventually be used for tives, in terms of adverse impacts
pers will need to be devised, lest heretofore unknown and poten- on connectivity and usability, is
trust in content be undermined. tially nefarious purposes. yet to be determined.
Cryptography, though, cannot We may have no choice regard- There is a storehouse of data
be expected to solve all security ing such data dissemination, since that we are looking forward to
problems. PGP encryption guru global economic forces may be having online, which is currently
Phil Zimmerman told London’s driving us toward total intercon- located in libraries, recordings,
2003 Infosec security conference nectivity of all humans on the and research databases. As David
that Moore’s Law is a “blind planet. This is ultimately feasible, Sarnoff predicted in an article he
force” for undirected technology since in the networking world, wrote for the New York Heraldin
The ultimate question must be whether or not there will someday be a
computational system that can prevent all forms of nefarious attack.
escalation. He explained that “the Gilder’s Law dictates that the total 1922, “It is inconceivable that the
human population does not dou- bandwidth of communication sys- development of the transmission
ble every 18 months, but its abil- tems will triple every 12 months. of intelligence will go forward at a
ity to use computers to keep track (By comparison, the number of leisurely pace; everything points to
of us does,” and added, “you can’t humans is only expected to dou- a very great acceleration.” One
encrypt your face.” He fears the ble from 6 to 12 billion by 2100.) wonders whether Sarnoff might
series of initiatives in U.S. home- Metcalfe’s Law rates the value of a have imagined that such accelera-
land security have far-reaching network as proportional to the tion would, within the next
effects on privacy because “it has number of nodes squared, so the decade, make it feasible for a lap-
more inertia and is more insidi- merit of connectivity increases top computer to hold the contents
ous. When you put computer exponentially as units are intro- of the entire Library of Congress.
technology behind surveillance duced, while costs tend to remain Certainly it is imperative to ensure
apparatus, the problem gets stable. But this supposition of that all information will be repli-
worse.” We already yield a continually increasing payback is cated correctly in such compendia.
tremendous amount of personal not necessarily correct. Jake Brod- Imagine an insidious virus that
information to our PDAs and sky reminds us of Newton’s Third permutes documents such that
permit tracking of our movements Law (“For every action, there is an history eventually reflects that
in exchange for continuous equal and opposite reaction”), Thomas Jefferson was the first
incoming telephone service, so the noting that events are “going on president of the United States.
devices we voluntarily adopt may under our noses this very minute: This might not be so damaging,
ultimately prove more untrust- Security holes, hacking, and but other transformations could
worthy than the monitoring being phreaking. The very tools that have dire results. Even if data is
imposed. The increasing ability of make this ‘revolution’ [in technol- maintained intact, accessibility to
computers to store and analyze ogy] possible are also being used powerful search and logic engines
16 March 2004/Vol. 47, No. 3 COMMUNICATIONSOF THE ACM