~misterio/IC

04c35be15566b0cf083599858b613d0ac3160d7e — Gabriel Fontes 1 year, 8 months ago 39a976b
melhorar introdução e escrever plano
1 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

M project/project.md
M project/project.md => project/project.md +52 -28
@@ 1,4 1,4 @@
# A safe, flexible computer science laboratory powered by free software
# A safe, flexible computer science laboratory backed by free software

Student: Gabriel Silva Fontes



@@ 10,7 10,7 @@ Advisors: Dr. Elisa Yumi Nakagawa; Dr. Francisco José Monaco
**Keywords**: computer laboratory, configuration management, higher education,
learning environments

## 1. Introduction and motivation
## 1. Introduction

Computer laboratories are an essential piece of public infrastructure, even
more so for high education institutions focused on computing fields. Having


@@ 32,65 32,89 @@ even more important: each student might prefer to use different software
tooling, and each class or subject might require completely different software
stacks.

These issues minimize the amount of tooling choices users have, and maximize
maintenance burden with constant installation requests.

### 1.1 Existing solutions

Security usually requires denying superuser privileges to be denied to users.
Most computer operating systems do not natively support unprivileged software
management, forcing IT administrators to install and maintain a specific subset
of packages.

**TODO**: Existing solutions (together with last paragraph)
- AD is most used
All solutions boil down to some sort of isolation between different users'
state: be it enforced by the running system, or full wipes between uses.
state: be it enforced by the operational system, for example Microsoft's Active
Directory; or by lower level resources, such as virtual machines or
network-boot images.

These issues minimize the amount of tooling choices users have, and maximize
maintenance burden with constant installation requests.
Each of these bring different advantages and issues to laboratories, some
weren't even applied to this problem; through investigation and research is
required to provide the best possible solution.

## 2. Objective

With this work, we aim to research, build, and evaluate a computer lab system
that: increases user software freedom, enforces security for the institutions,
and decreases IT management burden (even when compared to locked down systems).
With this work, the author aims to research, build, and evaluate a computer lab
system that greatly increases user software freedom, as well as enforces tight
security and decreases IT management burden; even when compared to operating
systems with low flexibility.

## 3. Methodology

This project will be worked on with a smaller scale, backed by existing
infrastructure provided by ICMC's Open Source Competence Center (CCOS), steered
by the work's advisors; with contributions from the Free and Open Source
Extension Group (GELOS), whom the author is the current student lead of.
This project will be worked on with a smaller scale laboratory, backed by
existing infrastructure provided by ICMC's Open Source Competence Center
(CCOS), steered by the work's advisors; while involving contributions from the
Free and Open Source Extension Group (GELOS), whom the author is the current
student lead of.

Desirable side-effects from the partnership include: more exhaustive knowledge
of technological options, exposing newer members to system configuration
processes, as well as helping develop the group's newly acquired physical
practices, as well as helping develop the group's newly acquired physical
space.

Results will be measured by three different aspects the solution must provide
to its users: software and workflow flexibility, safety, and ease of use.
Results will be measured by three benefit sets the solution must provide to its
users: software and workflow flexibility, safety and privacy, and universal
ease of use.

Two main evaluation methods will be employed, as to correctly measure all
criteria: acceptance testing with different user groups, to evaluate workflows
and ease of use; as well as penetration testing to evaluate the security.
and ease of use; as well as penetration testing to evaluate the system's
security.

## 4. Case study and expected outcomes

University of São Paulo's Institute of Math and Computer Sciences (ICMC/USP),
the executing institution, is facing a prime example of the problem.
the executing institution, is currently facing a prime example of the problem.

Recently, due to ever higher maintenance burden, the IT team had to decrease
the choice of software offered even further: currently only Microsoft Windows
is available to students, who previously had the choice between it and Ubuntu
Linux.
Recently, due to ever higher maintenance burden, the IT team had no choice but
to decrease the amount of software offered: currently only Microsoft Windows is
available to students, who previously could choose between it and Ubuntu Linux.

This situation affects classes that are better ministrated with Unix-like
systems, as well as students with a software preference. Making this a case
where software flexibility is severely limited.

This project aims to research, design, and implement a solution that is both
more secure and flexible than any of the previous implemented at ICMC. The
results might be presented to the IT team and can potentially help improve the
institution's computer laboratories.
more secure and flexible than any of the previous implemented at ICMC.

The results might thus have an immediate application: presenting solutions to
the IT team and potentially helping improve the institution's laboratories.

**Obs: É ruim colocar um estudo de caso tão específico? Pode dar problema?**

## 5. Work plan and schedule
**TODO**: 1 year (SICUSP, november)

The project is scheduled to be conducted, at most, over the course of a year,
but plans on having relevant results in time for SICUSP (USP's Scientific
Initiation Symposium), which happens in november.

**Obs: O "at most" é ruim?**

A broad schedule is:
- About 2 months of study and evaluation of literature and existing solutions
- Between 2 and 3 months for implementing an initial version of the solution
- Between 2 and 3 months for evaluating and polishing the solution
- Between 2 and 4 months for writing and submitting the work **Faz sentido?**

**Obs: Muito amplo?**

## References
1. Newby, M & Fisher, D. _A Model of the Relationship between University