Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Future of Security

Posted by michael on from the need-digital-anti-aircraft-guns dept.

Kvorgette writes "Scott Berinato in The Future of Security presents a very dark future of security in the years around 2010. Several computer security experts expect that a major security-related problem (a 'digital Pearl Harbour') will change software development procedures and remove the freedom in computer use we are striving for. The worst part is, most experts apparently think removal of software tools and access to information from the majority of computer and Internet users would be a good thing."

2 of 331 comments (clear)

  1. A suggestion by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 5, Interesting
    AV software is useless against new exploits unless heuristics are turned on. Few people will do this because of false positives.

    Relying on OS patches is useless because the true dark-side hackers won't publicise any holes they've found until they've used them.

    What could be useful is - dare I suggest it - holding essential OS kernel files in ROM. Slightly awkward if you want an upgrade, but not insurmountable with socketed chips. If you use UV-erasable ROM chips, you can still burn upgrades at home but remote hacking is impossible. And your PC would start up in the blink of an eye!

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
  2. This guy is a muppet. by tolan-b · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm sorry, I couldn't finish the article, it was just pissing me off too much.

    This guy is utterly clueless, I mean look at this:

    Five factors distinguish the digital Pearl Harbor from the virus attacks we've suffered to date.

    First, it disrupts backup systems. Fragile networks heretofore have been mitigated largely with backup. Disrupt that and badness follows.

    Second, it leads to cascading failures. All of those massively inconvenient attacks people previously referred to as Pearl Harbors pile up. Due to the loss of backup, corporate earnings data is irretrievably lost. This panics Wall Street and destabilizes the financial sector.

    OK, a couple of things. First, "it disrupts backup systems". Riiiight. So this Flaw in 'the internet infrastructure' can also get to tape backups in safes? OH NOS!!!1!

    Second, "it leads to cascading failures. All of those massively inconvenient attacks people previously referred to as Pearl Harbors pile up."
    "it attacks the Internet infrastructure--such as domain name servers and routers--and industrial systems connected to the Internet, like utility control systems.". I'm sorry but if someone connects utility control systems to the net then they are the ones who should be strung up.

    The point is that bugs aren't a risk to 'national security', they are a big problem, and will be very costly to business I'm sure, but an attack or accident that has a serious detrimental effect on peoples lives, caused by security holes just shouldn't be possible.

    This important infrastructure should not be connected to a fundamentally insecure network, and if you're looking for scapegoats, they should be those who allow that sort of level of insecurity. Look at that power station that got Blaster...