Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Feds Now Allowed To Use Internet

Posted by samzenpus on from the welcome-to-the-web dept.

fast66 writes "Nextgov reports that a new court order allows the Department of the Interior to connect to the Internet, six years after the federal agency was ordered to disconnect. District Judge James Robertson wrote in his ruling, 'I find that the consent order is of no further use and must be vacated.' 'The ... disconnected offices and bureaus may be connected.' He added that his ruling was based not on evidence but 'on a legal conclusion that it is not my role to weigh IT security risks.'"

19 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. The decision title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The decision was entitled, "The internet: Serious Business."

  2. Tomorrow's news: by symbolset · · Score: 5, Funny

    Interior department compromised by botnet.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Tomorrow's news: by antek9 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's what I was wondering: Imagine they had indeed strictly obeyed that order for six years now, and would just 'finally' re-plug their > six year old PCs and laptops, having missed security and virus signature updates for such a long time: That would be like they say, when the cat's away...

      Watch out for new torrents of sensible data from the same evening on. But of course, that's just my little hysterical hyperbole, they wouldn't have taken that order by the word, now, would they? They cannot, no, can they?

      --
      A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
      Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
    2. Re:Tomorrow's news: by Uncle+Focker · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is madness! No, THIS IS SPARTA!
    3. Re:Tomorrow's news: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Um, you do realize that you can set up an internal WSUS server and manually sync it with an external WSUS server and keep computers on a disconnected network up to date, right?

      Good, because that's what I did when we first got kicked off. I haven't worked there for a few years so I don't know if they kept it up, but it's not hard to do - and certainly not hard to do in preparation of re-connection.

      I guarantee you, the Trust Bureau's probably have networks secure then most military networks. The scrutiny on them from the courts and plantiff's is huge and they know it.

      Funny how the person who started the lawsuit also happens to own a bank and wants the trust fund moved to her bank for administration. Funny how that never comes up - it's always just the "evil government". No, there could never be any other ulterior motives here.

      Puhleeze....

  3. Well he's right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is not the job of a judge to weigh that risk.

  4. Re:and this is important... WHY? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Have you played the Lemmiwinks game?

    Would you be willing to deny that experience to any government employee?

  5. You've got to be kidding me! by Synthaxx · · Score: 5, Funny

    You mean they've not been watching us all this time?!
    Think of all the [Redacted] i could have [Redacted]!
    Or all the [Redacted] i could have sold!
    Now they tell us this.
    I hope they [Redacted]

    Edit: FBI_Smith(Admin), reason: "Nothing to see here, move along"

  6. Yes, I got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    First Post!

    (at least from the Department of the Interior)

  7. No internet connectivity since 2001? by Coopjust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if they'll update the machines beforehand. Anyone remember how long it takes for a Pre-SP2 copy of Windows without a good AV and firewall takes to get a worm? Minutes?

    In all seriousness, I hope that they take some precautionary steps before plugging in the LAN cables...

    1. Re:No internet connectivity since 2001? by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think this is usually a game played at security/hacker conferences. Hook up unpatched windows box, time it until it gets an infection. From what I remember reading it generally takes less than a minute. As of 2005, one company's estimate was twelve minutes to infection. The last time I booted windows (box connected directly to the net without a router) I had the firewall in verbose mode and it registered an average of two intrusion attempts per minute.

      Generally speaking, there's a reason that windows machines come with AV and firewalls these days. I'm sure the most conservative estimates of time-to-pwn would be less than the time it would take to download updates.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    2. Re:No internet connectivity since 2001? by Suhas · · Score: 4, Funny

      15 seconds? Ridiculous. What were you running on, Pentium 75Mhz?

  8. That was silly.. by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, a judge should not be making smart calls what governmental policy should be. Silly laws will be paid for by Congress, but I digress.

    Is it smart that the US governmental departments can now get online? Not in my opinion. These networks should be segregated from the unwashed internet as there is no data security or guarantees of anything except being hacked. Even the most "uber secure" area can be hacked with varying degrees of effort, either externally or internally. This just opens a vector that was once unopened.

    Not smart.

    --
    1. Re:That was silly.. by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Even the most "uber secure" area can be hacked
      > with varying degrees of effort, either externally
      > or internally. This just opens a vector that was
      > once unopened.

      Excuse me, Did you RTFA?

      How is the Bureau of Indian Affairs in need of security in excess of the Defense Department, Congress, the IRS, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission?

      I bet you were around here dumping on the Federal Government response to Katrina too! You can't have it both ways.

      You can not have efficient and responsive government agencies when you relegate them to 1960s era technology.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:That was silly.. by belmolis · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is not a case of a judge gratuitously injecting himself into computer security. This situation arose when Indians sued for royalties held in the Indian Land Trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which is part of the Interior Department. During the suit, it turned out that the problem was not just that they weren't getting paid, but that BIA's record-keeping was woefully inadequate. Just figuring out what the plaintiffs were owed proved to be a huge problem. Judge Lamberth ordered the BIA disconnected because court-appointed experts had hacked into the BIA and found the Indian trust fund records to be insecure.

      Of course, it isn't only external threats that are a concern. BIA is so incompetent or malicious that they are reported to have deleted their backup tapes. Judge Lamberth was so appalled that he threatened to jail the Secretary of the Interior for contempt of court. The government eventually got him removed on the dubious grounds that he was biased against the government, the only evidence of which was his well justified criticism BIA.

    3. Re:That was silly.. by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who said I want an efficient government???

      I want a slow-as-molasses-in-antartica government that will make as few laws as possible. If Congress knows they will only pass 100 bills per year, you'd hope they would check them better.

      Now, we have a somewhat eficent government that can and will make laws based on "save the children", "kill pedophiles" or "teh evul terrorists" without any thoughts on how those laws can be used in other, unforeseen ways.

      --
    4. Re:That was silly.. by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How is the Bureau of Indian Affairs in need of security in excess of the Defense Department, Congress, the IRS, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission? Well, you could argue that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) should have security equal to that of the State Dept., Treasury Dept., and IRS.

      The BIA is all those things for Native American tribes, each one being Sovereign.

      What the BIA used to have was the online equivalent of a safe, with the combination 12345, holding Native Americans' money.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  9. The switch has not yet been flipped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    While the judge removed the barriers last week, most of the disconnected agencies have not been brought live as of yet.

    It is a misstatement to say that this is against the Department of the Interior. More correctly would be to say the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and a few other small agencies that deal directly with Indian matters. While the DOI had originally claimed that the exposed Indian Trust data was too ingrained within their network that it could not be isolated, a ruling by a federal judge that disconnected the entire DOI caused a change of heart and it was realized that just the BIA and a few of its siblings could be sent to the dark ages by themselves.

    In the six years, these groups have had interconnected LAN's, that have been isolated from the outside world (it is fun to do business with BIA folks as they will give you yahoo, & netzero email accounts which they will check and respond to from home).

    Time will tell what impact reconnecting the BIA will have when the switch is officially flipped on Friday.

    1. Re:The switch has not yet been flipped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is a significant court case in which questions have been raised about billions of dollars.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobell_v._Kempthorne

      The order to be disconnected from the internet was spawned from this case (several years after the case had started). With a new judge, a new mindset on how matters were to be approached, likely leading to this reconnect, and possibly to an eventual conclusion to this case.