Visa resultat

Computer security, Lp1 HT-10, EDA263 / DIT641

Your own effort

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

At most 15 hours/week»		19		39%
Around 20 hours/week»		14		29%
Around 25 hours/week»		11		22%
Around 30 hours/week»		4		8%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?*

0%»		0		0%
25%»		4		8%
50%»		7		14%
75%»		12		25%
100%»		25		52%

Genomsnitt: 4.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.1

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		9		18%
The goals are difficult to understand»		2		4%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		14		29%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		23		47%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

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

No, the goals are set too low»		3		6%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		39		86%
No, the goals are set too high»		3		6%

Genomsnitt: 2

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

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

No, not at all»		11		22%
To some extent»		23		47%
Yes, definitely»		11		22%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		4		8%

- The course covers a lot of different topics, even if you have learnt 90% of the course content the exam might ask for the 10% you don"t know that much about. Giving a slightly unfair result.» (To some extent)
- I felt like the exam was too specific on some parts and I was not given the chance to make use of what I learned throughout the course and through the previous test exams.» (No, not at all)
- Too few quastion compared to what I know.» (No, not at all, To some extent)
- the questions on exam were ABSOLUTELY were not related to our labs, that we spend the most of time and made the highest effords » (No, not at all)
- I was expecting questions more spread through the chapters, for example there were not questions about pgp, kerberos.» (To some extent)
- Not many of the important parts of the course came on the exam.» (To some extent)
- While the exam did hit many key areas, I feel it was perhaps "bad resolution" on it. What I mean by that is, 7 questions to cover all of the course hardly seems fair, on the other hand if the goal is to achieve a sense of panic over trying to learn everything to perfection, it is a bullseye. Personally I feel we didn"t get any "cred" for the laboration assignments. They were great, and I learned a lot, and I know had there been a buffer-overflow, pgp signing, or encryption assignment I would have "aced" those. » (To some extent)
- The exam didn"t even cover half of this course! Very few high-point questions on few subjects which is terrible way to test! Questions about the whole course and give shorter answers would definetly be better.» (No, not at all, To some extent)
- As it is a rather broad course the exam can only cover some parts, if your focus has been on other parts those it wont show in the exam.» (To some extent)
- The exam tests your memory more than your analytical skills. The latter could be a better metric for a technical master student than the former.» (To some extent)
- The examination was highly focused on security assesing and didn"t touch almost the security problems inherent to code.» (No, not at all)
- I thought that the extermination would cover other areas, like some of what we covered in the labs that we had. » (To some extent)
- The exam was very unclear. The questions were formulated bad and it was difficult to understand exactly what the examinator wanted us to answer.» (To some extent)
- allocation of points in the exam was done very badly» (No, not at all)
- Nischfrågor som inte alls motsvarade det stora hela av kursen. Dåligt!» (No, not at all)
- One question on the exam that was about viruses and its properties, which we did not get much information about during the course. In other words to many points on the exam considering this part.» (To some extent)
- There were 10% good questions, the rest was not really relevant and it was hard to practice...» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

6. Please give feedback on the new book (Stallings).

I didn"t read it.»		20		55%
I preferred (...) instead.»		10		27%
I didn"t like it.»		6		16%

Genomsnitt: 1.61

- It was okay, I guess» (?)
- Nice book.» (?)
- I liked it.» (?)
- It is ok.» (?)
- I read some chapters given in course» (?)
- I read the one from the previous year because there is ebook available» (I didn"t read it.)
- Did not buy it» (I didn"t read it.)
- there are no options for a positive response to this question, I chose "didn"t read it" but the truth is that I liked it just fine» (I didn"t read it.)
- the lectures slides and others support documents were well done and summarised greatly the main things I wanted to know.» (I didn"t read it.)
- I rather searching security info by myself.» (I didn"t read it.)
- Only read some chapters, sometimes too much detail, but written in a good and comprehensive way» (I didn"t read it.)
- I read up on much of it, however since it wasnt available until week 4, I felt panic and rather disadvantaged over not having been able to keep in phase. I also loved the OP:s some of which were available online. All in all the book is good, but its index truely needs improvement. It is utterly useless.» (I preferred (...) instead.)
- I prefer to use writer"s slides» (I preferred (...) instead.)
- Pfleeger"s book is more available.» (I preferred (...) instead.)
- Why no "I liked it" option? =) Anyways, it was a good book!» (I preferred (...) instead.)
- I used the lecture slides by Stalling and brown and it was the main parts of the book that one should study for he exam,unfortunately I started reading them late,on the other hand the lecturer"s slides are terribly confusing ,as one reads something in the book and then in the slides the names and concepts are mixed together and it is confusing .» (I preferred (...) instead.)
- Its too much text, internet and comoendium should be used.» (I didn"t like it.)
- I read a lot, but as usual when I decide to read the book for a course I feel regret now after the exam. Reading is mostly time consuming and does not explain things as good as slides usually do.» (I didn"t like it.)
- Okej bok för den mer intresserade. Rätt onödigt inköp annars.» (I didn"t like it.)

7. Please give feedback on the other course material, i.e. off-prints (OP), downloads (DL) and hand-out on the web.

Poor»		5		10%
Fair»		11		23%
Good»		10		21%
Adequate»		15		31%
Excellent»		6		12%

Genomsnitt: 3.12

- Not enough offprints.» (Poor)
- slides are too difficult to follow. Please include all slides in 1 file, so it is easy to follow.» (Poor)
- No answer examples to earlier examquestions. Otherwise good.» (Poor)
- 6 testexams without awnsers. It should atleast give the awnsers for the trickier questions.» (Poor)
- sometimes you felt swamped by all the material you were supposed to read.» (Fair)
- the course material should be uploaded at least 24 hours before each lecture so that the students can read them.not to mention that some of the materials were added to the list on the homepage the day before the exam ,and this is not fair !!!!» (Fair)
- Not all the material on the overhead/powerpoint was uploaded on the home page» (Good)
- Some of it irrelevant, some quite hard to read.» (Good)
- Some slides could have explained a bit better, but overall they were good.» (Adequate)
- As stated above, I liked the OP:s. I missed lecture one due to double scheduling thus I wasnt made aware of its existance until later. Perhaps it could be more clear on course page?» (Adequate)
- The slides of subject of buffer-overflow on the website is hard to follow.» (Adequate)
- No complains here.» (Adequate)

8. What do you think about the guest lectures?

48 svarande

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

a) Poor»		1		2%
b) Poor»		3		6%
a) Fair»		5		10%
b) Fair»		3		6%
a) Adequate»		10		20%
b) Adequate»		9		18%
a) Good»		17		35%
b) Good»		13		27%
a) Excellent»		11		22%
b) Excellent»		7		14%

- some guest lecturers think that we are customers instead of students. We expect more theoretical and advanced level. » (b) Poor, a) Adequate)
- I didn"t get a chance to attend the hard disk lecture because we had an obligatory lecture clashing with that one» (a) Good)
- b) I missed because of schedule collison.» (a) Adequate)
- no practical use at all» (a) Adequate, b) Adequate)
- Good speaker and interesting subject on a). Did not attend b)» (a) Good)
- Did not attend to b)» (a) Excellent)
- I could not attend the guest lecture on hard disk recovery and erasure due to mandatory class on a double scheduling hour. This was particulary annoying since it was a lecture I wanted to attend, and since it was a question that showed up on the thesis/exam. I would like for someone responsible at H-section to look into this double-scheduling idiocy. We would get this no matter what class we select as "optional course of choice". Perhaps this does not concern this evalutation but I still wanted to mention it in regards to this question on guest lectures.» (b) Adequate, a) Excellent)
- couldn"t attend to the other one due to collisions» (a) Good)
- Web Security lecture was really basic. I prefer more advanced lectures.» (a) Adequate)
- Didnt attend the first one» (b) Excellent)
- The web security lecture was very interesting and it approached a lot of the problems I have had to exploit in security competitions. But the Hard Disk Data Recovery and Erasure looked more like spam than providing a real insight on the matter. I think that a brief explanation of the dangers of journaling systems aside would have been interesting.» (b) Fair, a) Excellent)
- Didnt attend b because of courses interlaping each other.» (b) Poor, a) Adequate)
- Both the Lectures were really interesting and they managed to focus on the specific points that we needed for the course.» (a) Excellent, b) Excellent)
- Since our schedule had conflicts I wasn"t able to attend any of the guest lectures. This is something that has to be changed, especially since the hard disk lecture gave answers to the exam I wasn"t able to write because of it.» ()
- We had mandatory lectures in the other course couldent attend. » ()
- The second guest lecture was more like an advertisement for the lecturer"s company,and I think giving questions from these lectures in the exam is not very appropriate .» (a) Adequate, b) Adequate)
- Guest lecture b) could have been a bit longer with more details.» (b) Good, a) Excellent)
- Kunde inte gå på b) pga krockande föreläsningar. Med facit i hand hade b) varit mer givande än Per Zaring.» (a) Excellent, b) Excellent)

9. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		5		10%
To some extent»		15		31%
Large extent»		17		35%
Great extent»		11		22%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- lecturers are not most of the times ready to answer questions.A teacher should teach in a way that no one falls asleep during the lecture ,with much more energy.» (Small extent)
- x = 100, for(x: x == 0: x=-1){ printf("actually"), } Hereby I return the generous amount of "actually":s offered by the principle lecturer. (yes Erland likes to use that word :) ) On a more serious note, it has been of great help showing the door in the various fields covered in the course. Helps one get some idea of what is required.» (Large extent)
- Engagerade föreläsare är alltid ett plus.» (Great extent)
- Though could be some changes regarding PP, ST and TOE in the common criteria subject. Hard to relate to reality, and thus hard to understand» (Great extent)

10. What was the best about the lecture part of the course? What can be improved?

11. How was the Identification and Authentication Lab?

Poor»		4		8%
Fair»		1		2%
Adequate»		7		14%
Good»		25		52%
Excellent»		11		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.79

- Way to simple, copy-paste code.» (Poor)
- It was a little hard to get started, because we hadn"t read any C in 2 years» (Adequate)
- Could be alittle more clear on the info.» (Adequate)
- Lab assistants were not eager to teach. » (Good)
- The C programming language was a problem for a lot of student because they didn"t have a lot of expirience in this programming language.» (Good)
- All the labs were excellent, big cred goes to Laleh and Pierre.» (Excellent)
- I though we did a lot more than requested anyway it was fun.» (Excellent)
- Gav mycket bra insikt i säkerhetskraven på program.» (Excellent)

12. How was the GPG lab?

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		4		8%
Adequate»		4		8%
Good»		30		62%
Excellent»		10		20%

Genomsnitt: 3.95

- Goddamn quesions.» (Adequate)
- Our first submission was returned with comments that said that we had missed some important steps in one of the questions. We could however not find that piece of information anywere else than from the tutor we submitted to.» (Good)
- Missed a real verification process (asking for ID documents to prove the owner is who he says to be) aside from that I think it was fun. Note: On next labs it would be good talking a bit of how to use simmetric ciphers with GPG as they are useful for certain tasks too.» (Good)
- All the labs were excellent, big cred goes to Laleh and Pierre.» (Excellent)
- I loved it when we could actually work with what we had studied in the manuals.» (Excellent)
- Kul involverande av andra labgrupper. Gav bra förståelse för PGP (GPG).» (Excellent)

13. How was the Vulnerability Scanning lab?

Poor»		4		8%
Fair»		6		12%
Adequate»		5		10%
Good»		24		50%
Excellent»		9		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- This lab didn"t offer much useful knowledge.» (Poor)
- Maybe a bit to simple» (Fair)
- It was a waste of time and it was really boring.» (Fair)
- According to the teacher we missed some because of the storm of scanners :(» (Adequate)
- All the labs were excellent, big cred goes to Laleh and Pierre.» (Excellent)
- Det är alltid roligt att scanna saker.» (Excellent)

14. What was the best about the lab part of the course? What can be improved?

15. How was the balance between the Lecture and the Lab parts?

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

Very badly»		1		2%
Rather badly»		1		2%
Rather well»		22		46%
Very well»		23		48%

Genomsnitt: 3.42

- Many some files are impossible to be printed (some students had the same problem). Slides are difficult to follow due to high number per lecture.» (Rather badly)
- There should be away to let the students know about updates on the course web page. for example through emails» (Rather well)
- Some download links were broken.» (Rather well)
- A bit confusing because one lecture has more than 1 handouts. It would be better to sum all topics in one handout.» (Rather well)
- No complaints, easy to understand web page, fast feedback on the laboration reports, clear and easy to understand lab-PM:s...» (Very well)
- Hopefully we can find what ever we are looking for in the web site.» (Very well)
- The only problem was for a week or something(might have been shorter) where you couldnt download some slides. Altough you could fiddle abit with the url"s to get it to work. Otherwise perfectly» (Very well)
- No complaints here.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

Very poor»		1		2%
Rather poor»		4		8%
Rather good»		15		31%
Very good»		20		42%
I did not seek help»		7		14%

Genomsnitt: 3.59

- No good time except lessons to ask stuff.» (Rather poor)
- It was hard to get a hold of teachers » (Rather poor)
- Big cred to Laleh and Pierre!!» (Very good)
- Perfect that Erland stayed after lectures to answer questions.» (Very good)
- At class the teacher allowed to be interrupted for questions, to me is more than enough.» (Very good)

18. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

Very poorly»		2		4%
Rather poorly»		2		4%
Rather well»		14		29%
Very well»		27		57%
I did not seek coopeation»		2		4%

Genomsnitt: 3.53

- Although my companion had not the same level I did I enjoyed working with him and would probably pair with him on other courses.» (Very well)

Summarizing questions

19. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		1		2%
Fair»		5		10%
Adequate»		13		27%
Good»		19		40%
Excellent»		9		19%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- I did not obtained any practical use from the course, excepting the first lab, which was quite good. The rest was just memorizing the book» (Fair)
- The course covers a wide range of topics related to computer security, but superficially. Though it is supposed to be a general course in the computer security, I would like a less-wide more-in-depth approach.» (Adequate)
- Needs a lot of updating as sometimes the topics touched were very old.» (Adequate)
- Much of the material did not seemed to be so relevant to the subject, just very theoretical. » (Adequate)
- learned quite a lot» (Excellent)
- Very informative and intresting course. I feel it really opened my eyes on computer security in general, and if there is a continuation course I would be intrested in attending. Overall I have no complaints worthy of note.» (Excellent)

20. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

21. What should definitely be changed to next year?

22. Additional comments

Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor