Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Border Security System Left Open

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the on-a-need-to-patch-basis dept.

7x7 writes "Wired News is running an article on documents they recovered via the Freedom of Information Act and a lawsuit. From the article:" A computer failure that hobbled border-screening systems at airports across the country last August occurred after Homeland Security officials deliberately held back a security patch that would have protected the sensitive computers from a virus then sweeping the internet, according to documents obtained by Wired News." It looks like Zotob made it in to the supposedly protected network."

7 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Let me get this straight by pHatidic · · Score: 5, Funny

    The government agency in charge of US security runs windows?

    What next, making Ron Jeremy the pornography czar?

  2. Failures are routine apparently by frdmfghtr · · Score: 5, Funny
    Publicly, officials initially attributed the failure to a virus, but later reversed themselves and claimed the incident was a routine system failure.


    I guess when you run Windows, failures are routine...
    --
    Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    1. Re:Failures are routine apparently by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful
      But two CBP reports obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that the virulent Zotob internet worm infiltrated agency computers the day of the outage, prompting a hurried effort to patch hundreds of Windows-based US-VISIT workstations installed at nearly 300 airports, seaports and land border crossings around the country.
      If there wasn't a Freedom of Information Act, would the public ever really know what had happened?

      I'm surprised the information wasn't classified as relevant to National Security. Weaknesses in computer security are just as bad as weaknesses in physical security.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  3. Should have used dumb terminals. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful
    These machines will sit in border offices, staffed by government employees.

    I wouldn't even trust *nix workstations in that environment.

    Not to mention the WHY of this. From TFA:
    The system has processed more than 52 million visitors, and allowed border officials to intercept more than 1,000 wanted criminals and immigration violators, according to DHS.
    Great. 1,000 people. Didn't I see something on the news recently about 11 million illegal aliens in this country?
    The documents raise new questions about the $400 million US-VISIT program, a 2-year-old system aimed at securing the border from terrorists by gathering biometric information from visiting foreign nationals and comparing it against government watch lists.
    1,000 people at a cost of $400 million.

    $400,000 per person caught?

    Someone REALLY needs to pitch the LTSP to the government.
  4. Non-computer Q about US Visit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except for really dumb criminals, how does US Visit actually improve security? The terminals are away from the gates, you don't need to pass special check points between the domestic and international terminals and ID doesn't get rechecked at the gate. So unless I am gravely mistaken an easy way around it would be

    -subject A buys international ticket
    -subject B buys domestic ticket
    -both pass security
    -A checks out at US Visit terminal
    -A and B swap tickets
    -B gets on international flight
    -A gets on domestic flight or leaves the terminal
    -B gets off the plane outside the country and uses his or her own passport to pass the border control. IIRC, most countries including the US don't feed back who passes passport controls back to the airlines or country of origination. But even if, B could just take a fake passport to a third world country without scanners or live database hookup instead of Europe, Japan or the like.

  5. Interesting... by nawcom · · Score: 5, Insightful
    An interesting question is to the Administrators:

    If you don't trust the patch that software developer provides for its product, then why trust to use the product at all?

    It sounds like someone saying, "Our OS has security holes in it, but we don't trust the fixes because they will just open up more holed until we verify for sure.. .. but since 90% of the world use this "hole-y" OS we'll just do what works. Like reporting a planned virus infection. *all hail bill*"

    -nawcom

  6. This shouldn't come as a surprise by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I spent ten years as a government contractor and this shouldn't surprise anyone. First Homeland Security runs Windows which in itself isn't bad if it's properly patched and maintained.
    The danger comes from the the people in government who control the money who have no technical knowledge. This is positively RAMPANT in government. Many times agencies just go with the cheapest bid and contractors give cheaper bids by hiring fairly inexperienced and not so knowledgable techs.

    Many government agencies can get by with using Windows but really important agencies whose security cannot be left to chance should not be using Windows....period. Sadly Homeland Security and NSA are both starting to deploy more Windows units and that's only going to be bad for everyone.

    Biggest reason why? Strong security requires techs that actually have technical knowledge and can do more than just set up insecure boxes by pointing and clicking. Big difference between *nix and Windows?
    *nix needs techs with a decent amount of computer aptitude.
    Windows does not
    The person attacking you, or entity, or rogue state will not be using script kiddies. This only gets worse from here. "Homeland Security" is fast becoming an oxymoron.