6 Quotes by Peter Sommer

From very early on I thought these systems would have great educational applications, ... I think there are possibilities, but I can't tell you if it would be profitable. I'm not sure they could survive in terms of a business model.

Most businesses and individuals don't need to have on their staff a Digital Sherlock Holmes but they should have plans to identify and preserve important digital evidence such as email, web transactions, PCs, PDAs and cellphones - and have a broad understanding of some of the associated legal problems such as admissibility and privacy. It is very odd that organisations have in place contingency plans for low likelihood/high impact events like fire and terrorism but nothing for common place high frequency events.

You also have to consider legislation such as data protection. There are privacy and human rights law for e-mails, which you can overcome if you have the right contract of employment.

There is plainly a problem with dual-use tools for legitimate penetration testers. That clause is going to need some clarification.

The way we drink wine is changing fast and consumers of today want smooth, powerful, high alcohol wines, often to be enjoyed without food. Now, the producers are handed the tools to keep up with consumers.

The need for digital evidence is not confined to obvious cybercrime events such as hacking, fraud and denial of service attacks, ... it's also required when transactions are disputed, in employee disputes, and almost all forms of non-cyber crime, including murder, forgery, industrial espionage and terrorism. With the vast proliferation of computer ownership and usage plus the growth of low-cost always-on broadband connectivity, all organisations require a Forensic Readiness Program.