Honeypots mailing list archives
RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There!
From: "Chris Carlson \(OTG\)" <ccarls () microsoft com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 19:57:52 -0700
David Gillett wrote:
A functional definition can only really be based on one or both of two criteria:
(a) what it does
(b) what we do with it
If you cut away those supports, then it just means what the speaker
chooses >it to mean at any given moment. Agreed, when I think honeypot I don't think of a technology rather I think of a concept whose scope incorporates the use of many given technologies implemented in various ways. How about: 'A honeypot is an information related concept that incorporates one or more systems or technologies. When applied as a whole these systems present an artificial or deceptive front (facade).' -Chris
Current thread:
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Lobur, Julia M (May 23)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! eric () infobro com (May 23)
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Jack McCarthy (May 23)
- Re: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Richard.Salgado () usdoj gov (May 23)
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Chris Carlson (OTG) (May 23)
- Re: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Valdis . Kletnieks (May 23)
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Chris Carlson (OTG) (May 23)
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Chris Carlson (OTG) (May 23)
- RE: Honeypot Defintion - Almost There! Chris Carlson (OTG) (May 23)