Santo Domingo.- In concluding the ITU Regional Cybersecurity Forum for Americas held in the country’s capital, the participants recognized that cybersecurity is a global issue that requires cooperation across national borders.
The Forum concluded that measures at the national, regional as well as global levels are required to deal with the various aspects of cyber-threats to protect critical infrastructures. “Cybersecurity is increasingly important for countries in the Americas region, and governments need to be well informed and coordinated on this topic.”
The panelist also stressed the usefulness of the ITU Global Cybersecurity Agenda (GCA) as a mechanism and framework for international cooperation for cybersecurity and encouraged countries to undertake activities that relate to the five work areas of the GCA: Legal Measures; Technical and Procedural Measures; Organizational Structures; Capacity Building, and International Cooperation, and share their experiences in implementing these initiatives on the national level with other countries in the region.
“The Regional Cybersecurity Forum is useful as a platform for representatives from countries, regional and international organizations, to come together to discuss and elaborate on concrete steps to build cybersecurity capacity and competency in the region,” it said.
The Forum’s Wrap-up adds that that a coordinated national response in cybersecurity requires the participation of all relevant stakeholders and includes awareness and engagement at all levels.
“All different stakeholders have a role to play and government leadership in coordinating the national response is critical. In this regard, they encouraged countries in the region to actively share information and experiences, good practices and explore partnership opportunities for effective cybersecurity responses, and that the use of international standards should be promoted as a way to ensure interoperability between the diverse cybersecurity solutions being deployed. Only by working together to elaborate strategies, identify best practices, develop,” the Forum concluded.
Written by: BASTA, 9 Dec 2009 1:29 PM
From: Dominican Republic, =Ghetto/Legalize Drugs
Forget it = will never happen as long as dummys use Windows= Window Losers++++++
Written by: Lopez31, 9 Dec 2009 3:35 PM
From: United States
Basta,
Not all versions of windows have been bad! NT, 2000 and XP are actually pretty good operating systems, but 98, ME, and Vista were horrible.
Written by: xwill7, 9 Dec 2009 5:47 PM
From: United States, El cuarto bate
I like vista because it starts up faster than xp
Written by: Belly, 9 Dec 2009 6:16 PM
From: United States, Seattle, W.A.
Basta
Forget it = will never happen as long as dummys use Windows= Window Losers++++++
you seen to know nothing about Operating system. Did you know windows implemented security features in1999 that OS X is barely implementing now in 2009. Can you give this computer programmer with a Computer science degree a technical explanation of why windows is for looser because that just means 90% of the world is a looser you are the winner. Every version of windows has been the best for it's time because if we compare 1920s cars with those in 2009 don't you think they were horrible in comparison. Most people that say windows XP is better than Vista actually have no technical knowledge of how a Operating system works.
Written by: pelaut, 10 Dec 2009 8:35 AM
From: United States
No protection against dedicated Dominican IT pros inside the server centrals.
Written by: xwill7, 10 Dec 2009 12:24 PM
From: United States, El cuarto bate
just a matter of time until the other system are tampered with
Written by: Lopez31, 10 Dec 2009 12:39 PM
From: United States
Belly,
The reason why so many people complained that XP was so better than Vista was because in fact it was. For One, Plug and Play was horrible with Vista. When users try to upgrade to Vista not all their PC components would work properly. The user would have to download the drivers for each component and install it one by one. Second, Microsoft took the wrong approach to the security concerns. Instead of inbedding the Security features within the Operating systems Kernel it was instead engineer in the windows registry so the Vista would be able to prompt the user to accept every move they made. Horrible. And third, XP was just cleaner. Vista was clogged with a bunch of non essential add ins from the start.
Written by: Belly, 10 Dec 2009 1:46 PM
From: United States, Seattle, W.A.
Lopez31
The plug and play issue happened to Windows XP too but most people forgot about it by now and they only remember Vista. Remember that XP was being trashed out because of so many problems. Now the second part about security is that any body who has done coding knows that for every 10,000 lines of codes there are at least 20 to 30 flaws and with all the data that has been collected XP averaged 25 and Vista 21 so i don't see where most people keep saying that there were more problems. What happened on the driver side of things is that first Microsoft didn't give Hardware companies enough time to build-up driver database and they slack-off too and at the end blamed MS for the hardware problems which were mostly caused by hardware companies wanting people to ditch the old hardware and get new one. Heck even Creative inc. was blaming Vista for the driver problems now Creative Inc. the worse driver producers for their own hardware had a easy way out of it. cont.
Written by: Belly, 10 Dec 2009 1:55 PM
From: United States, Seattle, W.A.
The funny thing is Microsoft actually conducted a survey and allowed people to use Vista under the impression to people that is it was a brand new Operating systems which was called the Mohave project and most people were cheering up the so call brand new OS as been so much better than XP and then later found out that it was not a new OS and it was Vista all along. Another survey show that 80% of people who had not used vista yet said it was bad now can somebody in their right mind say a product is bad if the same person has never used to begin with. One more thing can you name the things that were in Vista that were not in XP other than Media Center which was a gift to users after many surveys showed that most people wanted to have it but didn't want it as a separate OS. The problem with Vista was that most people were paid off by Apple to write bad reviews as it was the case with Gizmodo who after finding out had to fire a couple of editors/writers.
Written by: Lopez31, 10 Dec 2009 2:46 PM
From: United States
Belly,
Are you a microsoft employee. LOL. You make valid points, but there is a reason why Windows 7 is out in the market a mere 2 years after Vista.
Written by: Belly, 10 Dec 2009 3:01 PM
From: United States, Seattle, W.A.
Lopez31
Not i'm not a MS employee but know many programmers who work for MS and one of my close friend who is Dominican too. The fact that people think Windows 7 is so much better is funny while Vista is considered bad proves that Windows Vista was not bad a all. The major difference was that with XP ms was stuck with the dilemma of CPU/GPU programming problems and something Vista fixed. Windows 7 big difference was that MS didn't make the same mistake about time frame given to hardware companies and how much more research was done. Both Vista and 7 are almost identical with only some changes to the kernel. Anyways i just find it funny that people listen so much to so call "experts writer' on web sites but most have never actually done any programming at all.
Written by: Lopez31, 10 Dec 2009 3:17 PM
From: United States
Well, the majority of the users and just that "users". They are not programmers and don't want to know about programming. But your are right, some of these editors have a hidden agenda sometimes. I personally have both a Macbook and a PC and both operating systems have their pros and cons.
Written by: Belly, 10 Dec 2009 3:27 PM
From: United States, Seattle, W.A.
Yeah most editors receive side money to review things and give it either bad and good reviews and taking advantage that most user are non-programmer and don't know what make up a good computer on the hardware/software sides. I have all 4 major platform Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu/Linux and Solaris that i use everyday and all have their goods and bads but over all Windows wins hands down because of it's flexibility. I love Ubuntu/Linux too but is not made for the average user and I like OS X too because is more oriented towards being easier to use but it comes at the cost of it's many limits.Anyways in the computer field it shocks me how easy are made believe things that are just simply not true.
Written by: Lopez31, 10 Dec 2009 3:37 PM
From: United States
I installed Ubuntu Linux on an old Laptop I had I thought it was great, but like you said not for the average user. I had a hard time getting my wireless connection working with Linux but when I finally got it working it was worth it. Now, I use that laptop as an FTP server for my music and movies files that I want access on go.
Written by: Belly, 11 Dec 2009 6:05 PM
From: United States, Seattle, W.A.
Lopez31
Yeah Ubuntu is very good but is just not something i would recommend for the average user unless i'm willing to seat on the phone all day providing tech support and writing the tricky commands. I have a file server too which i was going to build with a old pc i have but decided to just get a network drive that's already setup.
Smaller
Bigger
Close Gallery
Facebook
Digg this
del.icio.us
Technorati
Yahoo
Not all versions of windows have been bad! NT, 2000 and XP are actually pretty good operating systems, but 98, ME, and Vista were horrible.
Forget it = will never happen as long as dummys use Windows= Window Losers++++++
you seen to know nothing about Operating system. Did you know windows implemented security features in1999 that OS X is barely implementing now in 2009. Can you give this computer programmer with a Computer science degree a technical explanation of why windows is for looser because that just means 90% of the world is a looser you are the winner. Every version of windows has been the best for it's time because if we compare 1920s cars with those in 2009 don't you think they were horrible in comparison. Most people that say windows XP is better than Vista actually have no technical knowledge of how a Operating system works.
The reason why so many people complained that XP was so better than Vista was because in fact it was. For One, Plug and Play was horrible with Vista. When users try to upgrade to Vista not all their PC components would work properly. The user would have to download the drivers for each component and install it one by one. Second, Microsoft took the wrong approach to the security concerns. Instead of inbedding the Security features within the Operating systems Kernel it was instead engineer in the windows registry so the Vista would be able to prompt the user to accept every move they made. Horrible. And third, XP was just cleaner. Vista was clogged with a bunch of non essential add ins from the start.
The plug and play issue happened to Windows XP too but most people forgot about it by now and they only remember Vista. Remember that XP was being trashed out because of so many problems. Now the second part about security is that any body who has done coding knows that for every 10,000 lines of codes there are at least 20 to 30 flaws and with all the data that has been collected XP averaged 25 and Vista 21 so i don't see where most people keep saying that there were more problems. What happened on the driver side of things is that first Microsoft didn't give Hardware companies enough time to build-up driver database and they slack-off too and at the end blamed MS for the hardware problems which were mostly caused by hardware companies wanting people to ditch the old hardware and get new one. Heck even Creative inc. was blaming Vista for the driver problems now Creative Inc. the worse driver producers for their own hardware had a easy way out of it. cont.
Are you a microsoft employee. LOL. You make valid points, but there is a reason why Windows 7 is out in the market a mere 2 years after Vista.
Not i'm not a MS employee but know many programmers who work for MS and one of my close friend who is Dominican too. The fact that people think Windows 7 is so much better is funny while Vista is considered bad proves that Windows Vista was not bad a all. The major difference was that with XP ms was stuck with the dilemma of CPU/GPU programming problems and something Vista fixed. Windows 7 big difference was that MS didn't make the same mistake about time frame given to hardware companies and how much more research was done. Both Vista and 7 are almost identical with only some changes to the kernel. Anyways i just find it funny that people listen so much to so call "experts writer' on web sites but most have never actually done any programming at all.
Yeah Ubuntu is very good but is just not something i would recommend for the average user unless i'm willing to seat on the phone all day providing tech support and writing the tricky commands. I have a file server too which i was going to build with a old pc i have but decided to just get a network drive that's already setup.