The remote monitoring was first raised (that I can rememember) by Thomas
Low at the February GDB and the Pakiti stuff by Steve Traylen at the
April GDB.
John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kelsey, David
> (STFC,RAL,PPD)
> Sent: 26 September 2009 16:04
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: recent EGEE policy wrt kernel patching
>
> Several of you on this list have stated that you have never
> heard of this security monitoring activity.
>
> The EGEE security operations activity is organised on a
> regional basis.
> As you all know, Mingchao Ma is our regional security
> officer. I don't know when Mingchao first talked about this
> to the UK community, but I do know that this was covered in
> his talk to the UK HEP Sysman meeting on 1st July 2009.
>
> See slides 13 and 14 in
> http://hepwww.rl.ac.uk/sysman/June2009/talks/Day2/Security%20U
> pdate.ppt
>
> Dave K
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> Dr David Kelsey
> Particle Physics Department
> Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> Chilton, DIDCOT, OX11 0QX, UK
>
> e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: [+44](0)1235 445746 (direct)
> Fax: [+44](0)1235 446733
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Simon George
> Sent: 25 September 2009 14:04
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: recent EGEE policy wrt kernel patching
>
> Thanks for the link Pete. Maybe I missed something because
> this is the first I have heard about it.
>
> So in my opinion, EGEE needs to improve communication about this.
>
> I think all site monitoring used to make decisions about
> sites should at least be open to the sites themselves to
> ensure accuracy. Since I have not heard anything about this
> until now, and still nothing officially with a reference to
> the stats for my site, I think it would be unreasonable to
> blacklist sites based on private and possibly wrong
> information held about them. We all know how much effort we,
> the sites, have to put into each new monitoring/accounting
> initiative to make sure it is right before it can be used.
>
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
> Peter Gronbech wrote:
> > This security testing has been talked about for some time
> and was run
> > by Romain Wartels group.
> > It basically ran a grid job at your site which did a rpm
> -qa and then
> > compared that with what was expected for a system running that OS.
> >
> http://indico.cern.ch/contributionDisplay.py?contribId=107&sessionId=1
> > 37
> > &confId=55893
> > Shows an abstract and a Poster they presented about it at
> EGEE09 this
> > week.
> >
> > I must admit I was surprised that they sent the email from the EGEE
> > PMB saying sites that did not act would be de certified,
> but I think
> > I'm in favour generally.
> >
> > I have no doubt that the data stored is being held in a responsible
> way.
> >
> > Cheers Pete
> >
> --
> Scanned by iCritical.
>
--
Scanned by iCritical.
|