Category Archives: Security

ID Ten Seven errors

More from the humor department. This was just sent to me:

I was having trouble with my computer. So I called the 11-year old next door whose bedroom looks like Mission Control, and asked him to come over.

He clicked a couple of buttons and solved the problem.

As he was walking away, I called after him, ‘So, what was wrong?

He replied, ‘It was an ID ten T error.’

I didn’t want to appear stupid, but I had to ask, ‘An, ID ten T error? Can you explain that to me in case I need to fix it again?’

He smiled…. You haven’t heard of an ID ten T error before?’

‘No,’ I replied.

‘Write it down,’ he said, ‘and I think you’ll figure it out.’

So I wrote down: I D 1 0 T …

Har har. Wikipedia suggests this actually comes from adult Naval parlance.

I like the ID ten seven format better (ID107), or even ID hundred seven.

I remember those problems being termed layer 8 of the OSI model or PEBKAC errors — when a problem exists between keyboard and chair — both mentioned by Wikipedia.

Surely someone can come up with something new already, no?

Onion Guide to Risk Management

It is no laughing matter, but The Onion does its best to make fun of risk management. They do an amazingly thorough job pulling up the best habits of reporters in the mainstream press — drama, statistics as well as potential remedies are duly noted:

In addition to increasing public awareness of deaths caused by falling down a laundry chute and severing the spinal cord, Baron suggested several direct precautionary measures. These include keeping a hamper full of extra pillows at the bottom of laundry chutes at all times, placing large, easy-to-read warning placards around chute openings, and moving to a house without a laundry chute.

“Until someone comes up with a safer means of conveying dirty laundry from the top floor of a house to its basement, this is the reality we have to live with,” Baron said.

Cute. Watch out FOX News, The Onion is cutting in on your territory here.

I can’t wait for the book.

Iraq and Western oil companies in discussions

The Washington Post story on the state of Iraqi oil has an interesting pair of paragraphs:

A higher-profile role for Western companies in Iraq’s oil industry is likely to revive speculation that the Iraq war was motivated by a desire to tap into reserves that were controlled by foreigners until the 1960s, when the industry was nationalized. The belief is widespread in the Arab world.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Thursday said the U.S. government played no role in securing the deals. She called the impending contracts a sign that security gains are attracting foreign investment in Iraq.

If I read that correctly, Rice is speaking out of both sides of her mouth at the same time. Impressive. US security gains are attracting deals, while deals are not attracted by US security gains. In other words, better security is not required for developments that require better security, and therefore better security should be given credit while it has nothing to do with progress. Good luck easing concerns with that reasoning. She should have just said “the U.S. government played no role in security gains”.

Senator opposes sale of Budweiser (manuf) to foreigners

This is a classic Onion comment:

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) has vowed to stop the sale of Budweiser manufacturer Anheuser-Busch to Belgian-Brazilian company ImBev. What do you think?

“Might I suggest that Sen. McCaskill actually try drinking a Budweiser before making any rash decisions? That’s what I usually do.”

Heh, too clever. Apparently she has already done that.

What’s the brew-ha ha over the sale of this company to a foreign one? I think first they should consider admitting formally to the original Budweiser manufacturer in Europe that they stole the name…then we can talk about the risk of European ownership.