Re: Obama silencing his critics Why wouldn't we give the switch to the inventor of the internet, Al Gore? I think everyone would be happy with that right?
Chinese Cyber-Attack Said to Be Part of Vast Espionage Campaign We have seen the US used cyber warfare in Iraq, and now we know China has cyber attack capability and has used it. At least 34 companies were hit, we don't know how many others were hit, because sometimes you don't find out for months that you were hit. Sometimes you may not find out you were hit. Google is attacked frequently by hackers, and the Chinese military got through to them. If a tech savvy company like Google that is frequently attacked, is on its toes, can get hit, is industry ready to spend the kind of dollars to protect themselves and the rest of us? Not really, the best among them are failing to protect themselves. Cyber warfare is not the same as 20-something hackers. I suspect this could be like sending out a platoon on patrol. Go out there, engage the enemy, assess their strength, see where their defenses are, don't give away any of our secrets, see how they react so if we decide to attack later we will know what to expect. It's standard warfare.
The flip side to this is what do they do when there is an internet kill switch? Do you think this reaction cannot be exploited? If the chinese and russians know that the US will use a kill switch if x happens, then why can't that be exploited as well? As in, thousands of businesses being offline for a set period of time... This is a silly power grab.
Disagree. What we have seen is the skirmishing parties, no more, just the tip of the iceberg (I refer to the Chinese attack on Google and others, which was very successful). The point is, we don't know what else they have. One of the factors in repelling an attack like this, is that when it hits, you can see what it does (sometimes) but you don't know how it does it. It takes analysis time. You can leave the net up and let China scramble corporate america, or you can shut the net down until you figure out what is hitting you, how to deal with it, develop a solution, bring up the net and deploy the solution. Of course this depends on the nature of the observed attack (if it is observed), the severity of the damage, the scope of the attack, the rapidity of the attack, and your perceived ability to respond to the attack in a timely manner. Shutting down the net is not the only response, it is a last resort measure, but if it comes to it, I think you want all your options available. The bottom line is we don't know what they have or what will hit us, but we know they have a capability today. In dealing with a serious unknown threat, I want all the options on the table to deal with it. Nobody foresaw the need to stop all flights in the US due to terrorists hijacking airplanes and using them as bombs, but it happened. It was a surprise we were not prepared to deal with, so we shut it down, did problem analysis, did risk assessment, came up with a new plan and we began to execute the new plan. It worked. What type of cyber attacks do you expect, and how would you ensure the nation we can deal with anything organized and govt. backed cyber warriors throw at us. You say they could learn when we will pull the switch and use it against us. That is true. But we should have a battle plan. Use of the switch should be a last resort. We know use of the switch will cost money by halting commerce. The battle plan, done in advance, should tell us when the cost of not shutting down is greater than the cost of shutting it down. Suppose we reach that point and there is no switch, then we lost. We have to produce a battle plan for cyber war, and we don't know what they will throw at us. We have experience, having used cyber attack against Iraq. China has use cyber attack against Google plus 33 companies that we know about, which I consider a skirmish to test the weapons. It's like the switch on the rig going to the blow out preventer, you don't want to use it, but there may come a time when you need it. Better to have it and be prepared with an instruction manual, than to be wishing you had developed on and not have it's use planned in your cyber battle plan.
Let's see... Banking companies Automobile companies Healthcare companies What they're trying to do to the energy sector because of the spill.. Sure, why not have their finger on the internet button too? All the while, calmly telling the people "We don't want to run/control these sectors, really. We promise. We're here to help."... And people just keep believing them. Houtiger, don't get me wrong. You make some good points, but ultimately with the way or government has been behaving I wouldn't give them the opportunity to have control over much else. I don't care what party it is doing the grabbing.
You know i get that, and it is a very valid point, but to me it is still a catch 22. Government, Corporations. Both are greedy bastards that only care about 2 things. Themselves and $$$$$. And i guess the argument against government would be that, well you can always stop buying goods from evil corporations, but you can't get rid of the government. People get mad because Americans sometimes blindly trust the Government, but i don't understand how some Americans can also blindly trust the Private Sector also. They are both narcissistic.
Given the choice between the 2, I'll take the corporations anytime. At least with them, you have a chance to make your own money and make a better future for yourself. If you don't like the hand they're dealing you, you can move on to the next one in search of a better hand. If the government had it's way now days, everyone would make the same thing and live in the same little boxes, "for the greater good". No sir, I don't like it.
