I've started … -P
I'm just typing up a framework for the "Experimental Methodology" at the moment, I've done the easy bits … e.g.
License at end
Title page
Foreword
Table of contents
I was just starting on the Introduction …
How about people let me know how it is that they conduct their experimental work ? I would be interested in knowing a bit more about how people deal with more complex systems ( e.g. RAID, Non-Windows, etc. ) as I think that the guidance from keydet89 and dba599 (which is largely similar), pretty much hits the nail on the head for normal Windoze.
Having said that I would still be interested in hearing how people do theirs - there is, as they say, more than one way to skin a cat.
If I collate all of this and produce a first draft - then the community can rip it to shreds -) and we'll get towards what we need …
(It's ok, I've worked with editors before - I have thick skin … By the way though - I'm using a UK English dictionary, so those errors can be ignored -P)
Is this acceptable to everyone ?
@Azrael,
maybe a little late but glad to contribute (if possible).
An idea, due to the huge number of topics involved in CF, what about using the "programming by interfaces" paradigm and trying first to describe the generic approach to an artifact (i.e. a rdbms, a vm, etc.) then "implement" the concept on the specific (i.e. mysql, vmvare, etc.).
How does it sound to you ?
@Jamie,
I think that a new forum could be useful, but maybe the methodology should be wiki powered with a pdf output of the releases. (Always imho)
Rob
I think there's enough support/enthusiasm to warrant creating a new forum specifically for methodology and I'll move this thread there once it's ready.
I agree that, although it might seem a bit a**e about t*t, it's probably useful to have the discussion about what issues the forum is intended to address in the forum itself.
Two quick further points
1. azrael - do you fancy putting something together for the newsletter based on your thoughts re. an open methodology?
2. Re.
maybe the methodology should be wiki powered with a pdf output of the releases
no problem with pdf releases but I would need to look further into how much time/work/risk is involved in setting up and running a wiki. My preference would be to leave that to one side for the time being and come back to it in the future should it be desirable (good suggestion, though).
Right, I'm off to watch something on telly. I'll do the new forum thereafter 😉
Jamie
Would be honored -)
Hey, you've lost a "u" already - what happened to that UK English dictionary?
Just kidding -)
J
The magic wand has been waved…hopefully you should now be reading this thread in the "Methodology" forum!
Now we just have to decide what to do with it….
Jamie
Hey, you've lost a "u" already - what happened to that UK English dictionary?
Just kidding -)
Oh dear, how embarrassing ! oops
The magic wand has been waved…hopefully you should now be reading this thread in the "Methodology" forum!
Indeed I am, thank you very much.
I'd like to open the discussion up a bit, so I'm going to start off some new threads within the "Methodology" forum to break out the separate topics that have been discussed so far.
These are
"Licensing"
"Structure & Approach"
"Topics"
"Accessibility"
Can we keep this thread now for generic high level discussions ?
Thanks,
Azrael.
I am willing to commit time and knowledge, and to participate in this effort.
Might I suggest a private area for discussion and development. Newcomers are welcomed, but designed to keep the evolution of this document away from the public releasing updates periodically.
Secondly, threads are appropriate for high level discussion, sorted by specific topic, however we need some sort of live vehicle to track the progress of FEKOF 😉 Perhaps a wiki?
Ivalen firstly, thank you for your offer of participation. -)
The way I read your post, you are suggesting that we should move the development discussions to a private area. I personally don't think that this would be beneficial to the cause, as it would reduce visibility as also discourage people who may only have one comment to make having their input.
The concept of a wiki keeps coming up - thus far I have resisted creating new resources for the project, prefering to make use of what is already available. If we were to head down the wiki route though - because of the general opinion that this should be publicly accessible, the existing restricted wikis don't lend themselves well.
What is the general feeling with regard to creating a wiki for this ?
A short note with a couple of quick points
(1) Invitations are out to those who have previously expressed an interest, to become members of the First Stage Board. This is at
http//www.forensicfocus.com/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=6516780#6516780
I await acceptance or refusal please …
(2) A Wiki ( I caved in … What can I say ? I'm weak … ) is up at http//
Thanks,
Azrael