BioSec 2012: Cheryl: Difference between revisions

From Soma-notes
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
**Biology is so good because there aren’t two things that are really the same…they have a lot in common…but there is that one small aspect that sets them apart…if they were all the same then one small thing just wipes all of them out  
**Biology is so good because there aren’t two things that are really the same…they have a lot in common…but there is that one small aspect that sets them apart…if they were all the same then one small thing just wipes all of them out  
**Can this be done with computers…randomize things by adding ''introns'' (junk code)?
**Can this be done with computers…randomize things by adding ''introns'' (junk code)?
----

Revision as of 21:04, 23 April 2012

Trying to tie Computer Security into all of this

Using Darwin’s approach

  • Really slow: it took biology billions of years to get to the efficiency it now is at. How are we supposed to compete with that?
  • If we follow the same process we are setting up for failure most of the time…species getting extinct because they failed most of the time
  • Species survival is highly dependent on environment…computer security needs to basically work all the time independent of its environment …how is this going to work?




So for things to work:

  • there needs be a lot of redundant stuff:
    • Genes – redundant ways to get an amino acid
    • Genome – copies of the same genes
    • Pathways – many regulators
  • diversity
    • Biology is so good because there aren’t two things that are really the same…they have a lot in common…but there is that one small aspect that sets them apart…if they were all the same then one small thing just wipes all of them out
    • Can this be done with computers…randomize things by adding introns (junk code)?