Another Bill to “Protect US" online?

2011-02-03 00:12:09

#1

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

This would essentially give the President the abilty to kill the internet without judicial review.

Also consider Hackers usually have no problem finding a workaround.

Consider: Before the Dutch police shut it down last November, the Bredolab botnet commanded an army of 30 million virus-infected zombie computers to send spam. It did so with just over 140 command-and-control servers in the Netherlands, leased through a hosting provider. The man arrested in the case was Armenian. In this era of cloud computing, when anyone from anywhere can rent servers, including American ones, by the hour, a kill switch would be useless.

In fact, it might be worse than useless; it would present a tantalizing target. Whereas before, it was nearly impossible to disrupt entire networks, now hackers could simply hack into the kill-switch system itself. A more subtle (or cash-strapped) cyberterrorist might simply fake a cyberattack that would trick the U.S. itself into flipping the switch. No one really knows what would happen then—not only would e-mails go undelivered, but ATMs, stock exchanges and the flow of funds of all kinds could be disrupted. And then we would still face another challenge: how to turn the thing back on.

Wolf in sheeps clothing tbh..

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-02-03 00:47:09

#2

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6949|Canberra, AUS

The "without judicial review" bit is triggering mental alarms/red flags all over for me.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-02-03 01:04:42

#3

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:
The "without judicial review" bit is triggering mental alarms/red flags all over for me.

No doubt .. but even with it, it will likely do more harm than good. The popsci article in the op made some good points.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-02-03 02:13:18

#4

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,054|7046|PNW

Terminator 3.

2011-02-03 03:24:54

#5

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

Oh shiz.. ur right. Obama are android?

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-02-03 05:26:47

#6

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5632|London, England

Kmar wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/FAu0s.jpg

This would essentially give the President the abilty to kill the internet without judicial review.

Also consider Hackers usually have no problem finding a workaround.
Consider: Before the Dutch police shut it down last November, the Bredolab botnet commanded an army of 30 million virus-infected zombie computers to send spam. It did so with just over 140 command-and-control servers in the Netherlands, leased through a hosting provider. The man arrested in the case was Armenian. In this era of cloud computing, when anyone from anywhere can rent servers, including American ones, by the hour, a kill switch would be useless.

In fact, it might be worse than useless; it would present a tantalizing target. Whereas before, it was nearly impossible to disrupt entire networks, now hackers could simply hack into the kill-switch system itself. A more subtle (or cash-strapped) cyberterrorist might simply fake a cyberattack that would trick the U.S. itself into flipping the switch. No one really knows what would happen then—not only would e-mails go undelivered, but ATMs, stock exchanges and the flow of funds of all kinds could be disrupted. And then we would still face another challenge: how to turn the thing back on.
Wolf in sheeps clothing tbh..

This reminds me of Terminator 3 when they go searching for the mainframe to blow up and are told 'but the mainframe doesn't matter'

edit - next time I'll read more than the op...

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2011-02-03 05:27:27)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-02-03 05:47:22

#7

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

Gee what.. could go wrong.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-02-03 06:26:19

#8

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6679|North Carolina

It seems like everything that Lieberman is connected to is a bad idea.

2011-02-03 08:10:48

#9

jsnipy: ...; +3,277|6797|...

Decentralized dns.

They should spend thier time writing bills that matter.

2011-02-03 08:20:55

#10

SenorToenails: Veritas et Scientia; +444|6404|North Tonawanda, NY

jsnipy wrote:
Decentralized dns.

They should spend thier time writing bills that matter.

But we need to protect the series of tubes! We don't understand how it works, but we know it needs to be protected by the government!

2011-02-03 15:11:28

#11

Wreckognize: Member; +294|6759

What in the shit is the definition of a "cyberemeregency"?

2011-02-03 16:14:45

#12

mikkel: Member; +383|6875

Great. Take an obviously bad idea, sprinkle it with a lack of judicial review, and absurdly broad definitions, and you have yourself a bill.

Nuke the government. From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

2011-02-03 17:36:59

#13

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6719|The Land of Scott Walker

Do not worry comrade, we will "protect" you from the internets.

2011-02-03 21:37:02

#14

Stubbee: Religions Hate Facts, Questions and Doubts; +223|7017|Reality

lieberman scares the fuck out of me

The US economy is a giant Ponzi scheme. And 'to big to fail' is code speak for 'niahnahniahniahnah 99 percenters'

2011-02-03 21:47:45

#15

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

At least we can all agree that the lack of oversight is concerning.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-02-07 14:29:14

#16

Pug: UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate; +652|6816|Texas - Bigger than France

Summary:

Don't be a douchebag on the web...because then the douchebags that douchebags voted to be THE DOUCHEBAGS don't have to be douchebags.

Learned a new word today, yes

2011-02-20 23:33:12

#17

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/435769_killswitch20.html
On Thursday, the three sponsors of the so-called "kill switch bill" decided put the controversy to rest. An updated version of the 2011 Cybersecurity Freedom Act removed vague references to such a kill switch, and now explicitly states that neither the president nor any other federal official would "have the authority to shut down the Internet."

"We want to clear the air once and for all," Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., said in a statement. "As someone said recently, the term 'kill switch' has become the 'death panels' of the cybersecurity debate. There is no so-called 'kill switch' in our legislation because the very notion is antithetical to our goal of providing precise and targeted authorities to the President.

"Furthermore, it is impossible to turn off the Internet in this country. This legislation applies to the most critical infrastructures that Americans rely on in their daily lives -- energy transmission, water supply, financial services, for example -- to ensure that those assets are protected in case of a potentially crippling cyber attack."

The Senate bill proposes a new Office of Cyberspace Policy to develop a national Web-security strategy. It would allow the government to identify critical entities -- such as banks, stock markets and others -- whose compromised networks would threaten national security in the event of a major cyber attack, and require those companies to install safeguards that could disconnect them from the wider Internet.

Once selected, these critical U.S. "assets," whether they're businesses, universities or government agencies, would likely need to spend a lot of money to upgrade their systems. The updated bill allows appeals to federal court, but funding would likely be a big part of deliberation on the bill -- whenever that happens.

"It is time for some serious legislation about security cyberspace, so to speak," Ray Dickenson, chief technology officer of Palm Beach Gardens, Fla.-based security firm SafeCentral, told seattlepi.com. "It's a very important bill and it's gotta be done."

I still think it will do more harm than good.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2011-02-20 23:39:55

#18

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6949|Canberra, AUS

Still no judicial oversight? If not, then it's a bad bill. Might work here where the whole checks-and-balances thing is not so pronounced, but not in America.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-02-20 23:52:49

#19

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6875|132 and Bush

Well that is the problem we have with this bill. Checks and balances are an important part of our constitution. I just wish the legislature would stop trying to rewrite it. If people don't pay attention to things like this that is exactly what they will do. The ultimate "check" is the people. Unfortunately so many people in the US are either uninformed or ill informed.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

BF2S Forums Another Bill to “Protect US" online?

Spark wrote:

Kmar wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

Board footer