<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Network Forensics Blog &#187; Competitor Hype</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.networkforensics.com/category/competitor-hype/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.networkforensics.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 18:48:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>There is an &#8220;O&#8221;  in I/O &#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/04/28/there-is-an-o-in-io/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/04/28/there-is-an-o-in-io/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>brian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Forensics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Situational Awareness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agility]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.networkforensics.com/?p=278</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I spent a good amount of time this week speaking to customers, partners and prospects about deploying, engineering and using our products &#8212; one topic that always seems to be part of the discussion is system throughput and scalability.  Of course our position regarding this is clear, as NetWitness technology was designed from inception to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/04/28/there-is-an-o-in-io/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kneber Update</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/02/19/kneber-update/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/02/19/kneber-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:05:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advanced Threats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Situational Awareness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trojan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[botnets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kneber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[network forensics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zeus]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.networkforensics.com/?p=207</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There was a significant amount of coverage yesterday on research performed by NetWitness into a large set of stolen information recovered from a ZeuS botnet.  Some of the information, analysis, and commentary was very beneficial to the broader discussion of threats such as these.  There is, however, some information that we feel we should address.

Kneber [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/02/19/kneber-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Network Forensics ca. 1999</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/02/02/network-forensics-ca-1999/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/02/02/network-forensics-ca-1999/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:07:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>brian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Forensics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Situational Awareness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investigator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[network forensics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.networkforensics.com/?p=135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s a little known fact that NetWitness has been innovating in the security field for over 11 years, which was further validated by the announcement of our recently granted US Patent # 7,634,557. Clearly, when it comes to network analysis we do it better than anyone else, and it’s really the only way to get [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/02/02/network-forensics-ca-1999/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IDS Legacy is Institutionalized Failure</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/26/ids-legacy-is-institutionalized-failure/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/26/ids-legacy-is-institutionalized-failure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Visbility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[botnets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netwitness.com/blog/?p=77</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The news is rife with discussions about systemic failures in the intelligence community.  It is a good thing we do not judge information security on the same scale of success.  I know of not a SINGLE enterprise network that is not being repeatedly compromised with a deluge of malicious code.  Can you imagine a world [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/26/ids-legacy-is-institutionalized-failure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The (Smiling) Face of FUD</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/22/the-smiling-face-of-fud/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/22/the-smiling-face-of-fud/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:24:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eddie Schwartz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advanced Threats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulatory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Situational Awareness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eddie schwartz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[network forensics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.networkforensics.com/?p=107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
We recently sent an opt-in email to our contact database talking about the significance of Operation Aurora and the continued ascendancy and lack of advanced threat prevention/detection in many government and commercial organizations.  We also offered a NetWitness proof-of-concept (POC) to security folks concerned about this issue.  And security people should be concerned.
A noted security [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/22/the-smiling-face-of-fud/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Bucket of Sand?</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/11/a-bucket-of-sand/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/11/a-bucket-of-sand/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:08:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Visbility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[network forensics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netwitness.com/blog/?p=72</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Did NetWitness actually release a new product that consists of a bucket filled with sand? The answer is yes, but the real question is why? We released B.O.S. in an attempt to sound the wake-up call…
Organizations can no longer afford to rely so heavily on perimeter based technologies, on signatures for identification of threats – [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2010/01/11/a-bucket-of-sand/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Competitor Hype and Bull &#8211; It&#039;s the Analytics Stupid!</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2009/10/28/competitor-hype-and-bull/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2009/10/28/competitor-hype-and-bull/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:28:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eddie Schwartz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advanced Threats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competitor Hype]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Leakage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Visbility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eddie schwartz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Situational Awareness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netwitness.com/blog/?p=45</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was at the CSI show yesterday and was within earshot of one of our “competitors” who claimed that they were winning against NetWitness because they support 10Gbps and we do not.   I have heard this story frequently from this particular firm, and it’s a bunch of bull.
It amazes me that companies in this space, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2009/10/28/competitor-hype-and-bull/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
