There is nothing wrong with your PC... do not attempt
to adjust the picture... we will control the horizontal, and the vertical.
For the next minute, sit quietly,
and we will control all that you see and hear. BearItAll wrote:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Homeland Security not ready for Cyber Storm
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | In June, the Business Roundtable issued a report saying that "the
>> | United States is not sufficiently prepared for a major attack, software
>> | incident or natural disaster that would lead to disruption of large
>> | parts of the Internet" and that coordinating a response to such an
>> | attack or disaster should be turned over to the Department of Homeland
>> | Security.
>> `----
>>
>>
>
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/09/18/homeland-security-not-ready-for-cyber-storm/
>> http://tinyurl.com/lwp8y
>>
>> Windows botnets can paralyse the Internet infrastructure if properly
>> used/targetted, rather than gain profits through extortions (DDOS
attacks)
>> and SPAM (E-mail, referrer, comments and so forth).
>>
>> It was only over a month ago that Homeland Security liaised with
Microsoft
>> to issue a warning with regards to severe flaws in Windows. The operating
>> system has back doors that have been breached.
>
> I'm in two minds.
>
> I first I think that the importance of the Internet these days means that
it
> should be controlled by governments. We can't have unelected individuals
or
> businesses or marketeers controlling what we can and can not do.
>
> There is also too much oppertunity for the rogues of the world (different
> sort of rogue to marketeers :<) ), massive disruption of service to a
> company if they don't pay protection money, business and ecconomic piracy
> and so on. Plus of cause they will always be individuals taken in by a
> scam. The law has always needed to protect the ignorant from themselves
and
> that needs to apply to the Internet too.
>
> But at the same time the freedom of the internet has value too.
>
> Pulling in to line the current Internet would be a formidable task, I'm
not
> not sure if it is even possible now.
>
> Which makes the alternative Internet attractive. An Internet where all
> machines and users must be properly registered, no instant registrations,
> so that all things are traceable. Where secure is the only means of
> communication available. Where it is possible to block a machine or a
> person if they have abused the system.
>
> I know people don't like the big brother syndrome, but when the big lad
> across the street is out to get you, your big brother is the best
> protection you could have.
I'm of one mind about the Internet. No single entity should have control of
it. The Internet is a living, breathing organism (albeit in the meta
sense). Built by humans, it has inherited Human traits, including
self-healing and an almost psychotic loathing of imprisonment. Organisms
that show such traits should not be censured or restricted in any way,
they'll look after themselves if left to their own devices. Any
restrictions on its evolution will result in serious damage to the
infrastructure, maybe to the point where it simply dies.
--
Some people are like Slinkies; they serve no specific purpose, but they
bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
Linux Desktops & Clustering Solutions -*- http://dotware.co.uk
Registered Linux user #426308 -*- http://counter.li.org
We now return you to your regularly scheduled broadcast.
-*-Contemplating Knife-*- Which end do the bullets go in again?
That's it. No more coffee for *that* man!
|
|
