Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Department of Interior Ordered Offline
The whole of the U.S. Department of Interior has been forced off of the internet as a result of a court case Cobell v. Babbit. This was the result of compromises with the Microsoft Windows servers. A judge decided to take the whole of the organization down. Should this judge have this much power? Info here on the
indian trust web site. This includes the BLM, USGS and the Park Service. Staggering, really. CD: Hold off on the blaming of MS, it's still not clear.
This would be like the Government sending my tax return in cash -- it's irresposible because anyone could easily open my mailbox and find almost $3 of totally spendible money ready and waiting.
It seems to be that forcing the whole system offline until it's ready for the modern internet was the only responsible course of action here.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Well at least there is one competent judge in the US. Personally this decision makes alot of sense, as in previously posted... if you can't keep confidential information confidential then you shouldn't have the information. All and all a good decision. I wonder how this affects Microsoft? Maybe now their get their collectively large asses moving and fix those damn security issues before each major release so we don't have to go updating to Microsoft Windows Service Pack 143.
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
Of course the judge should have this much power.. it's what we called a "check" in civics class. The executive branch is sucking, and nobody could make it stop sucking if the judicial branch had no power.
Yeah, judges should be limited to minor things like imprisoning human beings and deciding how to preserve our fundamental rights. No way should they be able to pull the plug on a bunch of machines.
so a judge cut off a computer network because it housed sensitive data important to particular individuals which was not secure.
whats the problem here? i wish this would happen more often.
I know I ruined my slashdot credibility by actually READING THE ARTICLE, but this applies only to systems that provide access to the Indian Trust data, and its an emergency order designed to protect the people whose data is stored there. This was a "computer infrastructure so easily penetrable that a court investigator and his team of security experts were able to break in and repeatedly access, modify and even create trust data -- all without raising a response from the government." This involves the finances of over 300,000 people, I don't think the judge was out of bounds in ordering it closed.
It may seem a bit extreme to make the ruling so pervasive, but then again that may be the only way to get those brain-dead govt managers to create a real system (like perhaps without MS software to start).
*That's* what I call abuse of power. This strikes me more as steps to help ensure that the carelessness of a dimwitted government agency doesn't end up hurting anyone unnecessarily.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Yes, absolutely, a Federal Judge should have this much power. It's one of the best checks against the possibility of tyranny.
Since the Executive and Legislative branches of government routinely ignore the U.S. Constitution, it is extremely important that we can count on the check of the Judiciary.
Wikia
Good point; Quoth Netcraft
The site www.doi.gov is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) on Solaris
Other sub-domains are Netscape Enterprise on Solaris and Lotus Domino on NT4/98.
Laugh while you can, monkey boy!
...on the indian trust web site...
You'd think they would use apache...
Patrick Cable II
it might be helpful if the person who posts the story actually provides some background info or a link to it. guess i have to go to google myself...
This was the result of compromises with the Microsoft Windows servers.
However, I see no mention of the operating/database that was compromised. Following one of the background links there is reference to an IBM mainframe.
Among the facts omitted was the name of the Denver firm that maintains the IBM computer mainframe for the trust system
Just thought that should be pointed out.
Now the webservers may be IIS but the database being hacked was IBM. Most likely just a poor implementation.
Lots of information is available at the Indian Trust: Cobell v. Norton web site. Press releases plus offical court documents.
Of particular interest is this document, which more fully explains why the judge ordered all Internet access to the Department of Interior. Apparently, court investigators were able to break in and modify lots of important information without any response from the DoI.
Seems like this sets a legal precendence for locking down an entire business, organization, or corporation involved in a legal situation. If it can be demonstrated that it would be possible for an outside entity to modify data crucial to the proceeding of the case (such data would be subpeonaed), the judge can order all external access to that data cut off.
Since simply running a some Microsoft software makes it possible for a large number of outside entities to modify such data without difficulty, and to know that doing so is possible without having to figure it out, I could see this becoming a problem for businesses and organizations that run said Microsoft software.
However, it also means that lax UNIX administrators could have their systems' access cut off if court investigators demonstrate that they are able to get in. Sounds like Mac OS 9 is the best protection against this now.
"In a sweeping action with far-reaching but unclear ramifications, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth granted the emergency request, which was brought on behalf of 300,000 American Indians whose assets are housed on a computer infrastructure so easily penetrable that a court investigator and his team of security experts were able to break in and repeatedly access, modify and even create trust data -- all without raising a response from the government."
/. wants to see liability extended to the same absurd levels of product and contingent liability that have been demonstrated in the McDonalds and other Python-esque liability cases, BUT...
it's actually well past time for the courts to hold organizations whose systems are busted by 12 year old scriddies running "canned scripts" from Toolz sites
how would you feel if this were your families' or your companie's sensitive and/or private information??? Information about your 502 or your daughter's rape, or your son's juvenille arrest for possessing underage TeleTubbie Pr0n?
"Coupled with the judge's action were criticisms from members of Congress about the security failures. "The GAO told us five years ago that the fund was in shambles," said Rep. Jim Hansen (R-Utah,) chairman of the House Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over Indian affairs. "Now we learn that a computer security system deployed in 1999 is virtually worthless," he said."
i don't think anyone on
...isn't it about time the direct creators, distributors and managers of dangerously insecure computer systems have at least SOME small legal responsible (and limited accompanying monetary liability)????
If the facts on the Indian Trust website ARE true, DOI (and Congress) have long been aware of the problems and have been ducking the bullet on fixing it...if this were my money/info, I'd sure be upset...
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
Entering via the Internet, the "hackers" found they could break many of the passwords protecting accounts, using a tool called a "cracker." Many of the passwords, according to the report, were easy to guess, particularly one -- "passwd" -- which was frequently used.
This had nothing to do with the fact that they were running IIS, Apache, Joe's Web Server, etc. The issue was weak database passwords.
netcraft shows lots of different OS and servers are being used. The security breach could have been done through anyone of them, or the bad security could've been on the database itself.
... then again, that's not the sort of information they want to make public if the DOI wasn't addressing the problem.
For example :
The site doi.gov is running Lotus-Domino/5.0.8 on NT4/Windows 98.
The site www.den.doi.gov is running Netscape-Enterprise/4.0 on Solaris 8.
The site www.ios.doi.gov is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) on unknown.
The site www.doi.gov is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) on Solaris
I couldn't spot a document on indiantrust.org which went into technical details either
http://www.thehungersite.com
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Laugh at stupidity: mod idiots +1 Funny.
..at least when I check a few minutes ago. And SamSpade is reporting the front-end NPS server is Netscape Enterprise v4.1.
:)
.. why let the facts hamper you?
-'fester
-'fester
Insurance companies do this. I know, because I helped enable one. When you have low-volume, high importance data (like the personal records of Native Americans!!) this approach is justified. I'm not surprised in the least, however, that our underfunded park service wasn't able to hire a government contractor that would take security seriously. We can be as condescending as we like (and we usually are) but if you've ever tried to work through federal procurement procedures, you understand you're dealing with a very limited talent pool.
The site www.doi.gov is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) on Solaris.
The site www.blm.gov is running Apache/1.3.22 (Unix) PHP/4.0.6 on unknown.
The site www.nps.gov is running Netscape-Enterprise/4.1 on Solaris.
Oh, and nps is still up....
This is what happens when you disobey a lawful order from a judge. Now, the teachers may still be doing the right thing, but if you want to practice civil disobedience, you might end up in the clink.
Judges do not have the luxury of ignoring the law, or just saying "oh well" when people fail to follow their lawful orders. Again, this isn't flamebait...teachers may be doing the right thing by standing up for themselves, but the judge is also doing the right thing in enforcing the law.
But if the credentialing scheme in place depends on Windows frontend servers being secure, you can damn well better bet that it will be dutifully serving up data to the wrong party.
Can't do much about that. I don't perform ANY core business functions on Microsoft server software, their history of getting brutally hacked and denying it is far too pervasive. (Yes, Sun and IBM are terrible too. Frankly, Red Hat and the OpenBSD Project are valuable to me not because they're "perfect", but because they're honest and prompt when they fuck up! I cut both organizations a new check every 6 months of my own free will, NOT because they try and force my company to. The checks come out of my after-tax salary; as far as I know the company has never paid a dime for either project's media.)
The consultants were probably lazy too, but don't get too overzealous to defend the most probable point of entry. I am somewhat less than surprised that a large gov't agency would screw up like this, although most of the dep'ts I work with at least have the sense to retain solid IT security consultants (I've met some very competent Lockheed employees, for example; I have no idea who was at fault in this incident).
Remember that what's inside of you doesn't matter because nobody can see it.
From Netcraft's Survey:
The site www.doi.gov is running Apache/1.3.12 (Unix) on Solaris.
Of course, we don't know whether this was the system which the government investigators broke in, or whether it's something in this domain.
Bush Lies Watch
This is bad. There have been many, many reports and firestorms about these computer systems according to the Special Master's Report released as a court document.
.gov agency has the report detailing their secuirity holes, they left many of them wide open. So much so that Predictive could add bogus accounts and transfer real monies from real accounts into the bogus accounts, get sensitive documents and lots of other mischief. Really bad.
Predictive (the security company) broke in and documented abysmal security -- no firwalls, blank administrator passwords, other stuff that would make any script kiddie drool. The response of the B. of Indian Affairs was "naw, it's not that bad; you cheated".
So Predictive did it again. Got basically the same results. So after the
In classic Dilbertesque style, the Gov blames the messenger, says it's not really that bad (again) and promises to do a whole lot of nothing -- just like it has been doing for 10 years according to the special master's report you can click on here:
http://www.indiantrust.org/documents.cfm
This is bad. Real bad. Sad to say this judicial action was necessary. Sad.
Umm... why is there a link to the DoI website if they've been forced off line...?
With permission from U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, the special master's team logged onto computer servers, accessed databases, broke into Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs networks, discovered they could modify and erase sensitive data and even created an Individual Indian Money (IIM) trust account in Balaran's name. All of these breaches occured repeatedly and with ease -- and all without being noticed, or even tracked, by the Interior's own computer officials.
Here's a rundown of how it happened.
Predictive originally planned a two-phase test of the Interior's computer infrastructure. First, it would try to access the system from the public Internet; and second, it would test the network from within.
However, the company soon found it could scrap the second phase because protections were non-existent.
"Early on in the testing it became apparent that it was possible to access the sensitive internal data from the Internet and that the internal on-site testing phase was not needed due to the lack of overall perimeter security," Predictive wrote in August after a first round of hacking.
Using widely available, and free, tools employed by hackers all over the world, Predictive tapped into a number of systems the Interior deemed "critical" to bringing its trust duties into the 21st century. These systems included:
Predictive was able to break into a TAAMS server because it had "no password." As a result, the firm could perform administrative, high-level functions typically not available to low-level users.
Also, Predictive could access TAAMS because the BIANET, a BIA network accessible via the Internet, had "blank" passwords. Through this vulnerability, the firm gained administrative powers that allowed it to access data stored in a TAAMS database.
TAAMS is housed on two AS/400 servers, made by IBM, in Addison, Texas. The servers, the database and all its associated logic (coded in dBase) are fully owned by a third party, Applied Terravision Systems, because the Interior failed to consider long-term ownership and development issues.
A so-called "legacy" system in use since 1982, Predictive was able to gain "complete access" to IRMS, which tracks leases and distributes payments to account holders. Weaknesses on the BIANET allowed the firm to see every IRMS account that has ever existed.
Predictive could modify and delete user accounts, meaning it could prevent authorized Interior users from entering the system and give access to non-authorized outsiders.
Further, Predictive gained "complete control" to an IRMS server because it had a "blank" password. The firm was able to copy files and create links to sensitive data to outside networks via standard and highly vulnerable Microsoft Windows capabilities.
IRMS is coded in Cobol 74, an outmoded but pervasive language, and is composed of six databases -- including individual and tribal ownership and leasing data -- that reside on a Unisys Clearpath NX server in Reston, Virginia. Reston is the location of the BIA's Office of Information Resources Management, whose controversial move from Albuquerque, New Mexico, was temporarily halted by Lamberth.
Additionally, Predictive found numerous problems on a number of systems, most of which are not specifically named because information in the report is redacted. The firm was able to access "sensitive" information including "gigabytes" of BIA e-mail, configuration files, log reports, and all usernames and passwords on an unnamed system. Many of these systems had weak password or no password protections.
Certain Interior computers were also running web servers, file transfer programs, remote access servers and other technologies that could allow anonymous access by outsiders. Other systems were prone to well-known hacking techniques, including denial of service, buffer overflows, "Trojan Horse" programs and Microsoft Windows "scripting" attacks -- all of which are typically preventable by applying readily available "patches" to fix security holes.
All of this hacking -- which took place between June 24 and July 8 -- led Predictive to conclude in an August report that the BIA lacks "basic security" measures. "Even if every security vulnerability in this report was corrected, BIA's overall lack of a secure network perimeter would still leave BIA exposed to additional risk," the firm wrote.
Predictive recommended the BIA implement such standard protections as a firewall and intrusion devices. Along with Balaran, the firm informed BIA of the numerous problems at a meeting with Brian Bowker, then-director of OIRM.
Despite Predictive's damaging report, Bowker indicated the company was successful only because he had "turned over the keys to the store." Balaran said he felt Bowker was trying to "discount" the findings, so he again instructed Predictive to break into the system on August 30.
It was during this time that Predictive created a trust account for Balaran, whose report is not specific as to which system was accessed to perform this incredible breach. Predictive was able to create its own trust data and modify existing data on an unnamed system, leading the firm yet again to warn BIA of problems and make a number of specific recommendations to correct the deficiencies.
Just wait until it crashes in a couple of weeks and the problem will be solved.
In a couple of *weeks*?
I used to work for the USGS as a student employee in their computer services dept. Lack of security and competent network administration would be too kind for me to say. Stupidity like, each and every government computer has a public ip address, regardless if it is serving up web services. NT4 servers running with service pack four. And worse yet, users with full admin rights on their PCs, installing software and changing settings that could open them up for god knows what.
I'm sympathetic to the Indians. That accounting system has never been fully functional. And a lot of suspicious things, like fires that have destroyed records, have occured over the years to the Indian Trust. I'm heartended to see some positive progress behing made on correcting that horrible situation. The Indians already have it bad enough without this debacle making their plight worse.
However, the judge has done more harm than good by shutting the entire Interior's network access. As you pointed out, the USGS makes available the largest and most comprehensive repositories of geospatial data in the nation, and perhaps the world. Much of this data is free. And many universities, government organizations, and companies use that data; e.g., where do you think Rand-McNally gets its data to make maps?
Though I'm not as familiar with the other DOI departments and bureaus, I know that they, too, provide valuable public services that a number of people need to do their jobs.
Another angle is the impact on DOI employees. I can tell you I witnessed a number of people standing around the halls looking mystified at the USGS' headquarters in Reston this afternoon. We all depend on network access in some capacity to get our work done. In my case, it's crucial as I work with folks at the Mid-Continent Mapping Center in Rolla, Missouri. I was logged into one of their suns debugging some errant code when the plug was pulled. Most aggrivating.
(Initially I had thought that the network was down because of the Goner virus since the USGS has a history of shutting its network down when the system gets swamped by propogating virii and worms.)
MAC | A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
-- ;-)
Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end.
You know.. I just thought of something. There is the WayBack Machine which lets you get past copies of ANY website. Do you think one could get a copy of the DOI and get cached copies of the data, or some such stuff?
One good whore deserves another, I suppose.
The power of judicial review is not "ignoring the law". Judicial review is the power to say that a given law violated the terms of another, "higher" law -- in the US, that's the Constitution. A judge cannot (or at least should not) choose to ignore a law on the basis of "I just don't like it".
The power the judge is exercising in this case, is the ability for a judicial or quasi-judicial authority (ie: a congressional committee) to hold someone in contempt. When one violates the order of a judge in a given situation -- that is, a case is brought before him/her, and in the course of that proceeding orders a certain thing to be done, or not be done -- and that order is violated, they can be held until such time as they satisfy the judge that they will comply, or until suitably punished. Yes, the power of holding someone in contempt is broad, with only the barest hint of restraint (many jurisdictions only allow someone to be held on contempt for a year or less).
This says nothing of the laws themselves -- where one is charged, tried, and formally sentenced to a given term in accordance with the law violated.
Its time to withdraw my $4,000,000,000.12 from my BIA trust account. It seems their servers might get hacked from the internet. Darn /. hackers!
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
I managed to get in before it all went down. I am now officially 3/4 Cherokee and the legitimate owner of South Dakota.
Thank you Microsoft.
-Rothfuss
Actually, that McDonald's case you're so quick to dismiss is exactly like this. McDonald's *knew* that their coffee was far hotter than any competitor's, it knew that it had seriously harmed others, and it knew that the plantiff had originally only asked for her medical expenses to be covered. She was sitting in a car, sure, but it was stationary and she was a passenger, and I think others who were scalded were sitting at tables inside the restaurant.
It was the jury that decided that McDonald's needed to get a strong signal that its ongoing indifference to the harm caused by its actions would no longer be tolerated, and that huge punitive award (which was automatically capped by law, and further reduced on appeal) was an estimate of McDonald's profit on coffee sales for two days. That is hardly a burdensome amount - enough to get your attention, but probably something like $20-$50 for us. On appeal, the award was comparable to the change we can find in our seat cushions.
As for the DoI case, the court is pissed because one of the primary responsibilities of the court and its agents (which include every member of the bar, specifically including the Secretary of the Interior and her legal team) is to preserve evidence. You might get away with hiding evidence, but the fastest way for a lawyer to get disbarred is to get caught disposing of evidence. The government has clearly deliberately destroyed pertinent records in the past, but they've been claiming that's all ancient history that no current employee was involved with. Now we see strong evidence that the government, is indifferent at best, and deliberately trying to facilitate at worst, the destruction of additional records *today* which are required to determine the correct distribution of hundreds of millions or billions of dollars in royalty payments. Of course the judge is pissed -- and if the DoI drags their feet I would expect to see some of the lawyers hauled before disciplinary boards.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
CD: Hold off on the blaming of MS, it's still not clear.
/., they said it'd help.
Can I still bash Microsoft if I really, really want to?
I just couldn't help blaming Microsoft whenever I see 'Microsoft Windows' in the news roundup. This is something like complusory-anti-microsoft something, I think I've medical clearance to back my action. People in 'Anti-Microsoft Anonymous' recommends me to post in
None of which changes the fact that her lawyer is apparently a total weenie.
And the brethren went away edified.
This is interesting because the college debate topic for NDT/CEDA this year deals with increasing federal control over Indian Country, and these people research voraciously. I suspect a lot of future lawyers will begin to learn about how ridiculous Microsoft is as a result of this, and to think about the ways that policy and software interact (Lessig anyone?)
We'll see.
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
"Actually, that McDonald's case you're so quick to dismiss is exactly like this."
/.'rs are stupid. The DOI/Indian Trust case is about the DOI failing to exercise due diligence in the handling of the Indian Trust, to wit, the irresponsible and deleterious handling of both trust fiduciary assets and confidential trust data on its participants and beneficiaries Its ***NOT*** about Bottom Feeding Contingent Liability Lawyers who are sucking this country dry. I hope the Judge in the DOI case breaks it off at the knee in the DOI.
...the "us" you were talking about. There is NO "McDonald's". The judgement was also paid for by McD's shareholders.
since you seem to be defending a legal system that perceived as rampantly irresponsible by most Americans (in poll after poll*n)...to be precise, i wasn't dismising the McDonald's lawsuit, I was ridiculing it for illustrative purposes.
The DOI/Indian Trust case is not a product/contingent liabilty civil suit, you must think that all
People who support extremely irresponsible and irrational jury decisions, such as the McDonald's case, are costing everybody in America both money and opportunity, here's why:
1."McDonald's profit on coffee sales for two days. That is hardly a burdensome amount - enough to get your attention, but probably something like $20-$50 for us..."
THE SETTLEMENT DIDN'T COST MCDONALD'S ONE NICKEL, IT WAS PAID FOR BY MCDONALD'S ***CUSTOMERS***,
2. By encouraging people like that the person that sued McD, you create a society that values litigation over common sense.
I don't WANT to be on the road with someone who doesn't grasp that "coffee is hot". Like Stella Liebeck. I hope Stella (and her blood sucking attorney) remain objects of ridicule for every day of the rest of their lives. I also don't want to be on the road with someone who can't identify and manage simple threats to their personal safety.
"Consumer" Lawyers (contingent liability bottomfeeders specifically -- there are many lawyers who contribute to society and do great work for the poor and the needy) create an environment that discourages innovation and makes everyone American intelligent enough to grasp the (scalding liquids = personal danger) equation feel like the legal system is a bad joke designed for morons and con-artists.
Liability insurance add huge dollars to the cost of ***EVERY PRODUCT WE BUY***, it adds enormous costs to every startup company that wants to produce a item for public consumption/operation. When I bought my first Honda Interceptor I was trolling through the Owner's Manual and there in 20pt "Liability Lawyer Bold" was an instruction NOT TO DRINK THE BATTERY ACID!
Bob Heinlein used to have some of his literary characters joke that the standard you should have to meet in order to be allowed to reproduce was the ability to grasp and perform rudimentary integral calculus....I wonder what Bob would think about people who had be instructed that "hot coffee is hot" or "don't drink lethal chemicals"?
BONUS ROUND: Last year/b4 in Canada, some poor kid, during finals, had been on a classic "study to you drop" push, after a particular exam (Math???), he went on a drinking binge with his friends, got good and tanked (hadn't had much sleep/food for a coupla days)...sometime, early AM, he went to get a Coke from the dorm vending machine, he didn't have any change, so he shook the machine to loosen a Coke...didn't work too well, the machine fell over and crushed him to death (suffocation)....
his parents are sueing (Coke and the College) for big $$$$, claiming that Coca-Cola hadn't met the Canadian labeling laws for "dangerous machinery", by not providing an instructional label....they parents are angry and grief stricken and some a'hole attorney is looking to collect his 40-50% on their grief...Let's see; drunk, stealing a coke, shaking a several hundred pound vending machine with no one in sight, couldn't get out of the way in time...yeah, sure sounds like Coke's fault to me
.....
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
The "misuse of power" here is that of the executive branch's (i.e, the DOI) total breach of its fiduciary duty to manage, account, and safekeep native american trust funds. This litigation has been going on for years, in both democrat and republican administrations. It goes way beyond mere tech issues; in fact, I recall that entire warehouses of paper documents were basically destroyed and/or quarantined because they were infested with rat droppings and pathogens. Do some googling on this and you'll see that the DOI has nobody but itself to blame and that the executive branch has often left the judicial branch no alternative but to take actions such as this. You'll find many specific instances of neglect by the DOI that are just mind-boggling. Here's a copy of the hearing transcript for starters: http://www.indianz.com/docs/12062001/computeracces s.txt
This isn't about a judge not understanding technology; this is about the DOI failing to uphold its statutory obligations so egregiously that thousands of people have been harmed.
Sorry you got caught in the net there penis but you have to realize that this organization has been ripping off the indian trust for a long time. Gale Norton told lies to this judge (I guess she is so used to telling lies she did not realize she was in court). She will have to stand trial for contempt of court (of course you'd never know this because the conservative media won't report it). The entire interior dept is as irresponsible and unethical as they get these days. All public lands are officially open for raping as well as the indians.
Like I said sorry you got caught in the net there but I don't blame the judge. He was lied to repeatedly and people kept disobeying his rulings. If you ask me he should have thrown the entire lot in jail.
War is necrophilia.
If the DOI decided to shut down their entire network instead of taking those machines offline, that was their stupid decision.
On the other hand, if security is as lax as it seems, we all have (illegitimate, potential) access to said data. Maybe we'd better disconnect... ;)
Today, before the Senate, John Aschroft, the Attorney General of the United States, stated in plain terms that any criticism of Ashcroft's policies of extrajudicial military tribunals and other suspensions of civil and human rights will help terrorism. (LINK) .
I am not a lawyer. Do not take my words as legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney.
Folks, this is not rocket science. The easiest way to determine if the DOI is on the net or not is to try to connect to the DOI homepage itself. As of this moment (1:00 AM Central time), the entire DOI is off the net. It's not just the BIA or the agencies and sites directly related to it. It's the entire DOI. I am a DOI contractor and I can assure you that our facility (which has nothing to do with the Bureau of Indian Affairs) was most certainly yanked off the net this afternoon, and it remains off the net.
This is really causing pandemonium at our workplace. We cannot access our electronic timesheets because the server is external to our network, and as a result, I've just finished filling out my timesheet from home (because otherwise, it's not going to get done.) The silly part of it is that the facility that I work at has quite robust security, and yet we were still forced offline. This is not an "intelligent decision." This is a knee-jerk reaction that is going to end up inconveniencing a lot of people that have paid a lot of money for Earth science data. It's going to cost the government (and, as a result, you, the taxpayer) a lot of money.
By the time you read this comment, the whole issue may have been rendered moot; there was some hope that the court order might be rescinded overnight. If the order was rescinded and you are able to connect to the above links, then I'm glad (because I'll be able to do my job tomorrow.) But rest assured that the entire DOI lost network connectivity this afternoon. This is judicial idiocy, plain and simple; there is no more diplomatic way to put it.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
To get success, you have to hire just enough good people, pay them well enough that they don't have to worry about the bills, and help them build a success-centered culture. Well-paid people with practically guaranteed jobs who go on strike do not constitute such an organization.
OTOH, when I want money I ask for it, and if I don't get it I go elsewhere if the market lets me. I do not -- and would *never* -- collude with my fellows to put clients/employers in a position where they have to knuckle under to me or go out of business.If those teachers in NJ were truly not being paid enough, they could go into business for themselves and people would line up to pay them better.
I swear, this is the last I'm posting in this thread.
-- ;-)
Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end.
I remember about a year and a half ago, being called in to do some networking work in a department of a nearby county's office.
I found that the system I was in front of was primarily used to process permits for construction and the like within that county. It was open to the Internet (I did a full, nasty, in-your-face port scan and nobody blinked) and the hard drive was shared - to the world!
I was able to connect to the HD via SAMBA, from my HOME WORKSTATION! I bitched, complained, sent letters. They paid a consultant company something in the 6 figure range to do a "security survey" - and they recommended replacing the POP3 servers with MS Exchange!
I gave up, having other profitable ventures to go for.
But, do you think this doesn't happen like ALL THE TIME?!?!?
People, this is GOVORNMENT!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
> it's irresposible because anyone could easily open my mailbox and find
> almost $3 of totally spendible money ready and waiting.
But that's not too far from how the government has handled these trust funds--assuming, of course, that the government was supposed to have sent you $3 Billion . . .
The history of mismanagement of these moneys, and the sheer volume of missing records (they don't know how much they're supposed to have had, who it belongs, to, etc.) is shocking, even by banana republic standards. The existence of this case should have scared of Norton from *taking* the job as interior secretary . . .
Add to that that the first rule of litigation is, "don't piss of the judge." They've done that in spacdes. And if you *are* going to piss of a judge with misconduct and feigned ignorance, this is the *last* judge in the united states to do that to . . .
hawk, esq.