Visa resultat

Network Security 08, EDA 491

Your own effort

1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

37 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		21		56%
Around 20 hours/week»		11		29%
Around 25 hours/week»		4		10%
Around 30 hours/week»		1		2%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.59

2. How was the course workload?

Low»		2		5%
Fairly low»		6		16%
Ok»		29		78%
Too high»		0		0%
Way too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

3. How was the total workload this study period?

Low»		1		2%
Fairly low»		1		2%
Ok»		25		67%
Too high»		10		27%
Way too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- Something like "High", between OK and Too high.» (Ok)
- i had 3 courses (cryptography and computer communication)» (Too high)
- I had three courses this quarter.» (Too high)

Goals and goal fulfilment

4. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		5		13%
The goals are difficult to understand»		0		0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		6		16%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		26		70%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

- Maybe warn the students at the beginning of the quarter that there are plenty of technical things to learn.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

5. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

33 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		0		0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		33		100%
No, the goals are set too high»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2

- I had only taken the Computer Communication course and I didn"t have any trouble understanding this course.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

6. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

No, not at all»		1		2%
To some extent»		9		26%
Yes, definitely»		23		67%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		1		2%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- 30 points is a harsh limit since it leaves too little room for minor errors that can occur even if you understand the big picture of something.» (To some extent)
- It felt like alot of topics were left out, but the most important ones were there.» (To some extent)

Administration

7. How many lectures did you attend?*

0%»		0		0%
25%»		4		10%
50%»		3		8%
75%»		8		21%
Almost 100%»		22		59%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

8. How were the slides?

Poor»		0		0%
Could have been better»		1		2%
Ok»		4		10%
Good»		19		51%
Very good»		13		35%
Dont know»		0

Genomsnitt: 4.18

- too detailed sometimes. good summary of most of mandatory reading» (Could have been better)
- For me is not good to have some slides that are related to the book, other to papers, etc. Then, slides about Kerberos are not very clear » (Ok)
- One powerPoint slide per side is good, try that for all lecturs» (Good)
- The slides where great, specially when preparing for the exam.» (Very good)
- I had to miss some lectures because of a travel abroad, but I really enjoyed them» (Very good)
- Best slides I"ve seen on my 3,5 years @ chalmers!» (Very good)

9. How well did the course administration, web page, etc work?

37 svarande

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather well»		22		59%
Very well»		15		40%

Genomsnitt: 3.4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- change of lecture halls was annoying» (Rather well)
- The web page was updated in a good way during the course.» (Very well)

10. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		3		8%
Rather good»		12		32%
Very good»		14		37%
I did not seek help»		8		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- long waiting time in labsessions» (Rather poor)
- Too much people in too small lab enviroments. However, the teachers (Villhelm etc) did a really great work with the resources available. » (Rather good)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.4

Size and contents of the course

11. Should we have more, same or fewer lectures?

37 svarande

Fewer»		1		2%
Ok as today»		29		82%
More lectures»		5		14%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 2.11

12. Should we remove or add contents to the course?

37 svarande

Remove some contents»		1		2%
It is good as it is»		21		56%
More contents»		12		32%
Much more, please!»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- The book is useless (it hasn"t been udpate since 5 year), and the price doesn"t match » (Remove some contents)
- but will change in time anyway» (It is good as it is)
- Course may be extended on wpa2 but still it is a new protocol, course material is reasonable. Also number of labs could be increased, based on some security issues like password strength. Attacking a radius or wep system. Since our course is not a crypto course it might be useful and makes abstract attacks more tangible. » (It is good as it is)
- E» (It is good as it is)
- more would be interesting, but the load for the exam would maybe become too much. Some optional, additional lectures for some topics (including inviting guests) could be interesting.» (It is good as it is)
- maybe have a new course following up on some of the content in this cource. Ex specialises itself on something like IDS, NIDS or firewalls etc. Just a thought...» (It is good as it is)
- Some more information about WPA and WPA2 could be useful.» (More contents)
- More, or better, something on IDS because it is required in the last laboration.» (More contents)
- It was very interesting so I wouldn"t mind a little more content.» (More contents)
- But instead if more lectures, more practical sessions, such as labs.» (More contents)
- Add contents related to Analysis of Network security, specifically how do we analyze security in a network, what methodologies exist? How does a consultant begin the analysis etc...» (More contents)
- I"d like some emphasis in network design.» (More contents)
- More contents and I would like to have some excercises to do to learn more.» (More contents)
- I like to know more about the best practices on network security running right now in the world.» (More contents)
- You could cover some more details about wireless networks, VLANs and mobile systems and their corresponding protocols. You could also discuss network design in more detail, because the only lecture did not completely clarify the subject.» (More contents)
- More! More! More of it all!» (Much more, please!)

13. What topics should definitely be kept for next year?

- firewalls, SSL, IPsec, attack methods.»
- All»
- Firewalls, SSL, IPSec, WEP, Kerberos, Radius»
- None that stands out»
- Types of Attacks(MITM, ...) are a little bit abstract, I would like to practice some attacks and experience the real effects of them.»
- All»
- FRA demo!!!»
- It´,s good and ok. Nothing should be changed.»
- Everything was good..»
- tls + wep/wpa »
- Firewalls SSL SSH»
- ssl,wlan,ssh.ipsec»
- firewalls»
- All of the materials were useful for me (at least for reminding), except for details of different ways of cracking the WEP.»
- Firewalls, SSL/TLS, SSH, WEP, NAT, RADIUS»

14. What topics should definitely be changed to next year?

- None that stands out»
- Last chapter of this course, I think it was suggesting a central firewall was not enough and system should be extended like personal firewalls, security in every level. We may focus on this topic, they are interesting»
- less wep, more wpa/wpa2 will be great.»
- Perhaps remove the old attacks / technologies or only mention them quickly.»
- Nothing!»
- It´,s good and ok. But it can be changed with respect to time if newer technologies or terminology comes.»
- Slides Link-level security,Slides Network design»
- Details of different ways of cracking the WEP.»
- Network Design»

15. If more or deeper topics, any suggestions?

Teacher"s performance

16. What do you think about the lectures?

37 svarande

Very poor»		1		2%
Poor»		0		0%
Ok»		7		18%
Good»		9		24%
Very good»		20		54%

Genomsnitt: 4.27

- I found it hard to concentrate the full 2 hours. reasons specified in question 17.» (Very poor)
- You talk very fast sometimes and not very loud. I got used to this after a few lectures and I positioned myself in the front rows. I can understand that you need to hurry up with all the stupid questions though.» (Ok)
- They were absolutely worth visiting, specially since I didn"t read anything from the course book.» (Very good)
- Best Lecturer, I have ever seen in Chalmers.» (Very good)
- You are pretty much the best lecturer I"ve seen so far. Content and they way you present it!» (Very good)
- much (and mostly successfull) effort from the teacher if he got the impression, that something remained unclear, to clarify it by further explanations» (Very good)
- I felt as he were aware of most of the topics by hands-on knowledge, he could describe them very well.» (Very good)
- The teacher was wonderful. Both in lecturing and answering the student"s questions. Thank you so much Tomas.» (Very good)

17. How do you assess the lecturer"s teaching style and tonality of speech?

Very poor»		0		0%
Poor»		1		2%
Fair»		9		24%
Good»		15		40%
Very good»		12		32%

Genomsnitt: 4.02

- I had to concentrate too hard to clearly hear the lecturer. The lecturer also spoke too fast in my opinion. » (Poor)
- Lecture was good but not loud enough. A Microphon would be very nice.» (Fair)
- Try to speak up a bit» (Fair)
- lecturer speaks a little to low.» (Fair)
- For me the only thing is that teacher should use a microphone because his tonality of voice is very low and sometimes words are not clear» (Good)
- not loud enough for back seats (maybe VB"s problem)» (Good)
- voice sometimes hard too understand in the back (due to fast or unclear pronouncation).» (Good)
- I really like Tomas lectures, always interesting to listen.» (Very good)
- Maybe he can ask more questions to students rather than waiting question. But He is still very good.» (Very good)
- Really great. Incomparable to most other lecturers.» (Very good)
- The teacher sometimes speak very fast.» (Very good)
- I found it very very good, however I heard some students complaining about the speed of the speech during the first three or four lectures but they also got used to the way Tomas lectured.» (Very good)

18. How do you assess the quality of the guest lecture?

Very poor»		0		0%
Poor»		0		0%
Ok»		3		9%
Good»		12		38%
Very good»		16		51%

Genomsnitt: 4.41

- I missed it unfortunately.» (?)
- Couldn"t attend :_(» (Ok)
- The hacker lecture was quite fun to watch even if I didn"t learn that much.» (Good)
- need more time to discuss, need more guest lectures!!!» (Good)
- if someone from the FRA is invited then there should maybe be a little room for discussing the ethical aspects of this field of computer science - that may be not part of the course content but part of becoming a responsible engineer/researcher (that respects the value of privacy for instance)» (Good)
- It was very intersting to see a real attack. It helped me to get a better understanding of some details in the attack.» (Very good)
- Very useful and interesting» (Very good)
- That lecture was one of the most interesting I have attended in my 4 years at chalmers.» (Very good)
- Its really nice to see things in real action. One thing though: It should be better to instruct the guest somewhat about the knowledge of the class. Some details were explained the same way as to office managers.. » (Very good)
- It was fabulous. I was just fascinated by the practical job of hacking and cracking by a security guy! It was really good to know where exactly we are going to work as a provider of security.» (Very good)

Book and study material

19. Should we use a text book next year?

37 svarande

Yes»		10		27%
No»		10		27%
Have no strong preferences»		17		45%

Genomsnitt: 2.18

- I don"t like the current book. It is too shallow. In some cases you get more info by looking at the slides!» (Yes)
- Yes, but a better book. The one suggested this year is too chaotic and not too in-depth» (Yes)
- If it is a new edition yes ...» (Yes)
- I thnk the book was good » (Yes)
- I haven"t buy the book, also it wasn"t mandatory. Course was based on articles and I liked it in that way.» (No)
- The material was enough and the slides plus the lectures were as well as the book. So I don"t think the book would be necessary the next year.» (No)
- but it is disappointing to buy the "old" book and then download 4 chapters for free» (Have no strong preferences)
- I did not use the book at all. The slides already provide a lot of information, and the articles can complete them.» (Have no strong preferences)
- The material available in the subject on the net is really good and up to date. The mandatory reading was very interesting as a matter of fact. It is really good to encourage the use of research-papers instead of simple books in these last detailed courses. This is the way to work later on! » (Have no strong preferences)

20. How was the quality of the mandatory reading material?

Didn"t read it»		5		13%
Bad (replace it)»		1		2%
Fair»		10		27%
Good»		15		40%
Very good»		6		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.43 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Varying quality. The papers were very good, whereas the administrator/scriptkiddie-war-article wasn"t very good.» (Fair)
- Some of the marerials were to long and not interesting enough. The information in the lectures was sufficient to understand most of the topics.» (Fair)
- Some of the material (Radius, GRC.com, The Final Nail in WEP’,s Coffin) I found interesting and good to read but the other material I didn"t learn much from. The lectures often goes deeper into the subject than the reading material does so it"m much better to pay attention at the lecture.» (Fair)
- Some of the reading material was to "technical specific" (out of general range..)» (Fair)
- (for the long ones) there should be better indication on which pages are extremely helpful. Now the papers work more like "0/1" for the student ( read everything or nothing )» (Good)
- Very interesting and good reading. Thanks for the hint, really! However, some were pretty old and mostly historical. (GRC-DDOS, Vista BETA, etc). A pointer to good places to get good net-sec articles by good authors would be great. The quality of the ones found by google is.. well.. "not always great".» (Good)
- Intressting artcles» (Good)
- But too long to read» (Very good)
- The articles specially the RADIUS and IP articles were quite useful. Some of them were not as useful for the exam as expected but they did add a lot to my knowledge. So I suggest to have those material which are not really mandatory for the exam among the optional material and the really mandatory ones such as the RADIUS article as mandatory. There could be more mandatory readings related to the lectures and less optional ones, as I see most of the mandatory material practically optional.» (Very good)

21. Should we have more or less reading material?

37 svarande

Decrease»		6		16%
Keep same»		25		67%
More»		3		8%
More, but just as volontary reading»		3		8%

Genomsnitt: 2.08

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.43

Laborations

22. What do you think about the laborations?

37 svarande

Bad»		2		5%
Not too god»		0		0%
Fair»		2		5%
Good»		20		54%
Very good»		13		35%

Genomsnitt: 4.13 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Less labs, but more detailed!» (Bad)
- Smooth labs covering highly relevant topics.» (Good)
- labs are very helpful for understanding! need at least one more in another topic» (Good)
- Very useful» (Good)
- really good to have hands-on knowledge of these tools (snort, iptables, wireshark, snort etc). The labs can always be better etc. but with low resources, these are great. I understand that good "security lab enviroments" are hard/expensive to build just for a few courses. The potential is however huge...» (Good)
- Sometimes it was to limited. For Example the Firewall Config was poor. That was a router config and not a firewall.» (Good)
- I larned very new useful thing about firewall and ids. Also SSL was good» (Very good)
- Labs could be more practical. Lab 3 was not understandable at all! We could do it acceptably but we didn"t get the point of the lab at all. Other labs were good specially the first two and the last one. But there could be a comprehensive review of the labs for the course to cover the majority of topics of the course.» (Very good)

23. Do you think the resources in the lab were sufficient?

36 svarande

Very poor»		2		5%
Poor»		9		25%
Ok»		20		57%
More than enough»		4		11%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 2.74

- Had to wait for almost 2 hours before we could get an assistant to approve our lab.» (Very poor)
- Waiting two hours for approval is unaccaptable.» (Very poor)
- The last weeks the lab was more than full. And the time spent waiting for the teaching assistents was far to long.» (Poor)
- It took really long time before you could have your lab approved. It would be nice with more supervisors.» (Poor)
- not enough places.» (Poor)
- The teachers did a VERY good job. However, ONLINE bookings should really be preferred!! There is a function @ student.chalmers.se. Use IT! The analog booking system is really annoying. The lab was overbooked at pretty much all occasions I went there.» (Poor)
- More time for lab and therefor a bit more to do.» (Poor)
- even though we booked a session we often had to wait for someone to finish to get a computer, what is the point of booking then?» (Ok)

24. How effective would additional exercises/labs be to the understanding of the course material?

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

No, ok as it is»		17		45%
More laborations»		12		32%
Add exercises to the course»		8		21%
No opinion»		4

- Laborations is a great way of learning.» (More laborations)
- They were very good and stick to the course contents. I liked them, they helped me to understand the course theory but we may add 1 more lab.» (More laborations, Add exercises to the course)
- Maybe one or more "attack labs" would help us to understand how an attack works from a practical point of view: (scanning + finding a vulnerability + trying to exploit it + taking over the machine)» (More laborations)
- "problems" is always good to try to solve. The course contains a lot of information, but a few problems related to the course should really do the trick..» (Add exercises to the course)
- Although laboration in programming some exploit application could be very good in understanding how attackers think..» (No, ok as it is)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 4.13

Conclusions

25. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		1		2%
Fair»		0		0%
Adequate»		4		10%
Good»		19		51%
Excellent»		13		35%

Genomsnitt: 4.16

26. Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor