Aktuella utvärderingar

Visa resultat

Här kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.

MPCSN 1112-3 Computer security, EDA263/DIT641

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-03-08 - 2012-03-19
Antal svar: 47
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 39%
Kontaktperson: Mattias Bingerud»

Your own effort

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

We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.

47 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»16 34%
Around 20 hours/week»24 51%
Around 25 hours/week»3 6%
Around 30 hours/week»1 2%
At least 35 hours/week»3 6%

Genomsnitt: 1.95

- easy material, a lot just common sense (for any IT-student)» (At most 15 hours/week)
- there was not much to study until the exam.. a dugga or two would be good.» (At most 15 hours/week)
- I had a pretty solid ground before this course in Computer Security» (At most 15 hours/week)
- In an avrage, since we had much to do because we had 2 more courses at the same time. So sometimes more, sometimes less.» (Around 20 hours/week)

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

47 svarande

0%»1 2%
25%»7 14%
50%»5 10%
75%»16 34%
100%»18 38%

Genomsnitt: 3.91

- This was not due to the lectures themselves but laziness on my part.» (25%)
- I live 2h away from school.» (75%)
- it was very good, even tho some subjects aren"t as intressting as others.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.

To review the learning outcomes for this course, click here. (Opens in new window)

3. How understandable are the course goals?

46 svarande

The goals are difficult to understand»6 13%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»16 34%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»24 52%

Genomsnitt: 2.39

- The course could be better if subjects were more develop.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.

46 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»3 6%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»38 82%
No, the goals are set too high»5 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.04

- The goals are too high, and the course does not even attempt to reach them» (No, the goals are set too high)

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

46 svarande

No, not at all»2 4%
To some extent»26 56%
Yes, definitely»18 39%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.34

- Some big part about sec models was not on the examined.» (To some extent)
- The exam is more about memorizing some slides, can be done in a couple of days.» (To some extent)
- I think it could have been better. In some Courses with much facts to teach non mandatory duggas are given which gives extra points to the exam and makes sure that the student studies during the whole course.» (To some extent)
- Some questions felt very specific instead of giving a broader view of the security area.» (To some extent)
- making us just learn by memory a bunch of acronyms like TOE, PP and so on, i think doesn"t bring much in terms of improved knowledge, but takes a lot of effort.» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

6. Please give feedback on the book (Stallings)

36 svarande

I didn"t read it»17 47%
I preferred (...) instead»8 22%
I didn"t like it»11 30%

Genomsnitt: 1.83

- The book was OK, but I think you not nead it, I has most use the course webbpage and internet for find answer.» (?)
- I like it just fine.» (?)
- I liked it, it is comprehensive and well written.» (?)
- Rarely used it» (?)
- What? I did read it, and I did think it was OK, but there"s no option for that :P» (I preferred (...) instead)
- I"m missing a positive option! :) The book is excellent, and a new edition is just out (jan "12). I could not attend the lectures due to a bad schedule, so I only had the book, and I fared very well on the exam. Keep this book, it is excellent.» (I preferred (...) instead)
- The book was ok.» (I preferred (...) instead)
- Weird options on this question. The book was OK.» (I preferred (...) instead)
- Why is the only options here negative? I thought it was a pretty good book.» (I preferred (...) instead)
- I did read some chapers, and it was good for doing the exams. Some of the text felt kind of far from what we learn"t in the lectures.» (I didn"t like it)
- Massive wall of text.» (I didn"t like it)
- when searching for something particular ,you were reading too much (unnecessary?)information» (I didn"t like it)

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

47 svarande

Poor»3 6%
Fair»4 8%
Adequate»10 21%
Good»21 44%
Excellent»9 19%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

- no uniformity on slide» (Poor)
- Too much of it!» (Fair)
- Read mostly the slides.» (Adequate)
- Some good DL"s and OP» (Good)
- There were quite many, so I only had a look at a subset which seemed interesting to me.» (Good)
- The many layouts to the exams was comfusing.» (Good)
- Some dead links, and the site was down a few times. Some PDF with 90+ pages seems a bit overkill, othen than that it was good.» (Good)
- Some bit hard to identify what each PP contains.» (Excellent)

8. What do you think about the guest lecture?

Hard Disk Data Recovery and Erasure

42 svarande

Poor»2 4%
Fair»2 4%
Adequate»12 28%
Good»16 38%
Excellent»10 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

- I did not really think it was poor, but there was no option for us that did not attend...» (Poor)
- not cool to have a large part of it in swedish... otherwise pretty informative but nothing I learnt that I didn"t already know. Picture of the data tracks was cool though.» (Poor)
- Please raise the level. Very easy material.» (Fair)
- didnt attend» (Adequate)
- his claim to be proved to be impossible to read broken disks just because they never succeeded in doing so was VERY questionable. I didn"t say anything because i didn"t want to get into an argument, but » (Adequate)
- Interesting and good speaker.» (Good)
- I could not attend.» (Excellent)
- It was really informative.» (Excellent)

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

46 svarande

Small extent»7 15%
Some extent»16 34%
Large extent»18 39%
Great extent»5 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.45

- I have not attended any lectures.» (Small extent)
- Teaching methods was superb.» (Some extent)
- A lot of the materials I was familiar with» (Some extent)
- even tho much had been forgotten when I started studie for the exams as it was not fresh in the memory anymore.» (Great extent)

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

- Malwares and buffer overflows. Common Criteria and Metrics were really boring.»
- I have not attended any lectures.»
- I think it"s good to have 2 people giving lectures. Maybe more real life examples of "hacks".»
- Explanations on the blackboard.»
- Attacks»
- improve slide»
- The laboration part was the best part. Teaching part can be improved.»
- I enjoyed every part of the lecture because the professor and his assistant shared their knowledge very well and therefore understanding was easy.»
- Åke"s lectures were very interesting and engaging. Partly because he gave a lot of interesting real world examples and anecdotes.»
- Very good professors. However, material is too easy. Any one with common computer sense should and better know at least half of the material already.»
- n/a»
- I liked that so many subjects were covered, though it obviously has a negative effect on the depth. I would have preferred less blackboard use, since it is hard to read if you just sit on the wrong side of the room.»
- The knowledge seemd fresh! Its a very good feature that many other lecturers could learn from!»
- I stopped attending the lectures because I found the pace too slow. The heavy use of the blackboard felt unwarranted and would be better suited for material in the slides.»
- That it was up to date! Hands on examples?»
- Sometimes the lectures seemed a bit slow and it got hard to stay focused.»
- The best about the lecture part of the course was to introduce some security news and real examples related with the lecture. On the other hand, adding videos, discussions(more interaction with the students) can improve the lectures by changing the speed of lecture and preventing someone from falling asleep. »
- The guest lecture was very good. I think CC was rather confusing, in addition to being terribly boring. I would"ve liked to have a clearer overview of it in general, since it was hard to put all the different abbreviations in relation to each other.»
- Slides and examples were great guidance but the writing on the black/green board could be reduced drastically. It"s very hard to follow the lecturer and copy everything from the board.»
- Both teachers were really good At teaching»
- Overall good lectures! Could be improved with more fresh examples!»

11. How was the Identification and Authentification lab?

47 svarande

Poor»1 2%
Fair»1 2%
Adequate»7 14%
Good»28 59%
Excellent»10 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.95

- It was too basic and not very thought provoking.» (Poor)
- Feels quite..easy. Doesn"t feel real.» (Adequate)
- The first lab was too easy, it does not make the student think, since everything is given(one just has to follow the steps).» (Adequate)
- would be nice to make it cover also mlock and resetting the clear text password» (Good)
- Simple stuff.» (Good)
- did the labs last year» (Good)
- labs overall was great» (Excellent)

12. How was the GPG lab?

47 svarande

Poor»2 4%
Fair»2 4%
Adequate»6 12%
Good»29 61%
Excellent»8 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.82

- The lab was OK for what it was, but as a stand-alone lab I feel it is much too basic. A better lab would have been to implement some subset of PGP.» (Poor)
- the normal time slot was unclear» (Poor)
- Some bit slow, and much same each step.» (Adequate)
- This one was quite alright. » (Adequate)
- It was a bit messy when you where supposed to exchange keys.» (Good)
- i signed something like 5 or 6 keys.. so i guess someone didn"t sign any. Coudln"t figure out why.» (Good)
- Pretty decent lab.» (Good)
- did the labs last year» (Good)
- labs overall was great» (Excellent)
- I had never done encryption before so it was a great learning experience.» (Excellent)

13. How was the vulnerability scanning lab?

47 svarande

Poor»3 6%
Fair»6 12%
Adequate»9 19%
Good»22 46%
Excellent»7 14%

Genomsnitt: 3.51

- This felt like a tutorial in the vulnerability scanner software.. which was not very rewarding at all. A better lab would have been to actually identify a vulnerability, exploit it, and then patch it. (manually, not using some automatic software)» (Poor)
- The teacher assistant did not answer our group!!!» (Poor)
- the normal time slot was unclear» (Poor)
- I get not much from this lab.» (Fair)
- Very simple stuff.» (Fair)
- Little weak in my opinion, it would have been more fun to really exploit the vulnerabilities, rather than just looking at them.» (Fair)
- A bit boring.» (Adequate)
- It is actually good, however easy.» (Adequate)
- did the labs last year» (Adequate)
- labs overall was great» (Excellent)

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

- It is real work which is more important since it gives a better and more concrete understanding. The course should be more lab oriented than what it is right now. Why not 5 labs?»
- labs was great becaues you could put things into conrete manner, setuid was a bit confusing at first»
- I think, replace the "vulnerability scanning lab" with the SQL lab and add also homepage hacking as a part»
- All labs had a good teaching-level. Sign up for labs online would be good.»
- The best part was having us read the GPG manual, which is a very well written document. Please encourage students to read this in the future as well. it is a very good document for encryption/signing in general. It is very pedagogical.»
- The labs was of good quality overall. »
- Is good that we have to think a little. The setuid() system call paper(Setuid Demystified) was confusing and made us doubt what the right answer was but in a way it still was informative.»
- nothing»
- You learned a lot from the labs. Could be more labs but eisier.»
- The labs were ok because we had adequate support from those in charge, the time was also adequate so I can say everything went well »
- I think that the scheduled time for the labs was well calculated to fit the amount of lab time required for the labs, which is not always the case for all courses. I almost feel like there should be a fourth lab, like the SQL-injection lab the examiner was working on. Since I felt I spent little time on labs compared to other courses. »
- Make them harder, and let us learn more!»
- it was ok»
- All the labs were really easy, they could be more challenging for my taste. I was especially disappointed by the buffer overflow part, just checking for unsafe functions is trivial, and a lot of fun things can be done with buffer overflows in practice.»
- It was stuff that was nice to know.»
- Hands on experience! Understanding how easy it is. Structure the Lab PM better. A lot of text but it does say very little.»
- Plenty of time to make the labs on, no rushing.»
- Change the coursebook»
- The engagement and challenges »
- provide more guidelines»
- Perhaps , look at viruses, how they behave etc would be interesting»

15. How was the balance between the lecture and the lab parts?

- The labs were kind of easy. But instead of making them more demanding another lab should be added which gives more hands on experince of breaking a system. Injection attacks/wargame-ish..»
- There could have been more interesting labs.»
- more labs would have been more fun»
- Good, but I think some more lab has be fun.»
- I don"t know about the lectures, but the labs were very basic.»
- Not sure what you mean, they complemented eachother well.»
- Good enough.»
- Very low workload from the lab part on this course.»
- ok»
- Okey.»
- Great because we implemented in the labs what were covering in the lectures, and this helped a lot in our understanding.»
- both balanced too easy»
- not very good»
- A few more labs might be nice. »
- I would be able to spend a bit more time on some more lab assignment.»
- Good.»
- More labs!»
- good.»
- Maybe it would be better if there were less lectures and more labs. »
- Good»
- I think that one more lab could easily fit in. »
- Superb»
- Good»
- quite good. it is better to have more labs»
- Labs are really good to gain a good understanding, more labs is good!»

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

47 svarande

Very badly»3 6%
Rather badly»3 6%
Rather well»21 44%
Very well»20 42%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

- The lecture slides can be improved. E.g. provide -all- slides in fullpage or at least in the same shema. As some are 2-up others 6-up and so on. The student himself can then decide how he wants to be diplayed and/or printed out!» (Very badly)
- Magnus did a lot of teaching on the black board, and much of that material was never published (?)..» (Rather badly)
- If only there would have been solutions to the old exams... it would have helped much.» (Rather well)
- I would really have liked to have some answers for the old examinations. It would have been very helpful. Thats my only complaint.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

47 svarande

Very poor»1 2%
Rather poor»1 2%
Rather good»14 29%
Very good»23 48%
I did not seek help»8 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- no time for qustions, the lecutre time was so tight,too much writing on blackbord» (Very poor)

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

47 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 2%
Rather well»9 19%
Very well»33 70%
I did not seek cooperation»4 8%

Genomsnitt: 3.85

19. How was the course workload?

46 svarande

Too low»3 6%
Low»12 26%
Adequate»19 41%
High»12 26%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.86

- There was a lot to read, but since I was familiar with many topics beforehand, I did not read everything. I guess if you would read everything, the workload would be rather high.» (Low)
- High, as always, it"s Chalmers.» (High)

Summarizing questions

20. What is your general impression of the course?

47 svarande

Poor»3 6%
Fair»6 12%
Adequate»8 17%
Good»24 51%
Excellent»6 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.51 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- I feel like the course was too basic overall. I did not learn very much :(» (Poor)
- The amount of reading material is WAAAY to much.. There"s no chance of reading through all of it. And then asking questions on the exam like "How did the book describe X" is a complete load of bullshit, this is NOT how to administrate a course properly and to me just shows lazyness from the exam writers part.» (Fair)
- Decent course but if you could probably assume a higher level of computer proficiency among your students. Knowing how to select a good password is not only common knowledge among IT students but the general <25year old population...» (Fair)
- the lectures slide seem to be pick everywhere and teacher don"t look at it. PLease stop reading note during the lecture. But lab was very good nothing to said» (Fair)
- It is not bad, because of the superb teaching. However, too easy. Way to easy.» (Adequate)
- It was good base knowledge, some was maybe a bit simple but I"m really sure of how it works now.» (Good)

21. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Labs, and more of it.»
- Labs»
- The reading of the GPG document.»
- Lab 1,2 are very good.»
- Labs, different vulnerabilities, Malware, access rights, defensive programing.»
- unix security, expand it. SELinux»
- laboratory»
- Everything should be preserved»
- Answers to the old examinations. Maybe also a summary of which chapters in the book are necessary to read.»
- The labs»
- Teaching professors»
- mostly everything»
- Lectures and lecturers with up to date info! :)»
- The labs and the guest lecture.»
- The staying up to date part, the labs (more labs!)»
- The labs.»
- The labs(although I would increase the difficulty level), the guess lecture, security news and the combination of blackboard, projector and slides.»
- The powerpoint slides»
- Slides, lab"s and articles.»
- labs»

22. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Skip some of the reading material, it"s simply too much of it.»
- Answers to the exams. It should not be too hard to answer comprehensevely the questions for the exams. At the very least give hints for where in the book/material the information is well described. Some things where not always in the book, or not easy to find. Sometimes the book has over 10 thousand (or so) pages about a topic and in those cases it would help to have the answers to the questions. Why really have answers? Because it basically is a well description of a topic and ends up being great material for study. The real important content that needs to be known is there. Since there are many exams then one would have studied practically everythng wanted from the course. Some of the best ways of teaching have been shown to be recording, actually. This is not that necessary, but students who have the availability to recorded lectures perform better. This is because they can much easily take in the information that was given on the lectures. (by easily pausing and so on).»
- The labs, make them much more complex. require the students to spend several hours at home, and not be able to manage the labs during a 2 hour slot in the lab.. In other courses you do all the labs in your own time, and then go to the sessions to ask for help, this is a better model I think. Then you can have much more complex labs too.»
- Not sure.»
- All the security models, cc, risk analyses are hard to understand and the terminology gets mixed up, hard to remember what is what.»
- common criteria is not remembered without some concrete examples. But I guess that is difficult with such a huge standard.»
- slides»
- Nothing»
- Consider adding the SQL-injection lab»
- Make it a challenge. I would pass it after 2 days of study. »
- nothing»
- Answers to the exams, sometimes I did learn some stuff that was not true as I had no correct answers to check with.»
- Less blackboard, and perhaps review the slides so that related material isn"t spread out so much.»
- Hard to say, maybe focus a bit more on some fields, the course seems very "spread" in its area.»
- Less theory and more practice.»
- Less writing on the board and possibly start grading the labs. Final grade could be derived from final exam and labs. If we put soooo much time into doing the labs, we might as well be graded for it. Pass or fail aren"t adequate enough. »
- more labs, more practical things.»
- the first lectures were to basic for a computer science class. because of this, i didn"t go to the following 2 weeks of lectures.»

23. Additional comments

- I think that learning what vulnerabilities are is to experience them more first hand. During the course I stumbled upon this: https://stripe.com/blog/capture-the-flag. However, the CTF has ended, but the first levels consisted of breaking into C programs using buffer overflow attacks, manipulating web cookies and manipulating environment variables breaking setuid programs. Guiding the students through the breaking of some program interactively would definitely be interesting..»
- The professor Was great. »
- It was a great learning experience,in fact am planning to do my research on security.»
- Add solutions to exams»
- nothing»
- This should be a course that is recommended to almost all the students studying IT. It is to important to not know!»
- Unfortunately one of the new lab assistant"s attitude was not good»
- no»
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.51

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.51
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.62

Kursutvärderingssystem från