by DAN CALLOWAY, Editor-in-chief, TCW
Published on 1 October 2011

WEAVERVILLE, NC – With all the confusing terminology associated with wireless networking–and especially home networking–it’s difficult for the everyday layman to implement any form of security on their home wireless LAN (WLAN) let alone determine whether they really need it. This article will help you to understand the terminology a little better and will answer the age-old question whether your WLAN needs to be made secure or not.

The answer to that question is a resounding YES! Most definitely, home networking systems, which include a Broadband modem, host computers and wireless laptops, iPods, TiVo’s, and other devices need to be made secure over the wireless/wired router that you are using to establish your wireless Local Area Network (LAN). The device that needs the greatest security is the router that establishes the wireless LAN that connects all your host computers and devices behind your ISP.

Today’s routers come in many different models and manufactures, but they can be categorized into three basic groups for the purposes of networking standards. These are 802.11a, 802.11b/g, and 802.11n. The latter version is replacing its predecessors because of its improved security features, enhanced performance, and ability to handle much faster networking speeds (802.11n is capable of speeds in excess of 100Mbps). If you are investing in a router for your home whether it is a Cisco router or another manufacturer, go with the 802.11n standard if your devices will support it. Be careful, however, as some older laptops and even some of the newer netbook devices have Network Interface Cards (NICs) that don’t support 802.11n.

When deciding to setup your home network, keep in mind the following networking terminology that you will encounter:

  •     WLAN – Wireless Local Area Network (Your network that supports all your wireless devices so that they connect wirelessly to your router and, ultimately, to the outside world).
  •     Broadband Modem – This is the device that brings your ISP’s service into your home (this could be a phone line, a cable connection, or satellite).
  •     Router – The device that is connected to your Broadband modem and that routes your incoming Ethernet traffic over the WLAN to your host computers and other devices regardless as to whether they are wired connected or wireless. Usually, the router also serves as the means for making your subscriber connection to your ISP service and also acts as the server that issues IP addresses to your host computers and other devices so that they can talk to one another and to the outside world.
  •     IP Address – This is the 32-bit Internet address of your host device that is often referred to as a dotted quad. This address uniquely identifies your host computer on the LAN and/or WLAN for your home network. An example of an IP address would be 50.51.120.149.
  •     DHCP – Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. This is the protocol that your DHCP Server (usually your network’s router) uses to issue IP addresses (dynamically) to your host devices so that static IP addresses don’t have to be assigned manually (or statically) by a network administrator. When a new device is introduced to your network, the DHCP Server will automatically detect the device and issue a unique IP Address to it within the range of IP addresses that are specified.
  •     Network Security – the encryption methodology and protocol used to secure a home network so that traffic that traverses the network and that passes to and from your WLAN or LAN to the outside world is not human readable if intercepted. This security is setup on the router.
  •     Wireless Broadcast Name – This is the name that you give your home Wireless network and, which is also referred to as the SSID (Service Set Identifier). This name is broadcast within and without your WLAN so that others may connect to it if you want them to.
  •     Ethernet – The term associated with a family of networking technologies that were developed for LANs and WLANs beginning in the early 1980s. The cables that connect your wired networking devices to the router are referred to as Ethernet cables.
  •     Protocol – Also referred to as the Communications Protocol, is a system of rules and digital message formats that allow for the exchange of data between and among host computers, routers, servers, and other devices on the typical network as well as other telecommunications systems.

After you have established your home wireless network, it is important to implement a strong form of security on that network. Why is this essential? In today’s world, there are individuals and governments that want to obtain your private information and, especially your financial information. In addition, if a hacker can breach your network, they can then use one or more of your host devices as a relay to attack other networks. Thus, it is absolutely necessary that security be established on the router, which creates the means for your home wireless network to function. How is security identified and what do the basic terms mean?

Security on a home wireless network can be established in several different ways using several methodologies and protocols. The basic forms of network security methodologies today are: (1) NO Security, (2) WEP – Wireless Equivalency Protocol (the weakest form of security and has since been deprecated), (3) WPA – Wi-Fi Protected Access, (4) WPA2 – Wi-Fi Protected Access II, (5) EAP – Extensible Authentication Protocol, and (6) LEAP – Lightweight Extensible Authentication Protocol. By far, the most secure means of tightening down your home wireless network would be to use WPA2 and AES + TKIP encryption. AES stands for Advanced Encryption Standard, which is a 256-bit encryption standard used by the military. TKIP refers to the Temporal Key Integrity Protocol, which is a very strong encryption protocol used in wireless networking.

The WPA2 combined with AES or TKIP, or both would make for the strongest security possible on a home wireless network. Just keep in mind that some devices may not support the use of AES and TKIP when used with WPA2 and you may have to decide between AES and TKIP when creating a secure network. If this is the case, then I highly recommend using AES over TKIP because of its hightened encryption capabilities.

by DONALD CALLOWAY
Published 27 February 2011

CLARKSBURG, WV — We humans don’t think in terms of 1′s and 0′s so why should our computers do the same? From the very beginning of the computing age we have created our computers to do everything based on the binary number system, the “on” or “off” way of dealing with everything, and we’ve chosen to use electricity as the medium for passing data through our computing machine’s brain, it’s processor, to the final outcome. After all, electrical transmission seemed to be the logical and best choice since electrical circuits can either be “on” or “off” but not both “on” and “off” simultaneously; so the marriage between the binary number system and electricity has for many decades been one made in heaven for our so-called computing machines. In looking at the world in this way we have created machines that can compute, that is, manipulate these 1′s and 0′s of our machine’s world, the only thing our machines know, extremely rapidly to achieve a result, and we’ve cleverly constructed algorithms for our machines to follow in solving highly complex problems. But our computers can’t rationalize, that is, they can’t make informed choices among apparently mutually exclusive outcomes when any of the outcomes would be acceptable, just perhaps not the best choice for our situation from a variety of perspectives.

Is it just me or does anyone else think our present computing paradigm is flawed and thus seriously impeding our progress toward creating a machine that can truly think as we do? Since, as I said before, we obviously don’t think in terms of the binary number system, this conclusion seems likely. So, what is the answer? Out there somewhere lies a yet undiscovered, monumental breakthrough in computing that will give us the answer. The trick is in knowing how to construct a “thinking” architecture for our computing machines that is radically different from the present “computing” architecture based on the binary number system. In achieving this goal we must rethink how we think.

If our thinking mechanism is not binary, then what is it? Can we get any answers to this question from modern science? While it is true that present science accepts the fact that in the process of “thinking” there are electrical signals traveling to and through our brains,–we know this to be true because we only need to see what happens when we severe the spinal cord–what happens to these electrical signals that causes us to “think”, that is, have thoughts in a way that is far superior to even the most advanced computers of our time? To modern-day science, this is still an enigma wrapped within a riddle. So, how do we proceed in finding a solution? I believe that when we are able to understand how our minds work on a “computing” level, that is, how our brains function to perform all of the so-called “background processes”–such as regulation of our autonomic bio-mechanisms such as the pulmonary and cardiovascular systems of our bodies about which we are not consciously aware, that is, we don’t have to think about them,–then perhaps we will be able to construct a similar architecture to replicate that complex mechanism and then port it to a machine. If we can achieve this we will have constructed a computing machine that computes like we do but using a far less constrictive architecture than the one we currently use which is based on the binary number system. Perhaps this “new” architecture will lay the groundwork for a truly “thinking” machine, something that seems light-years away for a machine that is still computing the binary way.

Donald007 is a retired Navy LCDR and mathematician currently working as a supervisor for the WV Dept. of Health and Human Resources in Marion County, WV.

Tagged with:
 

by DAN CALLOWAY
Published 2 February 2011

WEAVERVILLE, NC — I recenty acquired a new desktop PC. It’s a Dell Dimension E310. It’s a fantastic desktop tower but it was lacking in one major area. It came with the minimum amount of memory to support the operating system that was shipped with it–MS Windows XP Media Center. Of course, this OS was the first thing to go.

The Dell Dimension E310 is a dual-core, Pentium 4, 533 Mhz processor with math co-processors, 64-bit PC with a160GB ATA hard drive, but only 512MB of random-access memory. Even though I’m running the Ubuntu Linux 10.10 (Maverick Meerkat) 64-bit operating system whose minimum system requirements is 256MB of physical RAM, the PC starts to slow down appreciably after loading OOo3.2 and the Mendeley Research Desktop beta 0.982 applications. Both of these applications are system resource hogs.  As physical RAM begins to be used up, the OS begins to dump unused RAM into the 1.4GB swap file on the HD and the number of HD read/write operations take a toll on performance. Since read/write access to physical RAM is somewhere in the 4 nsec range as opposed to 400 msec for the HD, the speed of data retrieval and storage slows down considerably. So, a memory upgrade was in order.

The memory that came with the Dell Dimension E310 was 533 Mhz DDR2 SDRAM, non-ECC, 240-pin DIMM memory from Dell. The system will take either 400 or 533 Mhz memory and has a capacity of 2GB of physical RAM. Even though the system board does not require the memory to be installed in pairs, if both memory bays are not used, a system-wide performance degradation is likely to occur.

I went searching for memory and found the solution. Amazon.com, my favorite eCommerce website, had just the memory I was looking for. So, I purchased 2GB of Kingston DDR2 SDRAM, non-ECC, 240-pin DIMM memory in two sticks of 1GB each for the low price of $19.49 each. My wife has an account with Amazon.com that has free 2-day shipping.  I purchased the memory on the 29th of January and it shipped the same day, tax-free, and no shipping. I can’t believe that I was able to get 2GB of Kingston memory for $38.98. That’s an incredible buy. The shipment should arrive on 1 February 2011.

I can’t wait to get the new memory upgrade into the Dell. It should transform that already-powerful desktop PC into a new machine. The Ubuntu 10.10 Linux operating system should be quite comfortable with the memory upgrade. I’m hoping that I’ll be able to load OOo3.2 and Mendeley Research Desktop beta without even having to touch the hard drive swap file. That should make for an incredible experience.

by DAN CALLOWAY
Published 21 February 2010 @ 01:29 UTC

SOUTH AFRICA - Ubuntu is an operating system built by a worldwide team of expert developers. It contains all the applications you need: a web browser, office suite, media apps, instant messaging and much more.

Ubuntu 9.10 Desktop

Ubuntu is an open-source alternative to Windows and Office. It’s a free operating system for your office, home, or when you travel.

A faster, smoother, more beautiful Linux operating system with new features, fixes, and applications designed with you in mind. Canonical, Ltd., headquartered in South Africa, has designed this operating system with developers of applications in mind as well. There are fun tools that make it easy to write and deploy applications for Ubuntu.

And, the latest in innovative ideas, Ubuntu 9.10 gives its users a Personal Cloud for storing and sharing files and contacts with other Ubuntu users called Ubuntu One.

If you thought that being a free operating system was the best part, then you’re in for a treat. All the applications that come standard with Ubuntu 9.10 are free as well. And, as a bonus, the technical support that Canonical, Ltd. offers its customers is absolutely superb! Ubuntu 9.10 uses the ext4 journalizing file system, which means that Ubuntu is more stable and will be able to recover from inadvertent and unplanned shutdowns. Security with Ubuntu Linux could never be better since no antivirus software or anti-spyware applications are necessary to protect you while your on the Net. And, Ubuntu Linux is a true multi-tasking, multi-processing operating system that allows you to run multiple applications on different workstations (selectable by the user) or the same workstation simultaneously without fear that your applications will step on each other.

You can visit the Ubuntu Community and join the Ubuntu Forum to post and receive answers to your technical questions, or, even better, there’s the LaunchPad, which this author will assure is a life saver. I have never had a question in Ubuntu–from usability, tweaking the OS, application support, and system issues–that hasn’t been answered professionally and swiftly by a qualified Ubuntu user and technical expert.

Ubuntu 9.10 is first rate! Give it a try today.

Tagged with:
 

By DAN CALLOWAY
Published 28 January 2010 @ 02:41 UTC

WEAVERVILLE, NC – An Operating System (OS) is designed to run on either desktop or network platforms. For the sake of brevity in this article, I will limit my discussion, for the most part, to user desktop platforms.

A desktop OS is essentially designed to be the interface between the hardware (including the CPU) and the user, wherein it is primarily responsible for the management of the hardware and activities that run on the computer as well any applications that may be running within the OS. The OS also provides the graphical user interface (GUI) where it exists, in order to make the computer more user friendly for the user. As the host for running applications on the computer, the OS is also responsible for the hardware, scheduling of system resources to support the applications, and the access protection for the hardware. When services are requested on the desktop, the kernel of the OS creates a process by assigning memory and other resources, establishing a priority for the process (in multi-tasking systems), loading program code into memory, and executing the program. The program then interacts with the user and/or other devices and performs its intended function.

Regardless of OS installed on the desktop, OSes provide application services to both programs running on the computer or to the user through the use of Application Program Interfaces (APIs) or, in some instances, program system calls. When invoked by the user or by another program running on the computer, system calls or APIs request services from the OS, pass parameters, and receive the results of the operation. As mentioned, users can interact with the OS either through the GUI or by Command-line Interface (CLI) to request services from the OS. On desktop computers, these interfaces are usually considered part of the OS. However, on larger multi-user systems running UNIX, UNIX-like, or VMS OSes on mainframes or mini-mainframes, the user interface is typically a program that runs outside of the OS itself.

As parallelism increases on the desktop platform; that is, as more and more processors are added and processing takes place through multi-core and multi-threaded environments, the impact that such increases in parallelism has on the OS is related to what is referred to as application workload or process scheduling and is directly related to this increased complexity. Thus, increasing parallelism would have a detrimental impact on OS functionality unless the OS is redesigned to accommodate this increase. Frachtenburg and Etsion (n.d.) suggest that as the average desktop workload grows more parallel and more complex, current OSes are not adequate to support the growing parallelization to handle this increase in computer parallelism. Frachtenburg and Etsion contend that parallel process scheduling required to efficiently run desktop platforms and their applications in a supercomputing environment cannot be achieved unless the OS is redesigned to handle the increased workload. Through case studies in their paper, Frachtenburn and Etsion demonstrate that one possible solution to this inadequacy of existing OSes might be to redesign the OS process schedulers with an understanding of the requirements of all process classes and their mixes, as well the abilities of the underlying architecture.

Frachtenburg and Etsion (n.d.) state: “The predominant approach to multiprocessing in general purpose [OSes] is to treat each processing element as an independent entity—processes/threads are migrated between processing elements in an attempt to balance cache affinity needs with CPU load imbalance” (p. 2). As a result, the general-purpose scheduler within the OS is too focused on handling a small set of requirements and misses the big picture, and overlooks two requirements that are critical in maintaining performance and efficiency for parallel desktop workloads: separation of co-interfering processes and co-scheduling of collaborating processes. Thus, these are two specific redesign considerations within the OS that Frachtenburg and Etsion suggest are necessary as parallelism is increased on the workstation.

Giacomoni and Vachharajani (n.d.) concur with Frachtenburg and Etsion (n.d.) in their assumption that in order to realize the potential of pipeline-parallel software as parallelism increases on the desktop, requires a reexamination of some basic historical assumptions in OS design, including the purpose of time-sharing and the nature of applications. Multicore architectures make it possible to fully dedicate resources as needed without compromising existing OS services. Giacomoni and Vachharajani describe the minimal OS extensions necessary to support efficient pipeline parallel applications on multicore systems and support their claims with evidence produced from the domain of network frame processing.

Giacomoni and Vachharajani (n.d.) contend that “maintaining a smoothly flowing pipeline, that is a pipeline where a datum is never waiting for processor time, requires the system to provide a zero-stall guarantee” (p. 4). Furthermore, “Pipelines implemented in hardware are based on this guarantee and ensure it by having every stage operate in lockstep with a uniform stage length of 1 cycle” (p. 4.). Operating systems that run on single-processor desktops, in general, do not make this guarantee as they have been built on the principle of timesharing resources. Multicore systems are different and OSes that support them “must be able to provide abundant processing resources permitting a system to use selective timesharing and fully dedicate resources to an application for an extended period of time. With dedicated resources it is possible to achieve the zero-stall guarantee” (Giacomoni & Vachharajani, nd., p. 4.). Giacomoni and Vachharajani argue that realizing these improvements require the operating system to be redesigned in order to provide a zero-stall guarantee. Meeting this zero-stall guarantee for any pipeline requires that the system: (1) fully dedicates sufficient computational resources to the application and (2) provides a set of pipe-lineable services. Finally, supporting a pipeline that spans multiple execution contexts requires a new abstraction to label the pipeline as single entity for resource allocation and security.

References:

Frachtenburg, E., & Etsion, Y. (nd.). Hardware Parallelism: Are Operating Systems Ready? (Case Studies in Mis Scheduling) . Los Alamos National Laboratory, Modeling, Algorithms, and Informatics Group School of Computer Science and Engineering. Los Alamos, NM: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

Giacomoni, J., & Vachharajani, M. (n.d.). Operating System Support for Pipeline Parallelism on Multicore Architectures. University of Colorado at Boulder. Boulder: University of Colorado at Boulder.

Dan Calloway

Get Adobe Flash player

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline