| Author | Message | ||
     Chellem |
The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license. Full article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.html Not sure how I feel about this. The government would essentially have the power to "shut down" the internet if there were a "threat". I guess my main concern is what exactly constitutes a "threat". It also grants them a LOT of access. Probably they already have it, but again, this would legalize it. Just seems a little...creepy. Thoughts? | ||
| Hex |
The government created the internet, with universities and the military. Why should it concern you if they see fit to temporarily or permanently shut it down? If there was a slew of poisonings via snail mail, or an atomic detonation at a sea port, would you not expect US to exert control? I'm glad WE are thinking about it. | ||
| P_squared |
Just because they invented it (with a lot of non-governmental help as well), shouldn't automatically give them the ability to exercise control over assets they don't control or own. Comparing it to physical harm which can be accomplished via mail & ports (which they're technically actually responsible for) seems a bit misguided IMO. I can see the need, but I question the current bill as written in its glorious "vagueness." In the interests of honest disclosure, I work for the phone company, so I do have a dog in this fight. | ||
| Oldog |
sounds a little "Orwell-ian" Baraque Obammer userping citizens freedoms in the most unique ways. The num-jurnos should be paying attention but they are not. | ||
| Hex |
What physical harm could be done with a really good hack, hummm, let's see, what could I control with a silly computer and a network connection...oh yeah--UNIMAGINABLE DAMAGE!!! | ||
| P_squared |
You've been watching "War Games" again, haven't you? There's a difference between direct physical harm (e.g. anthrax in an envelope) vs. electronic harm (e.g. crashing the banking systems). I see a need for ensuring both private & public networks are secure against attack. I see a need for ensuring emergency services have precedent on networks (e.g. TSP). I can even see a need for what it appears their publicly stated goal is. I question the intentional vagueness of 55 pages worth of proposed legislation. | ||
| Greenlantern |
I can validate this with one word....... FROGGY!  | ||
| Aesquire |
The idea that the government could shut off parts of the web in a cyber attack is a bit unsettling, but it makes sense that we would need that capability. Not sure I want to get exited about it. Now THIS, I could get exited about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RvZKKwtuMU | ||
| Hex |
I'm starting to like Beck, I hope you guys don't get me liking Rush as well!  Dammit Blake, I thought you locked my other account for me. | ||
| Just_ziptab |
I think you guys are missing their hidden agenda to all this. When civil unrest becomes imminent or out of control,they are going to "cut the head off the snake" so it will die. They will shut down the Internet,cell phones,land lines,TV and newspapers.......cutting off all us rascals with guns from communication and "plan B". They will then supply information that "only they" want anybody to know.The chit ain't hit the fan yet. It's slowly building and they know it and are putting in plans now......before it too late for them to get reorganized. If there is a "threat" to my computer,I can shut the damned thing down myself........ or sacrifice the machine for one last look at what's really going on. (Message edited by just_ziptab on August 28, 2009) | ||
| Fast1075 |
Good Citizens...is not all well and harmonious in Oceana??? Shall be call for the Ministry of Love to calm our souls?? | ||
| Aesquire |
Our enemies are Eurasia! Eastasia is our friend! We have never hated Eastasia! Um.... you mean, Iraq is the bad war...Afghanistan is the good war? Even though the Afghan thugs had no expansionist history while the Iraqi thugs did? No, that can't be it! We've always hated!... um... who was it again? If you haven't read "Nineteen Eighty Four" by Orwell, the last 2 posts make no sense. And your education is woefully inadequate. Read 1984 & don't expect a joy fest. I really preferred "The Return of the Archons" Star Trek OS episode. "Festival! Festival!" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four Ministry of truth? = fairness doctrin/local content/control/diversity commissar?? | ||
| Froggy |
I swear it has nothing to do with me! (This time) | ||
| Eaton_corners |
More current(published in 1991), but probably closer to reality is "The Illuminati" by Larry Burkett | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Spot on Zip | ||
| P_squared |
If the vagueness in the proposed legislation is not resolved, I'll be the 1st to stand in line for a tinfoil hat. But there's a gaping hole in using the proposed legislation as the basis of the theory...the Gubmint already has the technical means & knowledge to do it. Critical nodes in our infrastructure (communications, power, etc., etc.), means of monitoring (NSA, DOE, FCC via EAS, etc., etc.)...so in that light, I choose to take them at their word (for now) on the publicly stated purpose of the legislation, which is to define when & how the Gubmint can step into the private sector in the realm of privately owned components of the "grid." It is needed, but it's got a long way to go until it satisfies the need being expressed. | ||
| Just_ziptab |
What in the world would ever be a reason to shut down the Internet? Define "threat".The best of the best hackers have been trying to do it for years.There can be only one reason...civil unrest and stopping the communication that will let it grow. Was Y2K a threat worthy of shutting it down? Hardly,that was just a economic ploy by proxy.Millions,maybe billions was spent on Y2K....ask any 911 com center what Y2K cost the tax payers. The average Joe Citizen will accept the shutdown when it happens..........with out question. Damned sheep.........dumbest animal on earth. | ||
| P_squared |
What in the world would ever be a reason to shut down the Internet? Define "threat". I can think of quite a few server farms off the top of my head that are regularly involved in DOS attacks. Sure would be nice if we could just shutdown the pipes if they were to launch a really big attack. Just sayin... | ||
| Hex |
We sure had some peaceful skies for a few days after 9/11. Not one contrail. That was amazing. You don't notice some things until they are gone. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
Why is it that every piece of legislation is so flipping long that the representatives just dummy stamp the thing based on its title or maybe a glammed up synopsis and off to tee time? wtf. I am more concerned with government by sound bite. You want to truly crash the internet? there are more than a handfull of tweens in Russia that could do it just for fun. They took down twitter last month and caused Verizon full network slow downs because somebody dissed them on a tweet. |
