<?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; Regulatory</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.networkforensics.com/category/regulatory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.networkforensics.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:35:18 +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>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>PCI Alone Will Not Stop the Data Losses</title>
		<link>http://www.networkforensics.com/2008/04/23/pci-alone-will-not-stop-the-data-losses/</link>
		<comments>http://www.networkforensics.com/2008/04/23/pci-alone-will-not-stop-the-data-losses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:04:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eddie Schwartz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Data Leakage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Visbility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulatory]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.netwitness.com/blog/?p=3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent public disclosures at Hannaford Bros of millions of credit card numbers lost to professional carder gangs again raises questions regarding the state of preparedness of retail security and other industries to protect customer data in the current cyber threat environment.  In the case of Hannaford, these gangs may have followed a pattern familiar [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.networkforensics.com/2008/04/23/pci-alone-will-not-stop-the-data-losses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
