The University of Calgary Gauntlet®
  2003-06-05
(NOTE: Archived content:
Current issue here)

[image]
Previous Issues

News
Students to unearth history
Online Used Bookstore delayed
Computer malware course still drawing ire
C-TEP winners
Prickly seats
CFS defends bar
Scholarships
More research money

Opinions
Digesting media
Editor, the Gauntlet,
Editor, the Gauntlet,


Entertainment
Investing in Calgary's Pride
Come to the dark side
Put your left arm in
Going it alone
From Every Sphere
Night on My Side
Committed to a Bright Future
Scenes One Through Thirteen
Been So Long
The Moment After
Bar Talk
A Bit of You
Mavra Min
Beso Nocturno (Night Kiss)
Sweet Life
Rick & Steve, Episode #4: Menage a Twat




  Computer malware course still drawing ire





[Print] Print this story

ADVERTISMENT

ADVERTISMENT

Controversy continues two weeks after the University of Calgary announced a course in which students will study computer viruses. The course, entitled Computer Viruses and Malware, drew criticism for including a component in which students would study computer viruses by re-creating existing ones.

Graham Cluley, Senior Technol- ogy Consultant for Sophos Anti-Virus, challenged the university's assertion this week that students would not be writing computer viruses.

"I don't think that was the perception I got from your press release where you said: 'A necessary step in stopping viruses is that the computer professional could also write one so we are using the "writing" of computer viruses as a teaching method.' Can you explain where the mistake lies?" asked Cluley.

In response, instructor Dr. John Aycock remained adamant.

"As the instructor for the course, I can tell you that students will be writing both simple viruses as well as [anti-virus] software," said Aycock. "My plans for the course have not changed."

Computer Science Department Head and Professor Dr. Ken Barker said last week that students would be writing computer viruses in the sense that they would re-create elements of existing viruses in order to study them.

"It is time for critics to take their heads of the sand and work with us to start developing the next generation of computer professional (sic) who will be proactive in stopping computer viruses," wrote Barker in a statement on Thu., May 29 (emphasis in original). "The current approach of reacting to the viruses is simply not working."

Most current anti-virus software programs can only stop a new virus once they have been programmed specifically to detect it. The university has stated that learning about viruses by re-creating them--a practice uncommon in industry--will help students learn to combat malicious software.

"It would be unfortunate if companies and individuals were to have knee-jerk reactions based on little or no information, wouldn't it?" said Aycock.

Gauntlet reader John York, who claimed to be a student entering his first year in the fall, pointed to two on-line news articles from PC World and silicon.com with information to the contrary. The articles, both dated Fri., May 30--about one week after the course drew worldwide attention--state that two leading anti-virus software companies Trend Micro, Inc. and Network Associates Technology, Inc. (which produces the anti-virus software used on most U of C computers) will not hire virus writers.

"As a potential [Computer Science] student, I've become wary of the University of Calgary's program," wrote York in response to our May 29 story about the Computer Viruses and Malware course. "[With] all this talk in the industry about how U of C grads with this course will be unemployable, I don't think I want to be one of them."

Sophos CEO Dr. Jan Hruska was one of the first to state that they would not hire virus writers.

"Don't bother applying for a job at Sophos if you have written viruses because you will be turned away," said Hruska on Wed., May 28. "You are of no use to us. The skills required to write good anti-virus software are far removed from those needed to write a virus."

The university had stated last week that students should seek work elsewhere, in a company that would value their education and training. But with at least three of the top four anti-virus companies in North America rejecting virus writers, that may be difficult.

"I guess I'll discover after first year if the U of C risk is worth it," wrote York.

Network Associates did not return calls seeking comment.

Share this story: del.icio.us digg Fark NewsVine Reddit YahooMyWeb


Reader Comments:

 Add your comment or send a letter to the editor

Posted: 2003-06-09 08:53:42
#1 - Dr Aycock's comments that they will be writing viruses conflict with Dr Barker's comments in the earlier story that they wouldn't be writing viruses.

Sadly, I suspect that viruses will be written on the course. This isn't just a shame because the students will find it impossible to get a job in the anti-virus industry. It's also very sad because learning how to write viruses gives you *no* benefits whatsoever in learning how to write anti-virus software.

It is never necessary to write self-replicating code to test a theory or examine new techniques which viruses could exploit in the future. Which is one of the reasons why anti-virus companies don't write viruses.



Graham Cluley, Anti-virus expert, Sophos


Posted: 2003-06-09 11:21:32
#2 - "The skills required to write good anti-virus software are far removed from those needed to write a virus."

That may be true for the current AV model which reacts to threats AFTER the bad guys attack. However, knowing how virus writers think and act and create their malware from the ground up may be exactly what is needed to think beyond the current AV model and invent a new approach that is proactive rather than reactive.


–Tony Bradley, Information Security


Posted: 2003-06-09 22:25:12
#3 - It is unfortunate, but, it appears that rational discourse will not prevail in this matter. Both Dr. Aycock and Dr. Baker have great difficulty grasping the ethical nature of this problem. I think it is now time to act considering the short/long term national security concerns surrounding this matter. I've requested the FBI, Office of Homeland Security, and the Department of State look into this problem.

Dr. Aycock and Dr. Baker there is an old saying that I think applies to the situation at hand, and it is: "Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should." A more philosophical perspect: The end does not justify the means. A noble end (the good) is not noble if it has been attained through immoral acts, methods, and or principles (the bad).

I believe this to be the core of the arguement in this matter, and the reason why the opposition to university's position grows daily. As a CEO, I have had to cut my losses. May I wisely suggest you folks do the same!


–Joseph A. Broyles, CEO


Posted: 2003-06-10 04:26:27
#4 - It is not necessary and it is not useful to write computer viruses to learn how to protect against them.

See:
http://www.avien.org/publicletter.htm


–Daryl Shane, CEO


 Views expressed are those of the posters and do not necessarily reflect that of the Gauntlet.

ADVERTISMENT

ADVERTISMENT

RSS icon RSS Feeds:
[ Main - News - Opinions - Entertainment - Sports ]
Volunteer at the Gauntlet®
.