<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Gsdedeug</id>
	<title>Expertiza_Wiki - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Gsdedeug"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Gsdedeug"/>
	<updated>2026-05-17T06:14:46Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.41.0</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2135</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2135"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:32:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents? */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution, where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/05/26/canada.ecoli.01/ CNN Article on the Outbreak]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
An investigation into an accident has two main objectives: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. to assign blame/responsibility for the accident&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. to prevent future accidents&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
An ethical dillema may occur if, based on chain-of-event reasoning, blame is assigned to a &amp;quot;root cause&amp;quot; without taking into account for instance a situation that had become slowly unstable and anything could have set off an accident.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2134</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2134"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:28:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents? */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution, where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/05/26/canada.ecoli.01/ CNN Article on the Outbreak]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
An investigation into an accident has two main objectives: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. to assign blame/responsibility for the accident&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. to prevent future accidents&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2133</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2133"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:27:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents? */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution, where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/05/26/canada.ecoli.01/ CNN Article on the Outbreak]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
An investigation into an accident has two main objectives: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
1. to assign blame/responsibility for the accident&lt;br /&gt;
2. to prevent future accidents&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2132</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2132"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:11:20Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution, where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/05/26/canada.ecoli.01/ CNN Article on the Outbreak]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2131</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2131"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:11:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution, where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/05/26/canada.ecoli.01/ CNN Article on the Outbreak]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2130</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2130"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:09:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution, where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2129</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2129"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:08:55Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2128</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2128"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:08:27Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* The Mars Polar Lander Loss */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;[1]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2127</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2127"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:08:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Outside Links */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2126</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2126"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:07:54Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1. [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] - Nancy G. Leveson&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2125</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2125"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:07:17Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Outside Links */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
1.&lt;br /&gt;
2. [http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2124</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2124"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:06:12Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis] - Nancy Leveson, Mirna Daouk, Nicolas Dulac, and Karen Marais&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2123</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2123"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:05:05Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Degradation in the water safety control structure had occurred over time, without any particular&lt;br /&gt;
single decision to do so but simply as a series of decisions that moved the public water system&lt;br /&gt;
slowly toward a state of high risk where any slight error or deviation from the normal could lead&lt;br /&gt;
to a major accident. Degradation of the safety control structure may be related to asynchronous&lt;br /&gt;
evolution [5], where one part of a system changes without the related necessary changes in other&lt;br /&gt;
parts. Changes to subsystems may be carefully designed, but consideration of their effects on&lt;br /&gt;
other parts of the system, including the control aspects, may be neglected or inadequate.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2122</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2122"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:03:26Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The stage for the accident had been set over a large number of years by actions at all levels of the socio-technical system structure.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2121</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2121"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:02:30Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Walkerton, Ontario Water Contamination Accident */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario: Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2120</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2120"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T22:02:10Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain. */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Walkerton, Ontario Water Contamination Accident===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2119</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2119"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:58:36Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* The Space Shuttle Challenger */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2118</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2118"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:58:03Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* The Space Shuttle Challenger */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
[http://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/genindex.htm The Rogers Commission Report]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2117</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2117"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:53:51Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Outside Links==&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2116</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2116"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:53:25Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2115</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2115"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:51:42Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/iria03/p13-leveson.pdf Applying STAMP in Accident Analysis]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2114</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2114"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:50:44Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/ CNN Article on the Mars Polar Lander Loss]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2113</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2113"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:48:37Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* The Space Shuttle Challenger */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process. The failures occurred due to a complex socio-technical interaction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2112</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2112"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:47:10Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* The Mars Polar Lander Loss */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The software did not adequately control the descent speed of the aircraft - it misinterpreted noise from a Hall effect sensor as an indication the spacecraft had reached the surface of the planet&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The components did not fail in terms of not satisfying their specified requirements, the failure occurred due to an unplanned effect of the system's interacting components.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2111</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2111"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:42:16Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* The Space Shuttle Challenger */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
The O-rings did not adequately control propellant gas release and there were inadequate controls in the launch-decision process.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2110</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2110"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:38:17Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain. */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
===The Space Shuttle Challenger===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2109</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2109"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:37:41Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain. */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Mars Polar Lander Loss===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2108</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2108"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:35:45Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain. */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical and software-based systems where accidents can occur due to complex human decision making, component interaction rather than single component failure, and accidents that occur because slow shifts toward an accident prone environment.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2107</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 5, Group 5</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_5,_Group_5&amp;diff=2107"/>
		<updated>2007-08-04T21:30:14Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain. */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Software Safety: Accident Models - Systems Theory vs. Chain of Events=&lt;br /&gt;
'''Skim through the following paper (focus on sections 1, 2.3, and 3, skip figures and tables) entitled [http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/tdsc.pdf &amp;quot;A Systems-Theoretic Approach to Safety in Software-Intensive Systems&amp;quot;] by Nancy G. Leveson, a Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics at MIT, then answer the following questions:'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The majority of the content you need to form an informed response to the above questions is included in the paper.  Bring in outside resources and topics discussed in class lectures as appropriate to support your response.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some shortcomings of traditional methods of accident reporting when applied to complex systems like software systems?==&lt;br /&gt;
*Event-chain models tend to stop once something to blame is found. &amp;quot;reports stopped after assigning blame—usually to the operators who interacted with the software—and never got to the root of why the accident occurred&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
*Event chain models were not designed to handle complex systems such as software. &amp;quot;in dealing with software in safety-critical systems is the result of inappropriately attempting to extend the techniques that were successful in simpler, electromechanical systems and were based on models of accident causation that no longer apply&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
**Software can be very complex&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==How does the STAMP model improve accident prevention efforts?  Explain some general concepts of the model.==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Systems theory allows more complex relationships between events to be considered&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Accident models based on systems theory consider accidents as arising from the interactions among system components and usually do not specify single causal variables or factors&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model provides more information in terms of how to prevent future accidents rather then trying to place blame.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hazard analysis using STAMP rather then traditional methods can prevent accidents from happening in software based systems&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Why was the Milstar satellite damaged although the components of the Inertial Navigation Unit (INU) operated correctly with respect to the instructions, including constraints, and data provided?  Why would use of the STAMP model more thoroughly prevent problems such as those that occurred with the INU compared to traditional accident reporting?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some appropriate applications of the STAMP model (both current and past)?  Explain.==&lt;br /&gt;
The STAMP model is especially useful in analyzing complex socio-technical systems and systems which are more software-intensive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==What are some ethical concerns of assigning blame for accidents?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Relevant Class Website Links==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/risks/safety/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2053</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2053"/>
		<updated>2007-08-02T20:42:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Regulations===&lt;br /&gt;
Since Google's acquisition of DoubleClick, it has been under investigation by several regulatory bodies (FTC, Congress, and EU) for privacy concerns (as well as unfair business practices). This led to Google announcing that it would &amp;quot;make anonymous&amp;quot; all searches after a period of 18 months. This consists of eliminating any association of a search with an ip address as well as forcing cookies to expire after 2 years. Many [http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39288141,00.htm critics do not feel that this is enough privacy.] They point out that the 18 month limit goes into effect only after you stop using Google which seems rather unlikely given it's position in the world of search engines. Attempting to use the privacy issue to get an edge over Google, [http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/23/business/search.php Microsoft announced similar in-house regulations of their data], [http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;amp;articleId=9027924 as did Yahoo.] Ask.com [http://searchengineland.com/070719-173648.php went further.] In addition to severing identifying links to an IP address it allows for a search which is erased immediately. Though critics point out that too much privacy can allow internet predators to go undetected.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search is the name given to a tool that performs searches in a user's local system.  Current desktop search applications can search from text files, to music files, to images, to e-mail and chat files.  Desktop Search tools use an indexing system, which lets them perform searches in big hard drives at a great speed.  Newer versions of desktop searching tools also allow for searching files throughout networks and other computers.  Most of the desktop search tools out there can search for the content of files with Microsoft formats, such as word, excel, power point, etc. as well as of locally stored websites.  Some others support more formats such as PDF, MP3, JPG, GIF, AIM, etc.  Some of the most known desktop search tools out there are [http://desktop.yahoo.com X1 Yahoo! Desktop Search], http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/hp1.mspx Windows Desktop Search], [http://desktop.google.com/ Google Desktop], [http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/desktop/overview.shtml Ask Jeeves Desktop Search], [http://www.copernic.com/ Copernic Desktop Search], etc. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Good of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search tools can index emails, email attachments, files, messenger contacts, notes, web searches, etc. and uses these indexes to find these targets, based on specified keywords in a few seconds.  In some cases, such as with Google Desktop and Yahoo Desktop Search, these applications are mereged with their corresponding search engines by letting the user search their computer and the web, at the same time, from the search engines web site.  In other cases, such as Copernic's case, the tool is a stand alone application, which allows for better security.  Copernic is an application that is specially good for audio, and image files, as it searches comments and other factors that allow the application to scan their content.  In some other cases, the desktop search tool, like the Google tool, caches search results, which allows the user to look at older versions these.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Security Issues of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the main concerns with desktop searches has to do with the retrieval of web history.  The Google Desktop client was specially drawing attention, because it could index secure cached websites.  This gave unrestricted access to anyone who would perform a search, and though this feature could be disabled, it is a &lt;br /&gt;
very critical issue to keep in mind.  The problem lies in the fact that these are features rather than bugs.  It would make sense to have this functionality in a secure personal computer.  However, the perspective changes when we have this type of functionality in public or enterprise computers, as confidential information could be easily disclosed.  It is essential for companies to research these types of vulnerabilities before using this type of software.  There is another issue, which is concerned with indexing in a &lt;br /&gt;
network or on remote computers.  In this case, cached files are stored in a central server, which may make such information vulnerable for others to see, specially the government.      &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Articles===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Introduction''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/desktop-search-engines/review.html Desktop Search Engines] Consumer Search &lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421651 Google Desktop Search Launched] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Advantages''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/search/default.mspx Windows Desktop Search: Best in Class Search Tool] Windows Desktop Search&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://netsecurity.about.com/od/secureyourcomputer/a/aa102904_2.htm Desktop Search Tools] ''Tony Bradley'' About.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Security''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/07/HNgoogledesktopsearch_1.html Google updates desktop search tool] ''James Niccolai'' InfoWorld&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2006/02/09/privacy-experts-advice-against-google-desktop-3 Privacy Experts Advise Against Google Desktop 3] ''Nathan Weinberg'' Blog News Chanel&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=137896 Manage Google's Desktop Search Now or Lock It Out] Gartner&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1735099,00.asp Desktop Search: The Ultimate Security Hole?] ''Matthew Hicks'' eWeek.com&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://desktop.google.com/privacypolicy.html Privacy Policy] ''Privacy Matters'' Google Desktop&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421621 A Closer Look At Privacy &amp;amp; Desktop Search] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2048</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2048"/>
		<updated>2007-08-02T20:38:08Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Regulations===&lt;br /&gt;
Since Google's acquisition of DoubleClick, it has been under investigation by several regulatory bodies (FTC, Congress, and EU) for privacy concerns (as well as unfair business practices). This led to Google announcing that it would &amp;quot;make anonymous&amp;quot; all searches after a period of 18 months. This consists of eliminating any association of a search with an ip address as well as forcing cookies to expire after 2 years. Many [http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39288141,00.htm critics do not feel that this is enough privacy.] They point out that the 18 month limit goes into effect only after you stop using Google which seems rather unlikely given it's position in the world of search engines.Keeping step, Microsoft announced similar in-house regulations of their data, [http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;amp;articleId=9027924 as did Yahoo.] Ask.com [http://searchengineland.com/070719-173648.php went further.] In addition to severing identifying links to an IP address it allows for a search which is erased immediately. Though critics point out that too much privacy can allow internet predators to go undetected.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search is the name given to a tool that performs searches in a user's local system.  Current desktop search applications can search from text files, to music files, to images, to e-mail and chat files.  Desktop Search tools use an indexing system, which lets them perform searches in big hard drives at a great speed.  Newer versions of desktop searching tools also allow for searching files throughout networks and other computers.  Most of the desktop search tools out there can search for the content of files with Microsoft formats, such as word, excel, power point, etc. as well as of locally stored websites.  Some others support more formats such as PDF, MP3, JPG, GIF, AIM, etc.  Some of the most known desktop search tools out there are [http://desktop.yahoo.com X1 Yahoo! Desktop Search], http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/hp1.mspx Windows Desktop Search], [http://desktop.google.com/ Google Desktop], [http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/desktop/overview.shtml Ask Jeeves Desktop Search], [http://www.copernic.com/ Copernic Desktop Search], etc. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Good of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search tools can index emails, email attachments, files, messenger contacts, notes, web searches, etc. and uses these indexes to find these targets, based on specified keywords in a few seconds.  In some cases, such as with Google Desktop and Yahoo Desktop Search, these applications are mereged with their corresponding search engines by letting the user search their computer and the web, at the same time, from the search engines web site.  In other cases, such as Copernic's case, the tool is a stand alone application, which allows for better security.  Copernic is an application that is specially good for audio, and image files, as it searches comments and other factors that allow the application to scan their content.  In some other cases, the desktop search tool, like the Google tool, caches search results, which allows the user to look at older versions these.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Security Issues of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the main concerns with desktop searches has to do with the retrieval of web history.  The Google Desktop client was specially drawing attention, because it could index secure cached websites.  This gave unrestricted access to anyone who would perform a search, and though this feature could be disabled, it is a &lt;br /&gt;
very critical issue to keep in mind.  The problem lies in the fact that these are features rather than bugs.  It would make sense to have this functionality in a secure personal computer.  However, the perspective changes when we have this type of functionality in public or enterprise computers, as confidential information could be easily disclosed.  It is essential for companies to research these types of vulnerabilities before using this type of software.  There is another issue, which is concerned with indexing in a &lt;br /&gt;
network or on remote computers.  In this case, cached files are stored in a central server, which may make such information vulnerable for others to see, specially the government.      &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Articles===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Introduction''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/desktop-search-engines/review.html Desktop Search Engines] Consumer Search &lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421651 Google Desktop Search Launched] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Advantages''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/search/default.mspx Windows Desktop Search: Best in Class Search Tool] Windows Desktop Search&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://netsecurity.about.com/od/secureyourcomputer/a/aa102904_2.htm Desktop Search Tools] ''Tony Bradley'' About.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Security''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/07/HNgoogledesktopsearch_1.html Google updates desktop search tool] ''James Niccolai'' InfoWorld&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2006/02/09/privacy-experts-advice-against-google-desktop-3 Privacy Experts Advise Against Google Desktop 3] ''Nathan Weinberg'' Blog News Chanel&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=137896 Manage Google's Desktop Search Now or Lock It Out] Gartner&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1735099,00.asp Desktop Search: The Ultimate Security Hole?] ''Matthew Hicks'' eWeek.com&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://desktop.google.com/privacypolicy.html Privacy Policy] ''Privacy Matters'' Google Desktop&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421621 A Closer Look At Privacy &amp;amp; Desktop Search] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2046</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2046"/>
		<updated>2007-08-02T20:33:26Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Regulations===&lt;br /&gt;
Since Google's acquisition of DoubleClick, it has been under investigation by several regulatory bodies (FTC, Congress, and EU) for privacy concerns (as well as unfair business practices). This led to Google announcing that it would &amp;quot;make anonymous&amp;quot; all searches after a period of 18 months. This consists of eliminating any association of a search with an ip address as well as forcing cookies to expire after 2 years. Keeping step, Microsoft announced similar in-house regulations of their data, [http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;amp;articleId=9027924 as did Yahoo.] Ask.com [http://searchengineland.com/070719-173648.php went further.] In addition to severing identifying links to an IP address it allows for a search which is erased immediately. Though critics point out that too much privacy can allow internet predators to go undetected.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search is the name given to a tool that performs searches in a user's local system.  Current desktop search applications can search from text files, to music files, to images, to e-mail and chat files.  Desktop Search tools use an indexing system, which lets them perform searches in big hard drives at a great speed.  Newer versions of desktop searching tools also allow for searching files throughout networks and other computers.  Most of the desktop search tools out there can search for the content of files with Microsoft formats, such as word, excel, power point, etc. as well as of locally stored websites.  Some others support more formats such as PDF, MP3, JPG, GIF, AIM, etc.  Some of the most known desktop search tools out there are [http://desktop.yahoo.com X1 Yahoo! Desktop Search], http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/hp1.mspx Windows Desktop Search], [http://desktop.google.com/ Google Desktop], [http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/desktop/overview.shtml Ask Jeeves Desktop Search], [http://www.copernic.com/ Copernic Desktop Search], etc. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Good of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search tools can index emails, email attachments, files, messenger contacts, notes, web searches, etc. and uses these indexes to find these targets, based on specified keywords in a few seconds.  In some cases, such as with Google Desktop and Yahoo Desktop Search, these applications are mereged with their corresponding search engines by letting the user search their computer and the web, at the same time, from the search engines web site.  In other cases, such as Copernic's case, the tool is a stand alone application, which allows for better security.  Copernic is an application that is specially good for audio, and image files, as it searches comments and other factors that allow the application to scan their content.  In some other cases, the desktop search tool, like the Google tool, caches search results, which allows the user to look at older versions these.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Security Issues of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the main concerns with desktop searches has to do with the retrieval of web history.  The Google Desktop client was specially drawing attention, because it could index secure cached websites.  This gave unrestricted access to anyone who would perform a search, and though this feature could be disabled, it is a &lt;br /&gt;
very critical issue to keep in mind.  The problem lies in the fact that these are features rather than bugs.  It would make sense to have this functionality in a secure personal computer.  However, the perspective changes when we have this type of functionality in public or enterprise computers, as confidential information could be easily disclosed.  It is essential for companies to research these types of vulnerabilities before using this type of software.  There is another issue, which is concerned with indexing in a &lt;br /&gt;
network or on remote computers.  In this case, cached files are stored in a central server, which may make such information vulnerable for others to see, specially the government.      &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Articles===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Introduction''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/desktop-search-engines/review.html Desktop Search Engines] Consumer Search &lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421651 Google Desktop Search Launched] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Advantages''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/search/default.mspx Windows Desktop Search: Best in Class Search Tool] Windows Desktop Search&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://netsecurity.about.com/od/secureyourcomputer/a/aa102904_2.htm Desktop Search Tools] ''Tony Bradley'' About.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Security''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/07/HNgoogledesktopsearch_1.html Google updates desktop search tool] ''James Niccolai'' InfoWorld&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2006/02/09/privacy-experts-advice-against-google-desktop-3 Privacy Experts Advise Against Google Desktop 3] ''Nathan Weinberg'' Blog News Chanel&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=137896 Manage Google's Desktop Search Now or Lock It Out] Gartner&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1735099,00.asp Desktop Search: The Ultimate Security Hole?] ''Matthew Hicks'' eWeek.com&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://desktop.google.com/privacypolicy.html Privacy Policy] ''Privacy Matters'' Google Desktop&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421621 A Closer Look At Privacy &amp;amp; Desktop Search] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2045</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2045"/>
		<updated>2007-08-02T20:31:14Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Regulations===&lt;br /&gt;
Since Google's acquisition of DoubleClick, it has been under investigation by several regulatory bodies (FTC, Congress, and EU) for privacy concerns (as well as unfair business practices). This led to Google announcing that it would &amp;quot;make anonymous&amp;quot; all searches after a period of 18 months. This consists of eliminating any association of a search with an ip address as well as forcing cookies to expire after 2 years. Keeping step, Microsoft announced similar in-house regulations of their data, as did Yahoo. Ask.com [http://searchengineland.com/070719-173648.php went further.] In addition to severing identifying links to an IP address it allows for a search which is erased immediately. Though critics point out that too much privacy can allow internet predators to go undetected.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search is the name given to a tool that performs searches in a user's local system.  Current desktop search applications can search from text files, to music files, to images, to e-mail and chat files.  Desktop Search tools use an indexing system, which lets them perform searches in big hard drives at a great speed.  Newer versions of desktop searching tools also allow for searching files throughout networks and other computers.  Most of the desktop search tools out there can search for the content of files with Microsoft formats, such as word, excel, power point, etc. as well as of locally stored websites.  Some others support more formats such as PDF, MP3, JPG, GIF, AIM, etc.  Some of the most known desktop search tools out there are [http://desktop.yahoo.com X1 Yahoo! Desktop Search], http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/hp1.mspx Windows Desktop Search], [http://desktop.google.com/ Google Desktop], [http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/desktop/overview.shtml Ask Jeeves Desktop Search], [http://www.copernic.com/ Copernic Desktop Search], etc. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Good of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search tools can index emails, email attachments, files, messenger contacts, notes, web searches, etc. and uses these indexes to find these targets, based on specified keywords in a few seconds.  In some cases, such as with Google Desktop and Yahoo Desktop Search, these applications are mereged with their corresponding search engines by letting the user search their computer and the web, at the same time, from the search engines web site.  In other cases, such as Copernic's case, the tool is a stand alone application, which allows for better security.  Copernic is an application that is specially good for audio, and image files, as it searches comments and other factors that allow the application to scan their content.  In some other cases, the desktop search tool, like the Google tool, caches search results, which allows the user to look at older versions these.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Security Issues of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the main concerns with desktop searches has to do with the retrieval of web history.  The Google Desktop client was specially drawing attention, because it could index secure cached websites.  This gave unrestricted access to anyone who would perform a search, and though this feature could be disabled, it is a &lt;br /&gt;
very critical issue to keep in mind.  The problem lies in the fact that these are features rather than bugs.  It would make sense to have this functionality in a secure personal computer.  However, the perspective changes when we have this type of functionality in public or enterprise computers, as confidential information could be easily disclosed.  It is essential for companies to research these types of vulnerabilities before using this type of software.  There is another issue, which is concerned with indexing in a &lt;br /&gt;
network or on remote computers.  In this case, cached files are stored in a central server, which may make such information vulnerable for others to see, specially the government.      &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Articles===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Introduction''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/desktop-search-engines/review.html Desktop Search Engines] Consumer Search &lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421651 Google Desktop Search Launched] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Advantages''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/search/default.mspx Windows Desktop Search: Best in Class Search Tool] Windows Desktop Search&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://netsecurity.about.com/od/secureyourcomputer/a/aa102904_2.htm Desktop Search Tools] ''Tony Bradley'' About.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Security''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/07/HNgoogledesktopsearch_1.html Google updates desktop search tool] ''James Niccolai'' InfoWorld&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2006/02/09/privacy-experts-advice-against-google-desktop-3 Privacy Experts Advise Against Google Desktop 3] ''Nathan Weinberg'' Blog News Chanel&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=137896 Manage Google's Desktop Search Now or Lock It Out] Gartner&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1735099,00.asp Desktop Search: The Ultimate Security Hole?] ''Matthew Hicks'' eWeek.com&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://desktop.google.com/privacypolicy.html Privacy Policy] ''Privacy Matters'' Google Desktop&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421621 A Closer Look At Privacy &amp;amp; Desktop Search] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2044</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2044"/>
		<updated>2007-08-02T20:30:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Regulations===&lt;br /&gt;
Since Google's acquisition of DoubleClick, it has been under investigation by several regulatory bodies (FTC, Congress, and EU) for privacy concerns (as well as unfair business practices). This led to Google announcing that it would &amp;quot;make anonymous&amp;quot; all searches after a period of 18 months. This consists of eliminating any association of a search with an ip address as well as forcing cookies to expire after 2 years. Keeping step, Microsoft announced similar in-house regulations of their data, as did Yahoo. Ask.com *[http://searchengineland.com/070719-173648.php went further.] In addition to severing identifying links to an IP address it allows for a search which is erased immediately. Though critics point out that too much privacy can allow internet predators to go undetected.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search is the name given to a tool that performs searches in a user's local system.  Current desktop search applications can search from text files, to music files, to images, to e-mail and chat files.  Desktop Search tools use an indexing system, which lets them perform searches in big hard drives at a great speed.  Newer versions of desktop searching tools also allow for searching files throughout networks and other computers.  Most of the desktop search tools out there can search for the content of files with Microsoft formats, such as word, excel, power point, etc. as well as of locally stored websites.  Some others support more formats such as PDF, MP3, JPG, GIF, AIM, etc.  Some of the most known desktop search tools out there are [http://desktop.yahoo.com X1 Yahoo! Desktop Search], http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/hp1.mspx Windows Desktop Search], [http://desktop.google.com/ Google Desktop], [http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/desktop/overview.shtml Ask Jeeves Desktop Search], [http://www.copernic.com/ Copernic Desktop Search], etc. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Good of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search tools can index emails, email attachments, files, messenger contacts, notes, web searches, etc. and uses these indexes to find these targets, based on specified keywords in a few seconds.  In some cases, such as with Google Desktop and Yahoo Desktop Search, these applications are mereged with their corresponding search engines by letting the user search their computer and the web, at the same time, from the search engines web site.  In other cases, such as Copernic's case, the tool is a stand alone application, which allows for better security.  Copernic is an application that is specially good for audio, and image files, as it searches comments and other factors that allow the application to scan their content.  In some other cases, the desktop search tool, like the Google tool, caches search results, which allows the user to look at older versions these.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Security Issues of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the main concerns with desktop searches has to do with the retrieval of web history.  The Google Desktop client was specially drawing attention, because it could index secure cached websites.  This gave unrestricted access to anyone who would perform a search, and though this feature could be disabled, it is a &lt;br /&gt;
very critical issue to keep in mind.  The problem lies in the fact that these are features rather than bugs.  It would make sense to have this functionality in a secure personal computer.  However, the perspective changes when we have this type of functionality in public or enterprise computers, as confidential information could be easily disclosed.  It is essential for companies to research these types of vulnerabilities before using this type of software.  There is another issue, which is concerned with indexing in a &lt;br /&gt;
network or on remote computers.  In this case, cached files are stored in a central server, which may make such information vulnerable for others to see, specially the government.      &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Articles===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Introduction''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/desktop-search-engines/review.html Desktop Search Engines] Consumer Search &lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421651 Google Desktop Search Launched] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Advantages''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/search/default.mspx Windows Desktop Search: Best in Class Search Tool] Windows Desktop Search&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://netsecurity.about.com/od/secureyourcomputer/a/aa102904_2.htm Desktop Search Tools] ''Tony Bradley'' About.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Security''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/07/HNgoogledesktopsearch_1.html Google updates desktop search tool] ''James Niccolai'' InfoWorld&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2006/02/09/privacy-experts-advice-against-google-desktop-3 Privacy Experts Advise Against Google Desktop 3] ''Nathan Weinberg'' Blog News Chanel&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=137896 Manage Google's Desktop Search Now or Lock It Out] Gartner&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1735099,00.asp Desktop Search: The Ultimate Security Hole?] ''Matthew Hicks'' eWeek.com&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://desktop.google.com/privacypolicy.html Privacy Policy] ''Privacy Matters'' Google Desktop&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421621 A Closer Look At Privacy &amp;amp; Desktop Search] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2043</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=2043"/>
		<updated>2007-08-02T20:29:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: /* Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Regulations===&lt;br /&gt;
Since Google's acquisition of DoubleClick, it has been under investigation by several regulatory bodies (FTC, Congress, and EU) for privacy concerns (as well as unfair business practices). This led to Google announcing that it would &amp;quot;make anonymous&amp;quot; all searches after a period of 18 months. This consists of eliminating any association of a search with an ip address as well as forcing cookies to expire after 2 years. Keeping step, Microsoft announced similar in-house regulations of their data, as did Yahoo. Ask.com went further. In addition to severing identifying links to an IP address it allows for a search which is erased immediately. Though critics point out that too much privacy can allow internet predators to go undetected.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search is the name given to a tool that performs searches in a user's local system.  Current desktop search applications can search from text files, to music files, to images, to e-mail and chat files.  Desktop Search tools use an indexing system, which lets them perform searches in big hard drives at a great speed.  Newer versions of desktop searching tools also allow for searching files throughout networks and other computers.  Most of the desktop search tools out there can search for the content of files with Microsoft formats, such as word, excel, power point, etc. as well as of locally stored websites.  Some others support more formats such as PDF, MP3, JPG, GIF, AIM, etc.  Some of the most known desktop search tools out there are [http://desktop.yahoo.com X1 Yahoo! Desktop Search], http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/hp1.mspx Windows Desktop Search], [http://desktop.google.com/ Google Desktop], [http://sp.ask.com/en/docs/desktop/overview.shtml Ask Jeeves Desktop Search], [http://www.copernic.com/ Copernic Desktop Search], etc. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===The Good of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Desktop Search tools can index emails, email attachments, files, messenger contacts, notes, web searches, etc. and uses these indexes to find these targets, based on specified keywords in a few seconds.  In some cases, such as with Google Desktop and Yahoo Desktop Search, these applications are mereged with their corresponding search engines by letting the user search their computer and the web, at the same time, from the search engines web site.  In other cases, such as Copernic's case, the tool is a stand alone application, which allows for better security.  Copernic is an application that is specially good for audio, and image files, as it searches comments and other factors that allow the application to scan their content.  In some other cases, the desktop search tool, like the Google tool, caches search results, which allows the user to look at older versions these.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Security Issues of Desktop Search===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the main concerns with desktop searches has to do with the retrieval of web history.  The Google Desktop client was specially drawing attention, because it could index secure cached websites.  This gave unrestricted access to anyone who would perform a search, and though this feature could be disabled, it is a &lt;br /&gt;
very critical issue to keep in mind.  The problem lies in the fact that these are features rather than bugs.  It would make sense to have this functionality in a secure personal computer.  However, the perspective changes when we have this type of functionality in public or enterprise computers, as confidential information could be easily disclosed.  It is essential for companies to research these types of vulnerabilities before using this type of software.  There is another issue, which is concerned with indexing in a &lt;br /&gt;
network or on remote computers.  In this case, cached files are stored in a central server, which may make such information vulnerable for others to see, specially the government.      &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Articles===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Introduction''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/desktop-search-engines/review.html Desktop Search Engines] Consumer Search &lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421651 Google Desktop Search Launched] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Advantages''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.microsoft.com/windows/desktopsearch/search/default.mspx Windows Desktop Search: Best in Class Search Tool] Windows Desktop Search&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://netsecurity.about.com/od/secureyourcomputer/a/aa102904_2.htm Desktop Search Tools] ''Tony Bradley'' About.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
====''Security''====&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/03/07/HNgoogledesktopsearch_1.html Google updates desktop search tool] ''James Niccolai'' InfoWorld&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://google.blognewschannel.com/archives/2006/02/09/privacy-experts-advice-against-google-desktop-3 Privacy Experts Advise Against Google Desktop 3] ''Nathan Weinberg'' Blog News Chanel&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=137896 Manage Google's Desktop Search Now or Lock It Out] Gartner&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1735099,00.asp Desktop Search: The Ultimate Security Hole?] ''Matthew Hicks'' eWeek.com&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://desktop.google.com/privacypolicy.html Privacy Policy] ''Privacy Matters'' Google Desktop&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3421621 A Closer Look At Privacy &amp;amp; Desktop Search] ''Danny Sullivan'' SearchEngineWatch.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1894</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1894"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:23:34Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Laws Regarding Internet Search Engines===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1893</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1893"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:23:09Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
===Laws Regarding Internet Search Engines===&lt;br /&gt;
===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1892</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1892"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:21:20Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Internet Search Engines)==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns (Desktop Search)==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1891</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1891"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:18:40Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for (revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dilemmas) in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1890</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1890"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:18:14Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for, revealing their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dillemas in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1889</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1889"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:17:03Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is often associated by an ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine. This information is very valuable to online advertisers and marketers who can use it to focus and target their campaigns and leverage what people search for in order to reveal their curiosities, anxieties, fears, and personal dillemas in order to increase their profits.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1888</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1888"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:08:54Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns==&lt;br /&gt;
===Introduction===&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is sometimes associated by your ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1887</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1887"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:08:19Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns==&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is sometimes associated by your ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1886</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Week 4, Group 3</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Week_4,_Group_3&amp;diff=1886"/>
		<updated>2007-07-26T23:07:51Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;=Privacy of Search Content / Search Engines both Local (Desktop Search) and Internet=&lt;br /&gt;
A recent proof-of-concept [http://www.hacker.co.il/security/ie/css_import.html exploit] of Internet Explorer allowed for the running of a search through Google Desktop for passwords on a user’s computer upon visiting a website containing the exploit script.  Operating systems, browsers, and other software like desktop searches keep a written history of user activities, of which many users are unaware of.  This poses a privacy threat to users as computers with content collected through the use of a variety of programs remains recoverable, even when thought to be deleted.  Many business and government agencies implement technologies designed to obscure information on hard drives prior to allowing old computers out of their inventory.  However for many non-tech-savvy consumers, such technologies are not implemented, or are impractical (as the case when a computer is disabled and needs repaired).  In such cases, private information can be exposed, now ever more easily and thoroughly through the use of desktop search technologies.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Internet search engines also pose a threat to privacy through maintenance of search logs as it may be possible for the government to use subpoenas to acquire normally private user search logs.  Google has responded by shortening the length of time it maintains search data, and other search engines have precautions in place as well to protect user privacy.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Privacy Concerns==&lt;br /&gt;
Most internet users are not aware that what they type into seemingly benign search engines is being stored in a database. Though the the tracking methodologies differ across search engines the data is associated by your ip address or name or both, depending on how much information you've shared with the search engine.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
'''Examine the ethical issues regarding the privacy of searchable content and the impact of search engines both locally and internet based.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Resources==&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant External Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal Wikipedia - AOL Search Data Scandal]&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?ex=1312776000en=f6f61949c6da4d38ei=5090 New York Times - &amp;quot;A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749&amp;quot;]&lt;br /&gt;
===Relevant Class Website Links:===&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/ http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/abuse/wvt/]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1448</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Weed 1, Group 2</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1448"/>
		<updated>2007-07-07T01:16:16Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Anti-Spam Techniques ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Blocking Domains ===&lt;br /&gt;
Domain blocking is not always effective. Since spammers are often spoofing domains, this results in the [http://www.mywire.com/pubs/PCMagazine/2004/03/16/418338?extID=10051 unintended blocking of non-spammers.]&lt;br /&gt;
=== The Earthlink Spam Blocker===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Charging for Sent Emails===&lt;br /&gt;
This technique consists of charging companies to send their commercial e-mails to a big number of people.  This is a controversial approach, since the Internet is a medium that has always been free.  However, this approach could lead to a more formal/controlled way of commercializing over the internet.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Related Articles&lt;br /&gt;
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/technology/05AOL.html?ex=1296795600&amp;amp;en=6efb03c8cbfac79e&amp;amp;ei=5090 Postage Is Due for Companies Sending E-Mail]&lt;br /&gt;
**[http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/2006-02-05-aol-yahoo-email_x.htm AOL to charge fee as way to cut spam] &lt;br /&gt;
**[http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/03/05/spam.charge.ap/ Gates: Buy stamps to send e-mail]&lt;br /&gt;
**[http://www.campaignmonitor.com/blog/archives/2007/02/how_to_charge_your_clients_for_1.html How to charge your clients for email marketing]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Opt-In===&lt;br /&gt;
Opt-In is a term used when someone is given the option of receiving bulk e-mail when they are registering to some sort of database system.  This technique implies a number of practices that will ensure correct ways of managing e-mail marketing campaigns.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.opt-in-email-marketing.org/ Opt-In E-mail Marketing] is a great resource for obtaining tips on e-mail marketing and reviewing other campaigns. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Domain Authentication ===&lt;br /&gt;
Weaknesses in the SMTP protocol have allowed spammers to remain anonymous by allowing them to  &amp;quot;spoof&amp;quot; sender addresses. [http://www.buit.org/2007/05/25/get-rid-of-spam-with-smtp-authentication/ Domain authentication technologies] would correct this and allow spammers to be identified.&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bounties ===&lt;br /&gt;
Spam bounties, or rewards leading to the arrest of spammers, have been [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/tech/main644056.shtml considered by the US government]. In 2004, Congress requested a report by The Federal Trade Commission which concluded that rewards between $100,000 and $250,000 would be necessary to make the program work.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== The Goodmail approach: ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Described as a guaranteed delivery of email for a price. Email will be guaranteed not to be spam-blocked by the Goodmail providers to its customers.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Although this will limit certain types of spam, like money cons from Nigeria, it does not prevent other types of corporate spam. This is more of a attempt to legalized marketing technique to spam.&lt;br /&gt;
There are also many individual and different interpretations of what spam is to an email user that we do not want the company deciding what is spam for all of its email clients.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bonds with escrow agencies: ===&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One of the archaic initiatives (as of 1994) to curve spam that was originated by on of our industry leaders &amp;quot;Bill Gates&amp;quot;. Although this technique creates some virtual money trail, it may produce corrupted escrow agents that can manage the results to hide certain individuals or companies from the blacklist. This technique could also limit the accessibility of email to non-profit organizations and/or poor individuals.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It is hard to keep up and enforce correctly across different countries that may have laws to allow or disallow certain types of email. By providing this type of block the abusing individuals or institutions will change the medium on how email messages are delivered. From text to sound or movie files instead making it harder to detect and interpret by a program or filter.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Links: ===&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1509f1 Anti-Spam]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=2737 Goodmail Approach]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/lawpoli/spam/2004072502.php Bonds with escrow approach]&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.hospitalitynet.org/news/4020610.search?query=spam+bonds+with+escrow+agencies Bonds with escrow approach - Spam Filter]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1397</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Weed 1, Group 2</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1397"/>
		<updated>2007-07-05T23:32:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Anti-Spam Techniques ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Blocking Domains ===&lt;br /&gt;
Domain blocking is not always effective. Since spammers are often spoofing domains, this results in the [http://www.mywire.com/pubs/PCMagazine/2004/03/16/418338?extID=10051 unintended blocking of non-spammers.]&lt;br /&gt;
The Earthlink Spam Blocker&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Charging for Sent Emails&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
===Opt-In===&lt;br /&gt;
Opt-In is a term used when someone is given the option of receiving bulk e-mail when they are registering to some sort of database system.  This technique implies a number of practices that will ensure correct ways of managing e-mail marketing campaigns.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[http://www.opt-in-email-marketing.org/ Opt-In E-mail Marketing] is a great resource for obtaining tips on e-mail marketing and reviewing other campaigns. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Domain Authentication ===&lt;br /&gt;
Weaknesses in the SMTP protocol have allowed spammers to remain anonymous by allowing them to  &amp;quot;spoof&amp;quot; sender addresses. [http://www.buit.org/2007/05/25/get-rid-of-spam-with-smtp-authentication/ Domain authentication technologies] would correct this and allow spammers to be identified.&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bounties ===&lt;br /&gt;
Spam bounties, or rewards leading to the arrest of spammers, have been [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/tech/main644056.shtml considered by the US government]. In 2004, Congress requested a report by The Federal Trade Commission which concluded that rewards between $100,000 and $250,000 would be necessary to make the program work.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Goodmail Approach&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Escrow Bonds&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Links&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1509f1 Anti-Spam]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Group Members:&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjhernan Jorge J Hernandez]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1392</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Weed 1, Group 2</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1392"/>
		<updated>2007-07-05T23:23:11Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Anti-Spam Techniques ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Blocking Domains&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Earthlink Spam Blocker&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Charging for Sent Emails&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opt-In&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Domain Authentication ===&lt;br /&gt;
Weaknesses in the SMTP protocol have allowed spammers to remain anonymous by allowing them to  &amp;quot;spoof&amp;quot; sender addresses. [http://www.buit.org/2007/05/25/get-rid-of-spam-with-smtp-authentication/ Domain authentication technologies] would correct this and allow spammers to be identified.&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bounties ===&lt;br /&gt;
Spam bounties, or rewards leading to the arrest of spammers, have been [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/tech/main644056.shtml considered by the US government]. In 2004, Congress requested a report by The Federal Trade Commission which concluded that rewards between $100,000 and $250,000 would be necessary to make the program work.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Goodmail Approach&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Escrow Bonds&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Links&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1509f1 Anti-Spam]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Group Members:&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjhernan Jorge J Hernandez]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1391</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Weed 1, Group 2</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1391"/>
		<updated>2007-07-05T23:22:42Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Anti-Spam Techniques ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Blocking Domains&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Earthlink Spam Blocker&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Charging for Sent Emails&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opt-In&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Domain Authentication ===&lt;br /&gt;
Weaknesses in the SMTP protocol have allowed spammers to remain anonymous by allowing them to  &amp;quot;spoof&amp;quot; sender addresses. [http://www.buit.org/2007/05/25/get-rid-of-spam-with-smtp-authentication/ Domain authentication technologies] would correct this and allow spammers to be identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bounties ===&lt;br /&gt;
Spam bounties, or rewards leading to the arrest of spammers, have been [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/tech/main644056.shtml considered by the US government]. In 2004, Congress requested a report by The Federal Trade Commission which concluded that rewards between $100,000 and $250,000 would be necessary to make the program work.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Goodmail Approach&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Escrow Bonds&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Links&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1509f1 Anti-Spam]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Group Members:&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjhernan Jorge J Hernandez]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1389</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Weed 1, Group 2</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1389"/>
		<updated>2007-07-05T23:22:06Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Anti-Spam Techniques ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Blocking Domains&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Earthlink Spam Blocker&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Charging for Sent Emails&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opt-In&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Domain Authentication ===&lt;br /&gt;
Weaknesses in the SMTP protocol have allowed spammers to remain anonymous by allowing them to  &amp;quot;spoof&amp;quot; sender addresses. Domain authentication technologies would correct this and allow spammers to be identified.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bounties ===&lt;br /&gt;
Spam bounties, or rewards leading to the arrest of spammers, have been [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/tech/main644056.shtml considered by the US government]. In 2004, Congress requested a report by The Federal Trade Commission which concluded that rewards between $100,000 and $250,000 would be necessary to make the program work.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Goodmail Approach&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Escrow Bonds&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Links&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1509f1 Anti-Spam]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Group Members:&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjhernan Jorge J Hernandez]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1387</id>
		<title>CSC 379:Weed 1, Group 2</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php?title=CSC_379:Weed_1,_Group_2&amp;diff=1387"/>
		<updated>2007-07-05T23:06:57Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Gsdedeug: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;== Anti-Spam Techniques ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Blocking Domains&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Earthlink Spam Blocker&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Charging for Sent Emails&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Opt-In&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Domain Authentication&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Bounties ===&lt;br /&gt;
Spam bounties, or rewards leading to the arrest of spammers, have been [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/17/tech/main644056.shtml considered by the US government]. In 2004, Congress requested a report by The Federal Trade Commission which concluded that rewards between $100,000 and $250,000 would be necessary to make the program work.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Goodmail Approach&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Escrow Bonds&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Links&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www.networkcomputing.com/showitem.jhtml?docid=1509f1 Anti-Spam]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Group Members:&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjhernan Jorge J Hernandez]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Gsdedeug</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>