Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So now you see why the subject at hand will cause a rather large bill, which people will need to look at. If I remember right the last bill was thrown out because a lot of people followed it as it was going on. In this case it needs to be watched again.
But follow what the real techies say about it. I did and they provided objective opinions because they had no skin in the game.
One sentence buried in that bill allowed it to become mandatory across the board.
Think about it for a minute. Why would the government go to great lengths and cost to do this and then say "optional" ?
Physical security should the the very first consideration when defining a network security policy. All the firewalls in the world can't help you if someone is able to walk into your facility and gain direct access to a system or destroy it.
And this would be the very same government that invented stuxnet, set it loose on Iran and then thought nothing more about it. Well, stuxnet got loose if you weren't aware of that. And it taught hackers all about industrial control of systems.
How Obama Was Dangerously Naive About STUXNET and Cyberwarfare | MIT Technology Review
Then, in Summer 2010, an event the administration should have anticipated occurred: The STUXNET worm got loose and started replicating outside the Iranian enrichment plant that had been its target. In the wild, on the Internet, its was exposed for everyone to see.
Physical security should the the very first consideration when defining a network security policy. All the firewalls in the world can't help you if someone is able to walk into your facility and gain direct access to a system or destroy it.
That is physical security, not cyber security.
Each requires different expertise.
A crackerjack security programmer knows nothing about physical security and doesn't care about physical security.
I've worked on crypto software in the past. I was software and then only a small piece of it.
It was clean room work and we couldn't talk to other groups while in development.
And none of us cared about the physical security of whatever the final product was.
Hardware folks were involved with that to a point. Then I guess other logistic folks were involved.
There's more to security then a guy with a gun sitting at the front door.
Cyber implies virtual..over the network. Don't redefine it to include a physical attack or risk.
That is completely separate.
If these masterminds could, they would take over, and be the ones regulating internet content and writing all of our computer software for companies like Apple and Microsoft.
I do not see anything wrong with the EO because it does not force the private sector and gives congress 240 days to come up with a bill. Does anybody doubt that this is a real huge problem?
Congress already defeated a bill. He just wants control over the internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova
In other words, Obama has the power to shut down the internet . We can't communicate if Obama does this. One man should not have all this power. Obama has power over the food supply, the water supply,electricity, energy, communication, he can shut down our cell phones, our tv , our roads, control the farms and farm equipment, and now the internet. One man with this much power is not healthy. Come on folks .. all this in the name of security? Whose security? We will have all our rights taken away in an instant. Obama can use any crisis to take away our power to communicate to eat and to survive. Without that we are sitting ducks with NO POWER .
Exactly.Someone finally gets it! He is trying to control the internet they tried this last year as well and it was defeated.
The last time I read the Constitution, a president had a delegated power to execute the laws enacted by Congress.
I cannot find the section where the president exercises power without a law in place.
Maybe I am reading the wrong constitution.
Help me out, folks.
In passing legislation, such as the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress delegated a great amount to the Executive Departments.
Moreover, Title 18 USC, has a great number of laws that authorize the Executive Authority to enforce. I am certain that there are laws making it illegal to gain access to a computer system for malicious purposes.
Get used to it. Anything that Obama thinks he can't get through congress he will get his way anyway through executive order.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
