Slashdot Mirror


Cyberwarrior Shortage Threatens US Security

An anonymous reader writes "US security officials say the country's cyberdefenses are not up to the challenge. In part, it's due to a severe shortage of computer security specialists and engineers with the skills and knowledge necessary to do battle against would-be adversaries. The protection of US computer systems essentially requires an army of cyberwarriors, but the recruitment of that force is suffering. 'We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in time,' says James Gosler, a veteran cybersecurity specialist who has worked at the CIA, the National Security Agency, and the Energy Department."

394 comments

  1. H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    if there is such a shortage of talent maybe we can offshore this responsibility? Maybe to China? As a bonus it will be less expensive.

    1. Re:H1b? by Maarx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      if there is such a shortage of talent maybe we can offshore this responsibility? Maybe to China? As a bonus it will be less expensive.

      Trolling: When you do it right, nobody realizes you've done anything at all.

    2. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You deserve a +5 Troll. Well done, Sir!

    3. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Especially when you cut an undersea cable.

      Oh, you meant trolling. Nevermind.

    4. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll have to outsource it to India or China soon anyway - you just don't have enough good guys (and gals) wanting to study Computer Science in the US anymore.

      And while you're at it, outsource most of NASAs tasks to India too - anyway half your country keeps cribbing about the 'hyper inflated budget allocated to NASA'. Anyway the Indians keep launching sats for the Israelis and others - they might give you some bargain basement prices for launches as a goodwill gesture.

    5. Re:H1b? by countertrolling · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Gee, why don't we just outsource the entire military, including the pentagon? In fact, let's outsource everything so we can just sit and munch Chitos all day? Of course we could treat people with respect, you know, like their rights, and maybe they'll come looking for the job.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    6. Re:H1b? by alexborges · · Score: 1

      He he...

      You said Chitos!

      Yum!

      --
      NO SIG
    7. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, outsource your military. Japan, West Europe, Taiwan etc. have outsourced their militaries to you, now you can outsource yours to India and China!

    8. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offshore? Offplanet! Get the ultimate cyberwarriors. Get the Borg!

    9. Re:H1b? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Of course we could treat people with respect, you know, like their rights, and maybe they'll come looking for the job.

      Treating IT workers with respect is utterly unAmerican and is counter to everything our culture stands for.

    10. Re:H1b? by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      haha. that and lots of people knew working for the gov't as a "cybersecurity warrior" would be a lot of fluff and short on reality.

    11. Re:H1b? by INT_QRK · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, is it "We don't have sufficiently bright people," or is it "our people aren't performing with sufficient brilliance"? The difference is nuanced, but significant in both causes and effects. Sufficiently bright people will tend to seek an environment where they are afforded opportunities to excel. Highly bureaucratic organizations where politically ambitious leadership (albeit very, very, bright) chase silver-Power Point bullets inside of banners quoting their sponsors like packs of 8 year olds chasing a soccer ball tend to repel, or paralyze, the best and brightest; that's even if, especially if, first attracted by the skillful sales pitch. I suspect that there are plenty of exceptionally bright people throughout the National Security Apparatus; however, its like throwing National Guardsman on the border in response to a couple of adverse editorials. Lacking a clear mission and effective rules of engagement supporting rationally assigned tasks, an exceptionally capable force becomes an otherwise useless consumer of time, money and supplies, not because they aren't bright and capable, but because nothing they're allowed to do is effective, and nothing effective is allowable. Same situation here. Until we figure out the mission, agree on the operating boundaries, and create conditions (including legal and governance framework) wherein bright people can work the problem set and not have to chase soccer balls, no amount of hand wringing, DSB studies, slogans, speeches, or bolded Power-Point bullets, with or without lightening bolts, will accomplish anything very effective. I am curious, what the heck means "Veteran Cyber Security Specialist," since that relatively nonsensical term simply wasn't coined that long ago.

    12. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, America launches more in 1 year than India has in total.

    13. Re:H1b? by nabsltd · · Score: 1

      Trolling: When you do it right, nobody realizes you've done anything at all.

      Hey, why do stars light up in my browser in time with the display of the words in your post?

    14. Re:H1b? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      I think many of us were thinking exactly the same thing. They can offshore them to the same companies that are taking care of all our banking and credit card systems.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    15. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is one of the few times that +5 troll makes perfect sense and is a wonderful modifier.

    16. Re:H1b? by b0bby · · Score: 1

      So, is it "We don't have sufficiently bright people," or is it "our people aren't performing with sufficient brilliance"?

      I heard him say this on the radio and I assumed that he meant "we don't have sufficient bright people" and simply misspoke. It doesn't really make sense the other ways, considering that he was talking about shortages in the order of thousands of people.

    17. Re:H1b? by slick7 · · Score: 1

      I think many of us were thinking exactly the same thing. They can offshore them to the same companies that are taking care of all our banking and credit card systems.

      You fail to see the silver lining in the doom and gloom cloud. The incompetent government managers have no one to do their bidding and take the fall when they do what they're told.
      As for the bought dogs of the gold, oil and drug consortium, you have to clean the dirt from the top, down. Fat chance and good luck. You would have better luck getting these A-wipes to buy into the same health care system that they are ramming down our throats, again, fat chance and good luck.

      In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equal to "civil master." - RAH

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    18. Re:H1b? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0, Troll

      A shortage of "CyberWarriors" is the answer to our fervent hopes and prayers.

      Maybe we need "CyberCriminalInvestigators" or "CyberContractSecurityGuards" - just no "Warriors" for a "war" that is as pointless and inevitible in its outcome as the "wars" on poverty, drugs and crime.

      You want a war? Declare one on investment banking. You'll save more lives, and do more to protect your way of life than any "CyberWar".

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    19. Re:H1b? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 0, Troll

      The reason that we don't have a proper cyber warfare command is that it's not profitable. The people and companies that run modern warfare are interested in winning the war, of course, but they're also interested in doing it cheaply. Automatic warfare systems and technicians (trained monkeys) fit that model. Even if the system is expensive, the people are cheap - and the people are the expensive part. Contracts these days are written as service contracts, not hardware contracts. That means that the Army brings in contractors to run Army-owned hardware.

      If you had a choice to specialize in cheap-to-pay technicians (trained monkeys) or expensive-to-pay (American computer security specialists with advanced degrees) there's only one choice that the stockholders will allow. Everything in America is a business, including the formerly patriotic occupation of war-fighting. Honor now has a specific dollar value. I bet that even the Silver Stars and Purple Hearts they award are given out on a cost-benefit basis these days.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    20. Re:H1b? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      The difference is "we can't hire the best people, because we treat them like disposable light bulbs". They can't publish, and they can't discuss their work with their professional peers in academia or industry.

      The "mission" to improve cybersecurity is, in many cases, directly opposed the the "national security" requirement of being able to intercept all communications. This has been played out repeatedly in the restrictions on the export of encryption, the Patriot Act, the prosecution of Phil Zimmerman, and the poorly executed monitoring of attendees at DefCon events.

      Until these issues are resolved, it's difficult if not impossible to actually provide security.

    21. Re:H1b? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh yeah... no wonder NASA struggles to get funding - there are far too many people in the USA who think NASA is a big waste of money. If one needs an example of how a country is systematically being made to lose its huge lead in technology, look no further than the US of A!

      The rate at which it's progressing, grandparent's comments will cease to be funny in a few years time!

    22. Re:H1b? by StormyMonday · · Score: 1

      The Government has already outsourced its computer security to Microsoft.

      --
      Welcome to the Turing Tarpit, where everything is possible but nothing interesting is easy.
  2. waves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    and yo know if you had not of tricked those two russians into the usa and hten arrested them....you might just not have this issue
    2002 onwards

    united hackers association
    CHRoNoSS

    ( offered loads a jobs in usa but after the Russian incident will never go to the usa again )

  3. Duh, they are in jail. by tekrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The USA has a bad habit of arresting anyone with the skills and curiosity to perform such tasks. Instead of arresting and jailing "hackers" they should employ them, and then maybe we'd have enough people for the "cyberwar" they are talking about

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The USA has a bad habit of arresting anyone with the skills and curiosity to perform such tasks.

      ...and refusing the skilled and desperately needed service of anyone who "likes show tunes".

    2. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm here in Canada - and I've tested the waters on controversial legal issues with computers - and I've considered going into the definately illegal waters just to see what would happen with the law.

      There was a case a long while back where a high schooler in Montreal or somewhere in the East Coast of the United States (I heard the story second hand from someone so I'm sketchy on the details) where he basically set up a botnet, and then to test it out he had it perform a DOS attack while he was at school, I think he ended up taking down CNN.com or Yahoo for a bit or something.

      Anyways, they hauled him off to juvee or some low security prison for a few years, and when he got out he was hired almost immediately for a security specialist job. (I believe at one of the websites he took down)

      I'd try it myself but I'm too old to go to Juvee...

    3. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      The USA has a bad habit of arresting anyone with the skills and curiosity to perform such tasks. Instead of arresting and jailing "hackers" they should employ them, and then maybe we'd have enough people for the "cyberwar" they are talking about

      Sounds like the perfect premise for the 2015 remake of the Dirty Dozen.

    4. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The USA has a bad habit of arresting anyone with the skills and curiosity to perform such tasks. Instead of arresting and jailing "hackers" they should employ them, and then maybe we'd have enough people for the "cyberwar" they are talking about

      It's part of a greater "war on curiosity" that's a fear-based initiative to stamp out any and all behaviors that even slightly deviate from a prescribed norm. Locking up those "evil hackers" is part of this. Another part of this is the way people are getting threatened by cops, security staff, and other jack-booted thugs for legally taking photos in public places. You also can't get a truly good chemistry set anymore, because somebody might use the glassware to make drugs. Now they complain that they can't find good personnel for something that requires initiative, individual thought and a willingness to think outside the box and see things from multiple angles.

      That serves them right. They've been systematically stamping out any kind of unapproved curiosity and exploration in the name of safety for a long time now. They've also done nothing but encourage the outsourcing trend of sending a great deal of IT talent to places like India, and you really do want US citizens to perform this kind of national security work. Then there's the general untrustworthiness of the US government as an institution, the idiocy and abuses and mismanagement that it perpetuates and the moral implications of joining up with them. That might further alienate domestic talent that would otherwise be interested. As far as I am concerned, they are reaping what they have sown.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    5. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by arkane1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Check out the 80's and 90's. Pointing it out to you piecemeal is about like pointing out dead bodies on a battlefield.
      Unless your 18 years old, I'm sure you remember SOMETHING from those "ancient" years 10-20 years ago.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    6. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those kind of people are all *pple lusers, hence not skilled h4xx0rs.

    7. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You need to read Where Have All The Hackers Gone. The guy who wrote it got a bronze Olympic medal returned to the US with a Google search. Worth reading.

    8. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is another possibility too you know.

      We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in timeWe don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in time

      Do *you* support our national security objectives? I know I don't.

      Especially since some people seem to be doing their damnedest to make copyrights a matter of national security. I'm sorry, let me take that back. ACTA negotiations already show that copyrights are a matter of national security.

    9. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by alexborges · · Score: 2, Informative

      Go read The Hackers Crackdown, its available online, and enlighten yourself. Some of the best minds in the net told the government back in the day how stupid it was to incarcerate people that commited no real crime.

      --
      NO SIG
    10. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by MintOreo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This. There are two main problems with this and thats that the best criminal hacker they pick up can't be better than the best "good guy" and that the pay off of cybercrime can be incomparably greater than the salary they'd be taking from the government (and every cybercriminal knows this).

      That's not to say that there are no hackers that it'd be good to reach out to, it's just an extreme risk they'd be taking.

    11. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by arkane1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The thing that scares me about it is, how do you interview for such a position? It really reminds me of when I was 21-22 years old and the FBI (not CIA since that was for offshore stuff at that time) would cuff you and interrogate BBS owners if they were suspected of anything more than owning a computer... even then you were suspect. I've had BBS sysops I was friends with (locally) that were ransacked by the FBI, and their items held in custody indefinitely... all over fabricated things so they could search the equipment. Of course nothing ever was pinned on any of them except for one who was an idiot and did Warez on an open system. The rest were just sysops with no illegal tendencies.

      Scared the shit out of me when I was learning C back then and saw all of the rules the feds had in effect that were mixed and mashed when it came to computer activities. A lot of archaic rules that were hypocritical of current rules and they overlapped instead of one taking precedence.

      One reason I encrypted my entire harddisk and downloaded as many docs as I could off of the 'net at that time... before the feds realized "that thar intARwEb" had info.
      This was before the browser, of course...

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    12. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by eln · · Score: 1

      The problem with recruiting via the justice system, meaning recruiting black hats who get caught, is that you're hiring from a pool with demonstrated ethical issues. Sure, their technical skills may be top notch, but hiring someone who has already shown they're willing to circumvent legal and ethical boundaries just to satisfy their own curiosity is asking for trouble.

    13. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The USA has a bad habit of arresting anyone with the skills and curiosity to perform such tasks." ...and refusing the skilled and desperately needed service of anyone who "likes show tunes".

      How is this off-topic? At a certain level of government, homosexuality is enough to get you excluded from the game. That means there are likely some qualified candidates who are excluded based off a fairly arbitrary criteria.

      Most especially amusing is that because they make you hide it, they use the fact that you are hiding it to show that you might be a security risk because someone could blackmail you.

      Seriously, the parent poster makes an insightful point.

    14. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by alphax45 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Mafiaboy!
      A great book was made about it: http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/Mafiaboy-Craig-Silverman/9780670067480-item.html?ref=Search+Books%3A+'mafiaboy'
      Got that book for Xmas. Great read and cool story

      --
      K Man
    15. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by tool462 · · Score: 1

      Why not both? Do it the old fashioned way. Arrest them, then tell them they have to join the CyberArmy or go to prison.

    16. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copyright laws really play into that greater "war on curiosity". The millennium act has rendered it illegal to experiment with the electronics you buy. Everything is proprietary, everything is locked. It takes a special kind of person to learn in this environment. You pretty much have to do it in-spite of authority. This means a lot of people simply wont have the guts to do it and they'll become passive consumers who wrought on the vine. Those who dare to learn will become subversives who work against rather than for national security objectives. I have many of the skills they are looking for, but personally I'd love to leave this country. I think it's time to start the great American brain drain. This place is only going to get worse before it gets better.

    17. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by causality · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is probably another possibility, but you mention none I did not already cover. I explained it thusly: Then there's the general untrustworthiness of the US government as an institution, the idiocy and abuses and mismanagement that it perpetuates and the moral implications of joining up with them.

      Copyright madness is certainly an example of this, and not the trait of an institution I want to support with my labor. I don't really understand how you wouldn't think this statement excludes copyright hysteria.

      By law I must pay my taxes or very bad things will happen, so I pay my taxes. That part is not a choice. But anywhere I have a legal choice, such as a choice of employers, I refuse to support this particular institution or join up with them in any way that is not mandatory. Maybe they were once a noble, respectable institution but they certainly don't fit that description now. I'd rather not be ashamed of how I get my living. That's why I wouldn't voluntarily work for the US Government.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    18. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Target+Practice · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. To top it off, now the government have created a paradox for themselves:
      -threatening students with lawsuits if they break copyright infringement laws
      -seizing computers used for questionable activity, and yet
      -rewarding students in contests where the challenge is an opportunity "...for them to hone their skills on being able to hack into other systems, particularly those of folks we may not be fond of,..."

      In a world where the corporation wins against individual rights, where suspicion can land you on a no-fly list, is it really so hard to understand why they can't fill these positions? We're raising the young to frown on the dark side of the internet. We have the Eloi, they have the Morlocks.

      --
      There's a 68.71% chance you're right.
    19. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by TheLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Y'know, the greatest threat to US security might be the US government.

      1) Who wields the greatest power in the world?
      2) Is the entity in #1 really using it for the benefit of the USA? Or for the benefit of others?

      It's always bogeyman after bogeyman, "The US is under threat" and neverending wars against drugs/terror/whatever.

      --
    20. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by arth1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is a pitfall of democracy. The great majority of voters are unimaginative, and will gladly trade ingenuity (which they don't possess) for perceived safety.
      And it becomes even worse in a litigation-based society, where companies and individuals don't dare to take risks, lest they be sued into oblivion.
      So yes, we breed and reward mediocrity.

      That said, the US government also excludes people by discrimination:

      If you're too old, they don't want you (the age limit for joining the bureau is 37, IIRC)
      If you have physical handicaps or just plain bad health, they don't want you.
      If you have an undesired sexual orientation and backbone enough not to hide it, they don't want you.
      If you have an arrest record (not even convicted, but arrested!), you fail security clearance, and they don't want you
      If you've been a member of or have associated with members of a communist party, you also fail security clearance, and they don't want you
      If you won't pledge an oath of allegiance (e.g. for religious reasons, or refuse to commit perjury), they don't want you.
      If you want more money than half of what the private sectors pays, they don't want you

    21. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call BS on this. The first hit on chemistry set on Google turned up a place that sells all the glassware you could want for anything up through and including organic chemistry.

    22. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

      Just what would a resume of a "cyberwarrior" look like? Do you need to have RFID implants, be able to code in 15 different languages at once, blindfolded, and hack an alien space ship with a mac?

      Or, do you need to be able to whistle into a phone and blow up a nuclear reactor like Kevin Mitnick could do?

      Just wondering, because I was thinking about submitting my resume.

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    23. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by irving47 · · Score: 1

      Pretty much what I clicked to say... Stop threatening to arrest everyone that knows how to use a computer to download a movie or TV show from a foreign country. Stop bowing to the demands of the MPAA and regulating our consumer electronics to the level of "it can't have this type of output port" on it. Why develop skills and then use them for the government constantly telling us we're felons for hooking up a TiVo the wrong way.

      --
      I had a sucky sig.
    24. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a good idea in theory. But this is an awful idea in practice. A leopard can't change its spots, and a curious hacker who can't respect boundaries (legal, ethical, or corporate) can rarely be trusted not to break those boundaries again as soon as he gets bored. Case in point.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    25. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It goes beyond this, in the DoD, when they employ such talented individuals they immediately try to marginalize them and stamp out any individuality they had in the first place. So the end result is whoever they hired either quits, or screws them over and gets fired/jailed.

      The mind set is that you can't have any one person or people treated better in the socialist USSA. Unless they OWN something and the people working in or on that something.

      They wouldn't even have to recruit people if they just rewarded such behavior in the field of Information Technology and "cyber security". The smart and bright people they have there would stop playing solitaire on the taxpayers money and start doing their jobs.

    26. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Nerdy Dozen

    27. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      Yet there's tons of talent available to make intelligence software and other sexy defense systems. I think it's highly more likely that the field of network security itself is just far less attractive. It is extremely narrow, difficult, detail oriented, un-sexy field that often puts you in the position of defense where your only success is not having massive failures. As such it interests a very very small subset of Computer Science geeks.

    28. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      The Nerdy Dozen

      The Nerdy 0xC?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    29. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beautifully stated...the morons running this nation are systematically painting themselves into a corner.

    30. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Natanael_L · · Score: 1

      Horrible. They should have encouraged curiosity instead, but they prefer easily managable mainstream sheep á la 1984.

      --
      Geek!
    31. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by eflores99tx · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Check out yesterday's big Washington Post exposé on the national security state, we have almost a million people with Top Secret clearance, Christ how many intelligence agencies and spies do we need? And they can't even catch morons like the underwear bomber because all the agencies are busy protecting their 'information' and feeding each other disinfo, and always the solution is one more agency to contain them all, kinda like the CIA was supposed to be at one time. This has gotten beyond ridiculous.

    32. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well,

      The real issue is that if they are willing to conduct and engage in un-ethical behavoir (Hacking, Cracking, Etc. Etc.) no federal institution will hire them; the flip side is the geniouses that end up in the military have the genius removed as part of the training; they are trained not to question any order and creative thinkers do not do well in such environments.

      That and all the good ones are chemcially augmented; furhter removing them.

    33. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Applekid · · Score: 1

      There is a distinct difference between practicing a skill driven by intellectual curiosity and practicing a sexual behavior driven by preference. Not saying excluding based on either is right, but it's most certainly not at all related.

      That said, in reference to your parent, if you think someone like Kevin Mitnick or some other high profile hackers HAVEN'T at least been approached by at least some covert government agencies and interested parties, then, you might be just a little naive.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    34. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you're talking about mafiaboy

    35. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      You should look at the requirements for working for the NSA. On one hand a certain amount of curiosity and knowledge is required and on the other you need a devotion to rules that lies somewhere between Boy Scout and Nazi. How they fill positions without assuming that every applicant is lying through their teeth is beyond me.

    36. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      I guess I'd have to go with the MS review process. Break everything up into groups of 10. Whoever makes less than 2% on the yearly "loyalty review" dies. Not that we will tell you how we check for loyalty, but one of you will be found on the floor every 12 months with a bullet in the back of their head. 11% people are fastracked to early "retirement". It was your own damn fault for signing the work prison contract instead of automatically going to "rape-you-in-the-ass" prison.

    37. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your talking about this guy?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MafiaBoy

    38. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Blue+Stone · · Score: 0, Troll

      Gun down a bunch of people you don't like and you're a dangerous madman on a rampage, who must be stopped at all costs.

      Do the same thing, but following the government's objectives rather than your own (generally in a foreign country) and your violence-loving tendencies will earn you the title of 'brave hero and defender of democracy' and possibly a shiny medal.

      They don't have a problem recruiting to the army. Maybe they just need a program and boot camps (root camps?).

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    39. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      Or was I thinking Roman Decimation? Bah, same difference.

    40. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      Gary McKinnon.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    41. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by bonch · · Score: 0

      All you'd have to do is cite a single example. Just one example of an innocent hacker who was arrested and put in jail. Otherwise, this sounds like more victimhood crap.

      "Check out the 80s and 90s" isn't exactly convincing research on your part.

    42. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like "Do *you* support our national security objectives enough to be willing to put up with the bullshit red tape involved to get anything done?" I'm leaving the government sector and taking my knowledge and experience with me to the private sector where my hands won't be so tied down.

    43. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the really good ones are smart enough not to get caught.

    44. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by slick7 · · Score: 1

      The USA has a bad habit of arresting anyone with the skills and curiosity to perform such tasks.

      ...and refusing the skilled and desperately needed service of anyone who "likes show tunes".

      ...or punishing with detention or expulsion from school when they exceed the capabilities of their instructors.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    45. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 1

      It's part of a greater "war on curiosity" that's a fear-based initiative to stamp out any and all behaviors that even slightly deviate from a prescribed norm.

      It's deeper than that; I think there's a large contingent of the population here that would agree with Tertullian:

      "Now, pray tell me, what wisdom is there in this hankering after conjectural speculations? What proof is afforded to us, notwithstanding the strong confidence of its assertions, by the useless affectation of a scrupulous curiosity, which is tricked out with an artful show of language? It therefore served Thales of Miletus quite right, when, star-gazing as he walked with all the eyes he had, he had the mortification of falling into a well... His fall, therefore, is a figurative picture of the philosophers; of those, I mean, who persist in applying their studies to a vain purpose, since they indulge a stupid curiosity on natural objects, which they ought rather (intelligently to direct) to their Creator and Governor." -- Tertullian, Ad Nationes II:4

    46. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Weezul · · Score: 1

      Yes & no, they've discouraged many and offended many, but there are still oodls of qualified people, they just need to pay them more to : compensate for their smaller numbers and the distrust the government has distilled in them, plus you cannot smoke pot if you've a security clearance.

      The NSA pays people roughly $100k even for PhDs, not much for that people working that level. If you ratchet that up to $250k+ for serious security types, you'll see black hat conferences disappear as people dump their pot habits, line up, and take some oath.

      It's just capitalism, pure and simple, but the people exist.

      --
      The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    47. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no such thing as a "cyberwar". There are no "cyber terrorists". None of that crap is real. What is real, and what actually costs us tremendous amounts of time and money to fight is spam, malware, and 419 scams. Unfortunately, "US security officials" are too stupid to even see it. They create a Cyber Command and send it off to tilt at imaginary windmills, protecting their tiny little segment of the network while the real threat rages on all around them.

    48. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His name was MafiaBoy, this wasn't to test it out like this was a mistake, it wasn't an accident, he just wanted to see if it could. It was a hell of a fucking botnet.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MafiaBoy

      While I don't agree with most government policies dealing with hacking/cracking/spamming/etc, I also don't agree with the characterization of das wunderkinder as noble, or similar. Having been one, and hanging around them, I know that I, and a lot of these kids, had absolutely no empathy, or remorse, for people I messed with. While I did run botnets, mine weren't for DDOSing they were for phishing. We (or more so I), seriously fucked shit up, and hurt a lot of peoples lives. There is no rationalization for it, but I did get away with it. No "juviee"/etc.

      I think this characterizes kids as a whole, whether it's calling people names, throwing rocks, or similar. Some (maybe most?) just don't have this ability, which is why we're probably further along the autism scale than most, and why we've often got personality disorders.

      Anyhow, I think this went way off topic somewhere a while back... reminiscing makes me introspective these days, since shits changed a lot for me.... I think... hrmmmm

    49. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Informative

      How is this off-topic? At a certain level of government, homosexuality is enough to get you excluded from the game. That means there are likely some qualified candidates who are excluded based off a fairly arbitrary criteria.

      That level is ONLY within the ranks of the military itself. It has nothing to do with civilian contractors. I personally know two trans-gendered people with clearances, deviation from the sexual norm is not a significant problem.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    50. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, punishment comes when you _break the fucking law_. Being more capable (as I was) is not grounds for punishment, abusing it is.

      Of course, many people are fucking retarded, and they think a little bit of computer savvy entitles them to break the law. Because they're fucking retarded.

      Like you, apparently.

    51. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U've hit the nail right on the head there. The war on terror is too visible ... despite the liberal media cleansing everything for the US population, there's still photos of injured children popping up and people are seeing them. This makes the government unpopular hence these publicity stunts for non-lethal weapons etc. etc. The US government needs to feed the populace it's dose of fear to make the people malleable to whatever the zionist leadership wants to dream up doing next. Fear created by real war makes the government too unpopular, the 'cyber war' is something that nobody truly understands so can be dredged out as a tool to feed the populace it's daily dose of fear.

      Once there are enough cyberwarriors working faithfully for the us, I'm sure we'll see daily internet colour coding announcements ... "Tuesday week you should be RED afraid of the cyberwar".

    52. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative

      To clarify: it's not a problem if you're open about it. They don't care what you do in your private life, they do care what you can be blackmailed about. If someone from China can threaten to tell your friends / parents that you're gay and send them photographs of you and your boyfriend if you don't give them secret information, this can be a problem. If your everyone already knows, it isn't.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    53. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Ultracrepidarian · · Score: 1

      They wouldn't want to take a chance on hiring someone like Alan Turing.

    54. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      They don't have a problem recruiting to the army.

      A lot of US Army recruitment comes from two sources:

      • People with no skills and no other options, right at the poverty line. The army may teach them a trade, or it may get them killed, but it probably won't be much worse than their life already.
      • Relatively intelligent people who aren't quite bright enough (or good enough at interviews / exams) to get a university scholarship and aren't rich enough to pay for a ludicrously expensive US university education. These people typically go in as junior officers or specialists of some kind, so may not see front-line combat.

      The first category is easy - just make sure you don't have an adequate social safety net, and the armed forces will never be short of this kind of recruit. They're not so useful for specialist roles though.

      The second category is a bit better, but for this kind of job you don't really want people straight out of university. They might be okay eventually, but you'd need to spend a few more years training them afterwards, and then they'd probably go off and get a lucrative job in the private sector, so you've wasted a lot of money training them for someone else.

      There used to be another category: patriots. Unfortunately for governments, the attitude 'my country right or wrong' is a lot harder to maintain when the Internet and television are showing you the wrongs that your country is doing. It was a lot easier when the flow of news was controlled by the King and you couldn't see the atrocities he was committing, because they were far away and he didn't leave any survivors to report them.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    55. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by JustABlitheringIdiot · · Score: 1

      I'd try it myself but I'm too old to go to Juvee...

      No instead you get to go to federal PMITA prison. Just don't drop the soap.

    56. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by musicalmicah · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I'll work long hours to ethically protect the interests of my community, but the military-industrial pork pie of the U.S. "cyberwar" doesn't really show much promise in that regard. It seems that a couple volunteer hours a week for the EFF would secure far more freedoms in the "cyberwar" than a cyber career with the CIA.

    57. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      No, they're not in jail.

      The people "smart" enough to "defend our networks" are also smart enough to know it's impossible to "defend our networks". Why sign up for a career you know will result in repeated failures?

    58. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      Most politicians find a way to keep their mouths shut and don't let their personal lives get into their professional, why should you...! If your gay, stop flaunting it to the world, I would put my right hand into the fire that at least 50% if not more of politicians are gay, but you just don't read or hear about it!
      As of yet, I have not found 1 single instance where a form you fill to get security clearance asks you your sexual preference....now if you go blabbing to every tom dick and harry (no pun intended)...that you are gay, well come time to get a form filled, you might get blacklisted behind closed doors, because if you could not keep your mouth shut about something like that, what sort of security personnel would you make?

    59. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Slider451 · · Score: 1

      It is possible to possess sufficient character and values for these positions without sacrificing curiosity and creativity. Boy Scout, maybe. But Nazi devotion is a Hollywood trope. You work for "The People" not the institution.

      "Loyalty to my country always. Loyalty to my government when it deserves it." - T. Roosevelt

      --
      Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
    60. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Slider451 · · Score: 1

      You're implying an institutional conspiracy in the military against education and critical thinking that is simply untrue. The military today values bright, talented people more than ever. The problem is that many of them are too fat, have too many health problems, and have too many drug and felony convictions to qualify for service.

      There are plenty of scary-smart patriotic people in the military who had plenty of cushy options but chose to serve in combat instead. Jon Stewart has said as much on the Daily Show from his interactions with them.

      You can be patriotic and serve your country while disagreeing with your government's policies. That's the beauty of a democratic republic.

      --
      Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
    61. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      Top Secret really isn't all that high, and a very small percent of holders belong to the intelligence community. A great number of them are civilians working for contractors which you'd know if you knew anything other than you don't like this government which you don't understand.

    62. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by NickGnome · · Score: 1

      Yes, I must confess that when I had security clearances, I made it a point to avoid information I did not actually *need* to know to do my job.

      But a cyber security worker needs to do the opposite to some extent, to poke into things while under supervision in order to find weaknesses, to find where others have exploited those weaknesses. Still, we've got plenty of bright people who could be trained in the specifics of this skill-set and turned loose to get the job done.

      I'll be convinced there's a genuine "shortage" of people able to do a good job when the job ads shift from hyper-specificity and hyper-credentialism, to big-G intelligence and a solid foundation of knowledge in the field, with offers of specific training... and the job ads include e-mail addresses, voice phone numbers, and street addresses by which you can get in touch with actual human beings, instead of having your info dumped through some resume parser into a black-hole data-base.

      Until then, it appears to be the usual cheap labor scam NSF, STEM execs (in business and academe), and immigration lawyers have been pulling since the 1980s, and including the NSF and DoD crises-mongering when there is no actual crisis that's been around since just after WW2.

    63. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by broter · · Score: 1

      Y'know, the greatest threat to US security might be the US government.

      In a sense I agree. We the people are the government, and we the people are generally apathetic, under educated, idiots. I believe the war on curiosity, as a grandparent poster said, is the fear of "main street" Americans of everything they don't understand. Technology is scary, so we have to keep he evil hackers at bay. Those Ai-rabs are funny looking and scary as well, so we have to attack them before they attack us. Or, worse, make "our" gas prices higher. There are large segments of the population that hold ignorance and staying inline w/ the the "right" (as in correct) thinking of the community to be paramount.

      "Democracy is the theory that the people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
                      -- H. L. Mencken

      --
      "One man can change the world with a bullet in the right place."
      - Mick Travis, "If..."
    64. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Seriously, the parent poster makes an insightful point.

      It's especially insightful given Alan Turing's key contribution to WWII and his subsequent treatment including removing his security clearance.

    65. Re:Duh, they are in jail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was Micheal Calce aka. mafiaboy. He wrote a pretty decent book too. some people say he was a script-kiddie. but that simply wasn't the case he could most def write code.

      i really respect him, considering he did it when he was 15 years old.

  4. Stupid tags by jeffmeden · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'm not allowed to tag stories, but the moron who managed to misspell "cyberwarfare" as "cyberwarefare" is free and clear, huh? Nice job, Slashdot.

    1. Re:Stupid tags by causality · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not allowed to tag stories, but the moron who managed to misspell "cyberwarfare" as "cyberwarefare" is free and clear, huh? Nice job, Slashdot.

      I can't seem to tag stories either and I have no idea why. I can add a tag and it appears to work, but I have never once refreshed the Slashdot main page and seen any tag I have applied. That is, they seem to just go straight to /dev/null. Tags I try to apply do seem to show up on my user page, however.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    2. Re:Stupid tags by jeffmeden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For me, in both FF and IE, the tag interface is simply static, I can't even try to add a tag. If I log out and clear my cookies (on either browser) the interface starts working again, and I can even post a tag if I carefully use the interface to add a tag and *then* log in as it prompts me to do so... and it will become a tag that appears on the main page.

      I have to think this is some sort of poorly implemented tag-ban, as I used to be able to (and did) tag stories up until a few months ago.

    3. Re:Stupid tags by codeonezero · · Score: 1

      Put in the right tag, and ! the wrong one. I'm so confused on how the tag system operates I rarely use it, and yeah sometimes I can't tag stuff either. Maybe it's a Karma thing?

      --

      ....
      int main (void) { ... }

    4. Re:Stupid tags by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      I think they moved it to the Firehose so you have to put in a little effort if you want to tag a story (presumably to cut down on tags like cyberwarfareisbullshit)

    5. Re:Stupid tags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no. They're two completely independent terms, albeit misapplied.

      "Cyberwarfare" is a PR term for activities on an imaginary battlefield where the participants battle to convince politicians to fund defense against a largely imaginary threat with the goal to keep themselves gainfully employed. Whereas a "cyberwarefare" is a term for the computer equivalent of a medieval fair, written in faux-old-English. A "cyberwarefare" is where greasy-haired geeks and nerds get together to talk about Commodore 64 and Altair computers, often shaving their heads bald, wearing beards, bow-ties and glasses to be "in character". A common tradition at such "fares" is to wear a slide rule in a belt holster and hold mathematical jousting matches with same.

    6. Re:Stupid tags by causality · · Score: 1

      I think they moved it to the Firehose so you have to put in a little effort if you want to tag a story (presumably to cut down on tags like cyberwarfareisbullshit)

      Then why leave a non-functional tagging mechanism in place for non-Firehose stories? It's either incompetent or deceptive. One way or another, something here doesn't add up.

      Besides which, if cyberwarfare is bullshit then there is nothing wrong with saying so.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    7. Re:Stupid tags by causality · · Score: 1

      Put in the right tag, and ! the wrong one. I'm so confused on how the tag system operates I rarely use it, and yeah sometimes I can't tag stuff either. Maybe it's a Karma thing?

      Mine is capped at "Excellent" and has been for a long time now. It's not karma-related.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    8. Re:Stupid tags by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      the tag interface is simply static

      It's there, just a little broken. Inspect Element, change the input's style from display:none to display:block, and then you can enter a tag and submit it, and it does seem to go through. If it's a ban, then the server would be ignoring/rejecting the request and not even putting the input element on the page in the first place; it's obviously intended to work and let people tag. My guess is that it's just some bug in the javascript that gets run when you click the little triangle icon.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    9. Re:Stupid tags by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Besides which, if cyberwarfare is bullshit then there is nothing wrong with saying so.

      Whether or not I agree with you (I do) I feel that tags are not the place to state that. Tags are for organization. This, right here, like you just did - is the correct place to state your opinion.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  5. How are they recruiting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is the US recruiting to meet this demand? If they are doing it at universities, they are doing it wrong.

  6. We don't have sufficiently bright people by mcfatboy93 · · Score: 1

    We don't have sufficiently bright people

    well DUH, the 'cyber warriors' that the government wants are hard to find. mostly because they are either trained IT security professionals or a kid who figured out how to hack his school to change his grades. the first of the 2 will be easy to get with the increase in IT students. however unlike china, there is sever punishment for committing cyber crimes. china and other countries have the right idea of hiring the hackers instead of locking them away like we used to do

    --
    Its not my fault, someone put a wall in my way.
    1. Re:We don't have sufficiently bright people by alexborges · · Score: 1

      What? No no, one thing is to say that US policy has gotten it in the wrong side of history, which I think is factually correct, and another to say that china does not crack down on its hackers.

      In china, you go and hack your school computer and youll probably end up in a nice concentration camp.

      --
      NO SIG
  7. Where do I sign up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a young system admin with two years experience and would be extremely interested in expanding my network security knowledge. Maybe they need to advertise better? I know lots of fellow would-be hackers looking for interesting work.

    1. Re:Where do I sign up? by Haxzaw · · Score: 1

      usajobs.gov or your Air Force recruiter

    2. Re:Where do I sign up? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      Just be ready to take the blame if anything goes wrong. Or get a waiver to protect yourself...

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    3. Re:Where do I sign up? by MrMr · · Score: 1

      Surely you meant: "break into usajobs.gov and put an interview in the recruiters diary" ?

  8. Is anyone surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The US treats anyone with the least bit of curiosity or know-how with suspicion.

  9. Jail time? by IICV · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe it's because we call anyone with even the smallest amount of computer knowledge a witch^H hacker, and burn them at the stake^H^H^H^H^H^H put them in jail (or detention, for the juveniles) while banning them from using computers?

    It's pretty simple, guys. If you ban model rockets, you won't get a generation of rocket scientists. If you ban chemistry kits, you won't get a generation of chemical engineers. If you ban playing around with computer systems, you won't get a generation of hackers.

    1. Re:Jail time? by 0racle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Playing around and breaking the law are two different things. Some laws stifle learning and need to be changed, but most do not.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:Jail time? by bonch · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's because we call anyone with even the smallest amount of computer knowledge a witch^H hacker, and burn them at the stake^H^H^H^H^H^H put them in jail (or detention, for the juveniles) while banning them from using computers?

      We do? Could you cite some examples of all these innocent computer users being thrown in jail for having a small amount of computer knowledge?

      It's pretty simple, guys. If you ban model rockets, you won't get a generation of rocket scientists. If you ban chemistry kits, you won't get a generation of chemical engineers. If you ban playing around with computer systems, you won't get a generation of hackers.

      Could you cite some examples of "playing around with computer systems" being banned as well? Or are you just following a narrative cliche to get upmods?

    3. Re:Jail time? by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's pretty simple, guys. If you ban model rockets, you won't get a generation of rocket scientists. If you ban chemistry kits, you won't get a generation of chemical engineers. If you ban playing around with [other people's] computer systems, you won't get a generation of [computer crackers].

      FTFY. It's illegal for a reason.

    4. Re:Jail time? by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      These bitches should have their own Time-Life series of books sold on TeeVee.

      Of course, a true geek would realize that such books should only be a springboard to further inquiry...

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    5. Re:Jail time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you ban chemistry kits, you won't get a generation of chemical engineers.

      That's OK. We legislated chemical engineering out of existence in the US long before we banned the chemistry kits.

    6. Re:Jail time? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't read the news, especially tech news. I'll leave to you to practice the art of Googling.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    7. Re:Jail time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you ban model rockets, you won't get a generation of rocket scientists. If you ban chemistry kits, you won't get a generation of chemical engineers. If you ban playing around with computer systems, you won't get a generation of hackers.

      JOB SECURITY!!!

    8. Re:Jail time? by aintnostranger · · Score: 1

      "Some laws stifle learning and need to be changed, but most do not." let me rephrase that: "some things in the universe relate to this discussion, but most do not" Those few laws that stifle learning are the issue.

    9. Re:Jail time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I kind of have to agree with the IICV. While growing up I would play around with computers but I always hit a limit when I had to decide if I should try to do something or not. If it was based on legality I stopped. I'm not saying the law is wrong, however, it certainly stunted some of my knowledge. There are other ways to learn, but they are hard to find when you're a 13 year old. It was extra hard to find when the internet was not big.

    10. Re:Jail time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, but what constitutes "Other People's" in this case?

      Say I have a Nintendo Wii; It's a computer in every respect; Has a programmable processor, has volatile storage, has permanent storage, and it has input and output devices. It can even be coaxed into doing useful work. (more or less. remember the wii balance board VS expensive medical device story about half a year ago?)

      Now, Does this Wii, which I paid money for, belong to Nintendo, or does it belong to ME?

      Hypothetical:

      Let's say I installed the homebrew channel, because I want to develop for the Wii, but don't meet Nintendo's "you must be this high to ride" rules. (I do NOT pirate. Hypothetical, yes?) Nintendo recently pushed a new console update that fixes NOTHING --EXCEPT-- it removes the homebrew channel, and can brick your console for you.

      Who owns the console?

      Should the people that make the homebrew channel and its installer be liable for criminal charges? How about me, the guy who wants to do hobby programming on the Wii console that I purchased?

      (replace above with hardware/hackware dejour-- PS3 and OtherOS functionality, et al.)

      Here you see why your argument is not very sound; Moneyed interests are leveraging a kind of "De-facto" ownership (though inseparable bundling with a service) over hardware, that the end users (who are operating under the presumption of ownership) are modifying, and being punished for doing so.

      This sounds exactly like what the OP was talking about.

    11. Re:Jail time? by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Playing around with something and breaking the law are not mutually exclusive. I'm all about fairness and justice and all that, but I am also about forgiveness too. If someone killed your dog because they were pissed off at you, that would be very, very bad. If someone killed your dog because they were playing with something, that's quite a different thing.

      When I was a kid, I did ALL SORTS of things that would result in jail time and/or serious psychological evaluation if done today. I was mean to wild animals (never dogs or cats) using BB guns, various types of traps and fireworks. I once created a decent sized pot-hole in the street using "a very large fire cracker" I built using about 100+ "Black Cat" fire crackers. When I learned to make blow darts using straight pins, thread and a bit of white school glue, the police arrived at my home following a neighbor (rival) kid getting his ear pierced while we were both riding bicycles. (awesome stunt though)

      The point is, I learned a LOT about physics and many other things through these experiments (and make no mistake about it, they were experiments!) and I am a much smarter person today than I would be if I relied solely on the public education machine for information. I'm proud of being a Texan, but I'm not proud of what Texas is doing to education.

      We all need to be better at forgiveness and also careful. There is room to be both.

    12. Re:Jail time? by pooh666 · · Score: 1

      Playing around and breaking the law are two different things.

      Not on a good day.

    13. Re:Jail time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty simple, guys. If you ban model rockets, you won't get a generation of rocket scientists. If you ban chemistry kits, you won't get a generation of chemical engineers. If you ban playing around with [other people's] computer systems, you won't get a generation of [computer crackers].

      FTFY. It's illegal for a reason.

      Write any software for your iPhone recently? No? Hmm!

    14. Re:Jail time? by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      uhhhh..... HACK THE PLANET!!

      --
      Balderdash!
    15. Re:Jail time? by IICV · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree completely. However, this student was suspended for creating a way around that piece of crap known as CCA, which is not illegal in any way though it may be against university policy. This student was arrested and faced 10 years in jail for offering to modify the hardware his friends owned for money (yes the modification was illegal, but that in no way means it was unethical or wrong). This student was charged with a couple of felonies for finding and reporting an unsecured file on the school network that included several pieces of private information, which is not illegal.

      It's not about the laws; it's about this attitude some people have that computers are witchcraft (which is what I was alluding to in my post), and anyone who has any power over the computer that they don't understand should be shut down as hard as possible. We should nurture curiosity and exploration in all their forms, not ban them - even if it means accepting responsibility for not know what the hell you're doing with computers.

    16. Re:Jail time? by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Off topic I know but can someone tell me what "^H^H" means? As far as I can tell it is the same as blah blah, is that right?

    17. Re:Jail time? by bonch · · Score: 1

      You're the ones making the claim. I searched Google using what search terms I thought would bring something up, but I didn't find any evidence of some epidemic of poor, innocent users getting thrown in jail just for knowing a little bit about computers.

      In other words, you're full of shit and trying to play the poor, oppressed computer nerd.

    18. Re:Jail time? by bonch · · Score: 1

      What does any of that have to do with the claim of people getting thrown in jail for a "little bit of computer knowledge?" You actually think your knowledge was stunted because you couldn't commit a crime? Give me a break.

    19. Re:Jail time? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 3, Informative

      Each one represents a backspace. Typing "hacker^H^H^H^H^H^H computer security expert" would imply that I initially typed 'hacker' and then changed my mind, deleted it and replaced it with 'computer security expert'.

      You may also see ^W which deletes the whole word.

    20. Re:Jail time? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      And you're just full of shit. Not much of a stretch for you... In the eyes of the authorities their only real crime was picking the wrong target.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    21. Re:Jail time? by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      :-) Second reply for shits and giggles.. I could do this all day

      I searched Google using what search terms I thought would bring something up...

      Obviously you don't think much at all. Face it. You're a goof.. An active member of the politburo, are you? You seem quite competent at spreading their propaganda and all.. but in America you should try to be a bit more subtle about it.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    22. Re:Jail time? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Playing around and breaking the law are two different things.

      Where can you play around that is a challenge without breaking the law?

      The best you can do these days is playing the white hat "responsible disclosure" game, and hope to hell that the people you disclose to don't turn around and stab you in the back with a sharp lawyer, because there's no way you can even be white hat without breaking at least the DMCA, and probably a few more laws too.

    23. Re:Jail time? by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      "yes the modification was illegal, but that in no way means it was unethical or wrong"

      Id love to hear your argument to back that up, you might disagree with the law and think that breaking it is ok but its still wrong - not even Jeremy Clarkson, would argue what you are if he got done for speeding.

    24. Re:Jail time? by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Somewhat off-topic but... Where I lived, there was a huge open field next door to us (probably 5 acres, which is huge in a suburb). All of the boys in the neighborhood would regularly go there and play (marbles, build forts, dirt clod fights, jump onto mattresses from next door warehouse, etc). The forts were built with (probably illegally) abandoned construction materials such as broken up concrete slabs and 2x4s etc. Yeah, we were breaking the law being there, and probably equally so going into the abandoned electronics warehouse at that same site. I later became a mechanical engineer, I'm not saying that it was directly caused by that, but, I think I learned quite a bit about stacking things up and such in the many many hours I/we "worked" there. So, were it not for the fact that our illegality was tolerated or not perceived, we would have all missed out on a lot of fun and learning. Yeah, it seems like usually laws have to be broken by kids in order to do a bit of learning.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    25. Re:Jail time? by losfromla · · Score: 1

      really? I think Monsanto, DOW, etc smugly laugh at your innocence.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    26. Re:Jail time? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I have no idea who Jeremy Clarkson is, but I don't let the laws determine my idea of right and wrong. Safe and unsafe is a different matter.

      If you think that laws determine morality, then you are as much a moral idiot as someone who lets his local priest decide that for him.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    27. Re:Jail time? by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      Not in MY America.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    28. Re:Jail time? by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      The idea that it's "your" computer system is dead. Even the largest computer development companies in the world are moving to a cloud. Not because it's for your benefit, but because it gives them ownership of all your property of value.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    29. Re:Jail time? by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      fine you can disagree with the law and break it to make a political point much as the civil rights movement did.

      But you have to make a better an overriding moral argument than "because I want it to be so".

    30. Re:Jail time? by xanalogical · · Score: 1

      Illegal for a reason - not disputed.

      When you have folks skilled in certain areas, they can be a force for good or for evil. But if you want the good you cannot avoid some of the evil. Intelligence and creativity, unlike other more mechanistic human activities, cannot be harnessed safely. It's in the nature of knowing how to think outside the box.

    31. Re:Jail time? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You are projecting the justification that you think the ggp(another grand or two?) used onto him. At no point did he say why he believed that the modifications were morally proper even if illegal.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  10. Funny how.. by SuperCharlie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field"

    Yet we have sufficiently bright people who can create a system that rapes the stock market.

    1. Re:Funny how.. by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why do you rob banks, Mr. Sutton?

      That's where the money is.

      --
      That is all.
    2. Re:Funny how.. by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field"

      Yet we have sufficiently bright people who can create a system that rapes the stock market.

      Which one pays better?

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    3. Re:Funny how.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod parent up.

      in a system where the score is kept by the size of one's wallet; the most likely conclusion is that the implication of success does not exist in these roles.

    4. Re:Funny how.. by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      It's hard to hire bright people who can hack systems, when they want them to be law abiding citizens as they hire them.
      *boggle*

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    5. Re:Funny how.. by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 1

      When Microsoft and plenty of other IT companies go out of their way to hire Indians for piss wages while IT talent sits in front of them BEGGING for a job, it doesn't motivate a new generation of geeks to get into the field.

    6. Re:Funny how.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you realize that Indian techies, who you claim work for 'piss' wages, lead a much better and more comfortable life in India that you can ever dream of. Just in case you're one of those usual dumbfuck Americans, let me tell you that the cost of living in India is around one fifth of what it it in the US. So, if you take your head out of your ass and stop measuring things in 'Daaalarrrrs', you'll realize that Indian techies lead almost royal lives in India for the salaries they get, which are extremely HUGE salaries in the context of Indian costs of living.

  11. Perception... by mlts · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is all about perception. I see high school advisors telling kids to stay away from computer science because they will be fighting for jobs against the whole world (programmers from India, sysadmins from the Bay Area, etc.) Instead, they tell them to go law because "there is no such thing as an unemployed lawyer."

    Russia and China, it is different. There, their security guys doing blackhat/white work are viewed with similar respect as Special Forces guys are viewed here, as heroes for their country. Here in the US, a CS/IT person is looked at as someone who is going to be unemployed as soon as the PHB finds some offshore firm.

    Change the perception, make it cool to be a CS/IT person. THEN you will have your "cyberwarriors" that are on par with the Russian/Chinese blackhats. Otherwise, the CS students will be taking their CS degree into law or business school.

    1. Re:Perception... by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

      Instead, they tell them to go law because "there is no such thing as an unemployed lawyer."

      There are now many unemployed lawyers. See the lawyer layoff list. There's now "legal process outsourcing, and it's not just clerical work any more. You can now send work to cheap lawyers in a Bangalore call center.

      A lawyer I was using was recently laid off by his downsizing law firm. It happens.

    2. Re:Perception... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2

      Well, Tron Legacy is coming out soon, that might make it cool again.

    3. Re:Perception... by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      Change the perception, make it cool to be a CS/IT person. THEN you will have your "cyberwarriors" that are on par with the Russian/Chinese blackhats. Otherwise, the CS students will be taking their CS degree into law or business school.

      There is a definitely a perception fix needed, but we need more. If we want to build up cyberwarriors, we need to reduce our exporting of jobs (offshoring), experience (H1B), and knowledge (foreign students). I'm not saying stop, but keep it in check.

      Second, we know how to train a soldier or a spy but we don't know how to train a cyber warrior. If we haven't had the equivalent of the OSS yet, we need it now. Also, what would be the incentive? People still join the military when they run out of employment options (I know one), but most (if not all) good candidates will be making 6 figures in the private sector. We would need the best, not the can't-make-it-in-industry types. The government would probably need to spend the kind of cash they waste on defense contractors building weapons to fight an imaginary war with Russia.

      Thoughts?

    4. Re:Perception... by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      "there is no such thing as an unemployed lawyer."

      I know two unemployed lawyers, and no unemployed sysadmins. /anecdote

    5. Re:Perception... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until two years ago... it didn't happen. It conveniently happened right as I finished my first year of law school. There are now tons and tons of young lawyers with no job prospects and huge amounts of student debt. Fortunately I have a software engineering background to fall back on. Most of my classmates are not so lucky. Sure, a few have landed jobs in big law firms. Some of those people will end up being very successful. Most of the rest of my class... not so much.

    6. Re:Perception... by wholestrawpenny · · Score: 1

      Yes, the best we could come up with is Ben Affleck playing a super-computer-genius by connecting a ribbon cable to a microchip (paycheck). Do that, and you get to sleep with Uma Thurman. Ooo, big prize.

    7. Re:Perception... by AnonymousClown · · Score: 1
      Law has been always cyclical. Back in 1990, I dated a newly graduated law student and she had a horrible time getting a job and she graduated top quintile.

      Take heart. One of the biggest specialties in career counciling is helping lawyers get out of law. At one time, there were just as many lawyers leaving law as entering.

      You may be dodging a bullet.

      --
      RIP America

      July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    8. Re:Perception... by couchslug · · Score: 1

      The PHBs will never make it cool to be a serf.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    9. Re:Perception... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Ben Affleck playing a super-computer-genius by connecting a ribbon cable to a microchip (paycheck). Do that, and you get to sleep with Uma Thurman. Ooo, big prize.

      *sigh* If only it was that easy to get a chance to sleep with Uma Thurman.

      I'm just sayin'. :-P

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    10. Re:Perception... by jlowery · · Score: 1

      Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word.
      Benjamin: Yes, sir.
      Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
      Benjamin: Yes, I am.
      Mr. McGuire: Plumbing.
      Benjamin: Just how do you mean that, sir?
      Mr. McGuire: It can never be outsourced.

      --
      If you post it, they will read.
    11. Re:Perception... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1, Troll

      With lawyers now being outsourced, surgeries being done offshore in India, CS work all moving offshore, is there really a point to even bothering to go to college for a professional degree any more? If I were graduating high school right now, I think I'd just go to trade school to be an auto mechanic or plumber, or just say screw it and go work at the mall. Professional, college-degree-requiring jobs just aren't worth it any more. The pay isn't anything special, college is enormously expensive, the working conditions suck, the specialization and age discrimination means you can only work for about 10 years before you're stuck in your job and can't move anywhere and when change comes, you won't be able to find another job.

      It seems to me we'd all be better off if everyone gave up on professions, and became tradespeople, retail workers, etc. Before long, the economy would collapse for lack of exports, the dollar would be massively devalued, and we could start over building home-grown industries.

    12. Re:Perception... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no kidding. Most of the guys here would probably be lucky to sleep with someone that looks like Rosie O'Donnell.

    13. Re:Perception... by mlts · · Score: 1

      It depends on the "cyberwarrior". Two types come to mind:

      Type 1: Someone who is able to focus on one small program or routine for months on end to find anything that can be used as en exploit. Perhaps one unbounded array, or the fact that it doesn't drop root privs immediately, or perhaps the program can be used to make another daemon dump core and the core file analyzed for encryption keys or cached passwords. They will focus on looking at an OS distribution to find any issues that might be with downlevel packages that might have been included. These are the "weapons makers", and the people that are really needed. However, due to the fear of winding up in jail because people fear them, these guys are not going to give their existence out. I'm sure that one can train people for this, but this type has been a solitary profession, or done with small groups of people that can trust each other 100%.

      Type 2: Instead of focusing narrowly, this is the type that looks at the gestalt view. Even if system "X" is compromised and completely owned, will this affect day to day operations? Will the audit log methods be able to detect if there was a compromise of sshd? How protected are critical servers from network attacks?

      It takes both types. The people that sift through code with a microscope to find any vulnerabilities, and people who are focused on a strategic perspective. Both are needed to cause successful intrusions, and both are needed to protect against them. No car analogy, but it would be the equivalent of a weaponsmith, and an armorsmith.

    14. Re:Perception... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Until two years ago... it didn't happen. It conveniently happened right as I finished my first year of law school. There are now tons and tons of young lawyers with no job prospects and huge amounts of student debt. Fortunately I have a software engineering background to fall back on. Most of my classmates are not so lucky. Sure, a few have landed jobs in big law firms. Some of those people will end up being very successful. Most of the rest of my class... not so much.

      sorry if i don't feel bad for your horrible life choice.

      --
      Be seeing you...
  12. Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by bogaboga · · Score: 2, Interesting

    'We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in time,' says James Gosler, a veteran cybersecurity specialist who has worked at the CIA, the National Security Agency, and the Energy Department."

    I wonder whether this gentleman has thought about the idea that his "national security objectives" cannot be achieved by computer science at all. In other words, those objectives are misplaced...simply put.

    Could I be right?

    1. Re:Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact that we are using the ridiculous term "cyberwarrior" suggests that, at the very least, the people writing the PR playbooks don't have a fucking clue.

      In addition to being corny as hell, "cyberwarrior" implies a dangerously literal application of traditional military doctrines(ie. you have the civilians, who do whatever, and then you have an army that stands between them and the bad guys and blows things up) to computer security. With networked computers, aside from the specific case of DOD sysadmins, virtually all of "computer security" is about making sure that the (overwhelmingly civilian) software and systems are properly designed and built. That isn't something that you are going to do by having a few "cyberwarriors" to hack through the enemy's code walls, or whatever. That is only doable by, more or less, massively increasing the status(and cost, sorry MBAs...) of programmers, software engineers, sysadmins, etc.

      Obviously, there will be some need for near-black-hats to spook around hostile networks in the service of various sinister three letter agencies; but the vast majority of "computer security" is much closer to being analogous to a civil engineering or public health question than it is to being a military one. Trying to solve "cybersecurity" with a relatively small number of "elite cyberwarriors" is rather like trying to keep a population from dying of cholera by building a few world-class research hospitals(with bed space for like 1% of the cases), rather than having civil engineers knock together a water system...

    2. Re:Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      In addition to being corny as hell, "cyberwarrior" implies a dangerously literal application of traditional military doctrines(ie. you have the civilians, who do whatever, and then you have an army that stands between them and the bad guys and blows things up) to computer security.

      I think you've just described the plot of Live Free or Die Hard. :-P

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by poor_boi · · Score: 1

      I kind of agree with your semantic analysis of the term "cyberwarrior." It's cheesy and for that reason it's just as likely to put people off as it is to attract them. But I don't think it goes beyond that. Anyone who is sufficiently intelligent to do the job, probably understands that the title doesn't always match the job description, and that good computer security doesn't change based on what you call it.

    4. Re:Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm less concerned about the cheesy term scaring away hardcore techies(they can always just mock it in the break room).

      I'm concerned about managerial decisions, program planning, and the like. It is hard to think correct thoughts with broken language, and "cyberwarrior" is broken language(except, again, in the specific context of l33t black-ops haxx0rs for the NSA who play offense. They may or may not like the term; but they are at least structurally somewhat analogous to various flavors of elite-and-slightly-irregular forces that have been used in the past.)

      My concern, essentially(in addition to the fact that "cyberwarrior" is an invitation to the quiet militarization of just about anything turing-complete and network connected, all in the name of "security") is that this sloppy use of language will(and already is) lead to sloppy, incorrect thinking on the part of politicians and planners and the like. You'll get roughly one of two outcomes:

      Outcome one: The "guard the borders" interpretation. This is the analogy extension of "cyberwarrior" that anybody whose worldview is steeped in the classic American quasi-isolationism(that comes quite naturally from having an ocean on each side, and largely untroublesome borders) will come up with. Basically, civilians get to be the soft chewy center, and go about their business however they like, and the military stands guard at the edges and occasionally goes overseas and kills some nazis or communists.

      This interpretation, will the better of the two, is largely useless. With modern internet interconnection, pretty much any sort of electronic attack will fly right past the border and into the ghastly mess that is civilian systems with ease. Even fairly petty criminals will not have much trouble, and some hostile nation's targeted attackers even less. Also, because of "COTS" fever, low-bidder private sector code will be all over military critical systems as well. Hurray.

      Outcome two: Super sinister, and not necessarily much more useful than Outcome one. This is the bad analogy extension of "cyberwarrior" that will be arrived at by either retro "total war" theorists, or their contemporary counterparts who have been hitting the "9/11 changed everything, new kind of war, assymetric undefined battlefield, war on abstract concepts!!" pipe pretty hard. Here, the thinking will roughly be as follows: 1. There is a state of "cyberwar" 2. "Cyberwarriors" must be used to win the cyberwar. 3. All internet connected systems are strategic resources, and/or strategic targets, and are therefore under the just jurisdiction of the "cyberwarriors" until such time as the cyberwar should end(ie. never).

      Basically, this outcome will mean massive militarization(and some super-juicy contractor food) of previously civilian areas; because, there is a cyberwar on, so if you are on the internet, you are territory...

    5. Re:Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I forget what MBA means. Major Bureaucratic Asshole?

      Eh. Probably close enough.

    6. Re:Maybe this man's ideas are misplaced... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COTS > GOTS.

      I've never seen a piece of GOTS that was maintained, or secured in any meaningful way. To the degree that a simpleton with backtrack could open 50 0days on some of these systems. Not being in the public (eg obscure) is not secure.

  13. We brought this on ourselves, perhaps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Maybe if the country wasn't so obsessed with computer crime that it looks for black-hat hackers in ridiculous places, we wouldn't have this problem.

    Chemistry sets and other "gateway drugs" to the sciences and engineering are also not as easily available any more. And isn't "creativity" declining too?

  14. insufficiently bright by ralphdaugherty · · Score: 1

    'We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in time,' says James Gosler, a veteran cybersecurity specialist who has worked at the CIA, the National Security Agency, and the Energy Department."

          That's ok, just click on brightness and adjust. Works for my monitor.

          If you can't get them bright enough for when you move backward in time, that's when we have a problem.

    1. Re:insufficiently bright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field"

      I represent this remark!

  15. We need more smart idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The protection of US computer systems essentially requires an army of cyberwarriors, but the recruitment of that force is suffering. 'We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in time,' says James Gosler

    Translation: we don't have enough really smart people willing to work for peanuts.

  16. Well, it does sound rather boring.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who wants to work in that environment? It isn't like the movies.

    I'm sure they will eventually fill their quotas with University of Phoenix grads.

  17. well stop arresting hackers for BS then by RobertLTux · · Score: 3, Funny

    all y'all have to do is setup a few sub sub basements with a few racks and fridges and then move anybody that can
    hack the doors into the group (of course filter for the obvious "problems").

    a few hints
    1 most good hackers will have some sort of criminal record
    2 hackers may or may not like a normal uniform and the hair thing may be an issue
    3 when you have a group setup DO NOT VISIT DO NOT ASK "HOW" (plausible deneyability is a good thing)
    4 psych evals may be another issue

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    1. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      How would the managers know if the people they hired to protect the system aren't a greater risk from those they are protecting from?

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    2. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, sounds like a bad Xfiles episode! Where do I sign up? I want to be typecast as the plucky hacker who's shy around girls but manages to be so adorably scruffy that they fall in love with him anyway. Ideally, my love interest would be played by Jennifer Love Hewitt. Acceptable alternatives include most latin american supermodels.

    3. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by Telecommando · · Score: 1

      When I read this article I was thinking along the same lines: that many people who would be bright enough to be a asset are also bright enough to know that they would have dificulty passing a background check, a drug check, complying with a strict dress code, regular hours, ...

      I don't know what the solution is but I wonder if in this case, the military is it's own worst enemy -- deliberately disuading from service the very types of people they need to court: the open-minded, free-thinking, sociatal-challanged oddballs who look at problems differently from everyone else.

      (And before someone jumps all over me, yeah, I probably fit in there somewhere.)

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    4. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by ae1294 · · Score: 1

      How would the managers know if the people they hired to protect the system aren't a greater risk from those they are protecting from?

      I often wonder the same thing about congress and the military in general... go figure..

    5. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by definate · · Score: 1

      I don't know why you're modded funny, I've known many people who have applied for these jobs, who are smart people, driven, but are always denied these positions because of one of the things you've mentioned, but I'd add a 1:

      5 drug tests

      I've known a fair few people who have gone through everything, but failed a drug test. Often they admin they have done, or do drugs, though they usually add the caveat they would stop for the job. It can be as little as weed, and they're still out.

      --
      This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    6. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      1 make sure that half the "team" hates the other half
      2 Like pay them well
      3 thats why you would also try to keep them in "the Cave" as much as possible

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    7. Re:well stop arresting hackers for BS then by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 1

      1 most good hackers will have some sort of criminal record
      2 hackers may or may not like a normal uniform and the hair thing may be an issue
      3 when you have a group setup DO NOT VISIT DO NOT ASK "HOW" (plausible deneyability is a good thing)
      4 psych evals may be another issue

      As someone who has worked in this field for years, I'd like to set you straight.
      You are full of shit.

      That is a movie/TV idea and has nothing to do with reality. My co-workers are very damn good, and you couldn't look at any of us on the street and say we conform to any of your lame sterotypes.

      You don't have a clue.

  18. Cyber Warriors lol by hypergreatthing · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes. I know what they should do. Bring back photon and use it as a recruitment tool http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_(TV_series)

    Who in their right mind would join up with a organization which wants to call you a Cyber Warrior?

    I mean, i get it from the perspective of appropriating money that should be used for better causes and justifying your 6 figure salary and all. But this whole thing is laughable.

    1. Re:Cyber Warriors lol by jafac · · Score: 1

      well. . . tell ya what. white-hat security engineering? can have it's very interesting and fascinating moments, on the Research side.

      On the Development, and Admin side . . . frankly, EXTREME boredom. Call it "Cyber Warrior." Please. Anything. it's just fucking MOUNTAINS of paperwork, endless 5am meetings with inconsiderate east-coast goons, and ignorant motherfuckers who think THIS Windows release will be the REALLY secure one. Yay! I got a security clearance. So I can, um, do what? Oh yeah. Be secure. I'm so secure. don't mess with me man. I'm a cyber warrior. To the rescue! fuck those nasty black-hat dudes! They make us re-install Windows all the time. Assholes!

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  19. I got your cyberwarrior by Culture20 · · Score: 2, Funny
  20. Because those jobs suck. by Zeek40 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A big part of the problem is that those jobs are very unappealing. First the applicants have to get a security clearance, which weeds out all non-citizens and a good deal of other applicants, then they are forced to work in secure facilities that feel like caves or underground bunkers, and on top of that they aren't allowed to discuss what they do in anything but the most general terms. Taking a job doing cyber ops for the government is volunteering to put a giant gap in your resume that you can't discuss.

    1. Re:Because those jobs suck. by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      How many of those jobs are actually in the government? Most of our critical infrastructure (phone system, backbone, water supply, electrical supply, and so on) is privately owned and operated.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    2. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who wants to work for an agency that still requires a lie detector test. What a flipping joke, as if security clearance wasn't already bad enough.

    3. Re:Because those jobs suck. by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      This is a good point and I was wondering the same thing. Why would we need more government security guys? Its in private industry that we need better security. Sure, the government could play a hand in that, but if your company isn't taking security seriously and using vendors that tie their hands, then all the government help in the world isn't going to help.

      There's no real cyberwar going on. There's just a bazillion skirmishes between hundreds of thousands of players. The government is just one player. Private industry must up its game.

    4. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Zeek40 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I meant government contracting. Almost all of the jobs are at civilian companies, but you need a security clearance to do them, so you're operating under the umbrella of the DoD.

    5. Re:Because those jobs suck. by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      Interviewer: "It seems on your resume that there is a time period of uncertain activity. What were you doing for the last 3 years?"
      Interviewee: "Government work"

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    6. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Taking a job doing cyber ops for the government is volunteering to put a giant gap in your resume that you can't discuss.

      I don't know about you, but if I got an applicant for a position that said "I can't discuss my last job, but here's a recommendation from Colonel Muckitymuck, and no, he can't discuss what I did either. Your great grandkids might learn about it in history books though." I'd be impressed.

    7. Re:Because those jobs suck. by kismet666 · · Score: 1

      I have a clearance, bill a generous rate, work from my home in South America, work on high-impact projects, and am always learning new technologies. Maintaining the clearance and flying up to DC every month or two are the biggest hassles.

    8. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole government is privately owned and operated, even by the same people that run the phone systems.

    9. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      And who wants to work for an agency that still requires a lie detector test. What a flipping joke, as if security clearance wasn't already bad enough.

      Polygraphs are only used for TS and above. The majority of such work is only going to be at the secret level. In addition, the government does not require a drug test for a clearance (although all the large DoD contractors do - just like most large corps in america nowadays, the small ones don't necessarily).

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    10. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Zeek40 · · Score: 1

      You're not working on anything classified from your home. If you are, you're going to be in Federal prison soon.

    11. Re:Because those jobs suck. by rotide · · Score: 1

      Exactly, if you can provide proof of employment with the government on a classified project (which means you held a clearance), I'm sure your prospective employer would be more apt to choose you over Joe whose resume lists Geek Squad as his last employer. Even if your duties are entirely blank.

    12. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Anyone who has worked such a job would not be impressed. 99% of what goes on behind a security clearance is useless bullshit, just like a regular job. The only reason for restricting access is to prevent certain potentially mitigating details from being made available to those whom might find them useful.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    13. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Amouth · · Score: 1

      I'd do it but i don't want to move to the hell hole next to the bunker.. you would think that something like that would be on the level to allow telecommuting.

      as for the gap in the resume - working for uncle Sam normally isn't a bad thing to to have on it - even if you can't talk about what you did.. as long as you can point out what you have experience in and how much.

      I say that because i've never applied for a job that didn't have some type of skill based evaluation, and i've never offered someone a job without one.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    14. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I have a clearance, bill a generous rate, work from my home in South America, work on high-impact projects, and am always learning new technologies. Maintaining the clearance and flying up to DC every month or two are the biggest hassles.

      I doubt it. Or at least I believe that you are misrepresenting your involvement. Unless you work on a US military base or the like in South America you aren't doing actual classified work there because handling classified materials requires a "secure area" - and having one of those in a personal home is about as rare as hen's teeth.

      Its far more likely that your work is unclassified and is peripherally related to a classified program such that program management can justify getting you cleared for the convenience of occasionally discussing classified details in person.

      Either that, or you are working on a program that is only considered 'sensitive' (for example a criminal information database) and thus only requires the most trivial of security procedures, like using a screen-saver with a password and merely promising not to share the personally identifiable information in the database with non-program people.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    15. Re:Because those jobs suck. by kismet666 · · Score: 1

      I didn't say that I work on classified projects from my home, the purpose of the clearance is as you describe.

    16. Re:Because those jobs suck. by kismet666 · · Score: 1

      I didn't say that I work on classifed data from my home, having a clearance does not mean that you work exclusively on classified projects.

    17. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was a top-secret programmer for the Air Force, working on nuclear stuff. The jobs aren't that bad, but there is just so much wrong with the military. They base your "performance" on anything you do, work related or not. They value how "crisp" your uniform is more than how "crisp" your code is. The biggest problem is that you don't have to go much higher than squadron commander to get to where people have no clue about computers, much less programming. When you are run by those that don't know what you do, you are bound to fail.

    18. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're not working in a SCIF, you're not doing the kind of job they're talking about in this article.

    19. Re:Because those jobs suck. by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      Protecting the Secret version of the Internet is a civilian company job with a clearance. But protecting the infrastructure that provides me with water and electricity does not require any clearance.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    20. Re:Because those jobs suck. by kismet666 · · Score: 1

      You must have read a different article, its talking about all kinds of information security in the federal government, not only compartamentalized TS or other work performed in a SCIF.

    21. Re:Because those jobs suck. by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

      yeh right and when they ask you about posting about this on slashdot waht will you say ;-)

    22. Re:Because those jobs suck. by kismet666 · · Score: 1

      Posting what? I haven't said anything sensitive, and obviously the people I work with know where I reside. My last security interview was with the head security officer at the US embassy in Buenos Aires:)

    23. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Informative

      First the applicants have to get a security clearance, which weeds out all non-citizens and a good deal of other applicants,

      Don't forget that the Federal government is big on drug testing, and the people who'd do well at this job are likely to be users of a fairly harmless, naturally-growing herb which happens to be highly illegal, and whose users are routinely thrown in prison for long terms, causing other dangerous and violent criminals to be released early to make room for them.

    24. Re:Because those jobs suck. by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      Protecting bank websites, ecommerce websites, online gaming... internal corporate systems, 3rd party applications, operating systems, device drivers... THESE do not require any clearance either.

      The article is correct, there is a lot of code that has to be fixed, and there are not enough skilled/interested people to do the job right now.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    25. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming that any hacker is likely to be a marijuana smoker seems a little reaching. As a slashdot story once pointed out that smokers as a group have a lower iq than non smokers, I'd imagine that a large portion of the best hackers would not be smoking marijuana or anything that would poison your lungs and brain with tar.

    26. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Drug testing is not a requirement for a security clearance. Not even a TS or special access.

      If program management has a valid reason to suspect illegal drug use, and cares enough to make an issue of it, then they can require a test in order to maintain your clearance. But that is discretionary and if you don't give them a reason - like coming to work high, or getting arrested for possession, or doing lines with your boss at the strip club - then they won't have a reason.

      Many large employers - including DoD contractors like Lockmart, BAE, Raytheon, Grumman, etc - will do a "pre-employment drug test" but it turns out that drug testing as a condition of continued employment is generally illegal for non-safety critical jobs (and no, writing code never qualifies for that designation in this context). Small employers, including the thousands of less-than-50 employee DoD contractors, are frequently not so cowed by their corporate liability insurers as to do any drug testing at all.

      The SF-86 form that you have to fill out for a background investigation does ask if you have used illegal drugs recently. It's up to you how your answer that question. Just know that for a regular secret clearance, all they do is run a criminal and financial records check. Anything more than that, they will go out and talk to your neighbors, your friends AND your friends' friends and they will ask them lifestyle questions about you and your friends.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    27. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      First the applicants have to get a security clearance, which weeds out all non-citizens and a good deal of other applicants,

      Don't forget that the Federal government is big on drug testing, and the people who'd do well at this job are likely to be users of a fairly harmless, naturally-growing herb which happens to be highly illegal, and whose users are routinely thrown in prison for long terms, causing other dangerous and violent criminals to be released early to make room for them.

      A big mistake many people make is to lie (or omit) past drug use. This tends to end up being discovered, and then you can't get any job that requires clearance.
      What people don't realize is that past drug use, and sometimes even current drug use, does not automatically disqualify you for clearance... but lying about it does.

    28. Re:Because those jobs suck. by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 1

      This is incorrect. All of it.

    29. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Nyder · · Score: 1

      A big part of the problem is that those jobs are very unappealing. First the applicants have to get a security clearance, which weeds out all non-citizens and a good deal of other applicants, then they are forced to work in secure facilities that feel like caves or underground bunkers, and on top of that they aren't allowed to discuss what they do in anything but the most general terms. Taking a job doing cyber ops for the government is volunteering to put a giant gap in your resume that you can't discuss.

      with the exception of the security clearance, I don't see a problem with the job.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    30. Re:Because those jobs suck. by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Assuming that any hacker is likely to be a marijuana smoker seems a little reaching. As a slashdot story once pointed out that smokers as a group have a lower iq than non smokers, I'd imagine that a large portion of the best hackers would not be smoking marijuana or anything that would poison your lungs and brain with tar.

      I'm sorry, but using a slashdot story as proof of something seems a bit odd, considering the quality of stories we get here and the great editors we have.

      --
      Be seeing you...
  21. A bad deal by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The federal government has a habit of imposing soul-crushing bureaucracies on its workers.

    Probably only a very small fraction of citizens are talented and inclined to do cyberwarfare and are willing to put up with the bureaucracy.

    1. Re:A bad deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Probably only a very small fraction of citizens are talented and inclined to do cyberwarfare and are willing to put up with the bureaucracy."

      You are so right.

      Not to mention that

      a.) Many if not most of these jobs are contract positions so you not only have to deal the the soul crushing bureaucracy but also the blood sucking contract middlemen.

      b.) About 80% of the positions I see advertised (near the epicenter of the whole "cyber-warefare" thing) require that you already have a clearance because the contracting firms rarely want to pay for that.

      c.) In my experience, a lot of these positions boil down to "investigate IDS false positives all day/night long".

      At one "cyber warefare" related organization where I did a brief stint, it appeared that they simply added a deny statement to their router configs (and not just the border routers) every time they noted suspicious activity from an external IP to the point where a router config print-out was about 50 pages long and everyone was wondering why things seemed slow.

      Be afraid. Nothing good can come of this.

       

    2. Re:A bad deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put another way - Anyone smart enough for the job isn't dumb enough to take it.

  22. Shortages by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd believe in stuff like

    1. Shortages of people who patch their systems
    2. Shortages of companies who are willing to pay security specialists a decent wage
    3. Shortages of CTO's willing to pay for migration away from IE6 to something standards-compliant
    4. Shortages of armed services who'd take overweight computer professionals over 30
    5. The tooth fairy
    6. Unicorns

    But a shortage of cyberwarriors? That seems a bit far fetched.

    1. Re:Shortages by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

      Companies don't hire anybody over 50, the US (civilian) gummermint hardly has any employees under 50. As to "Hackers" If you are "good" you probably will not admit it, in fact if anybody knows about you it's probably because you aren't "good" or you are a poser/script kiddie who brags about your "exploits". The "good" ones are invisible, to uncover yourself is to invite trouble and a conviction in a US federal court show trial will prevent you from ever working again out side of the fast food industry. The people with hiring authority in the gummermint are disinterested "retired on active duty" clock-watchers who, while they may posture and make a lot of puffed-up self important noise about "cyber terrorism" etc, they don't really even understand the concepts behind the terminology. They are just waiting to retire and trying to stay out of trouble until they do.

      --
      I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
    2. Re:Shortages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I meet the army weight requirements for a 38 year old 5'10" individual. I met it at my last physical. My primary care physician still told me I was overweight.

      OTOH, base pay entering as enlisted SUCKS. And the MOS (Field 29E) Cyberwarfare would fall under also includes IED cleanup.

      I can understand why folks would avoid it.

  23. Qualifications by cdoggyd · · Score: 1

    Sounds like an interesting career. What are the education, work experience, etc. requirements? Do you have to participate in a hack-off competition against a 13 year old script kiddie?

  24. I hear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they dwell in Azeroth.

  25. Angelina Jolie available by Orga · · Score: 1

    I believe she just finished her last film up so if we need more hackers let's get her on it.

  26. Wrong shortage by flaming+error · · Score: 1

    > a severe shortage of ... [sufficiently bright people]...
    > with the skills and knowledge necessary to do battle

    How many do we need? I submit that the number of brilliant hackers we need is quite small; if any shortage exists, it will be in the botnet, not the conference room.

  27. Expensive and Job Outlook is... by Chibi · · Score: 1

    I remember looking into some Information Assurance type programs a few years ago, as the buzz about this field (especially in the government sector) was beginning to pick up (or at least when I first became aware of it). Some of these programs cost about $50,000 USD a year. It was just too expensive in my eyes. Perhaps that's just become the cost of private higher education, but that doesn't make it easier to accept. I don't recall what the starting salaries for these types of specialists were, though.

    The other concern I'd have is that a lot of organizations receiving security audits would probably not be too cooperative. We all know that government work isn't always the most attractive, and one of the challenges they face are attracting people to interesting work, not being trapped for years in a political maze.

    Perhaps high enough salaries can attract more talent, but they'd still lose out on plenty of people because of the environment. And having worked in Federal IT for a bit, it's a black hole of money and productivity. I'm sure there will be plenty of individuals and companies scrambling for their piece of this pie, but I wonder how much of a difference they'll actually make (besides to their own bottom lines)?

    --
    If all you have are silver bullets, everything looks like a werewolf.
    1. Re:Expensive and Job Outlook is... by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      If you're good at learning on your own, you can get an M.Sc. from WGU for ~15k$ ( http://www.wgu.edu/online_it_degrees/information_security_assurance_degree ).

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    2. Re:Expensive and Job Outlook is... by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Have you done this program? I was thinking the other day about looking for a program like that. Do you know how it would compare to, say, UMUC's offerings?

    3. Re:Expensive and Job Outlook is... by qbzzt · · Score: 1

      I haven't done this. I'm doing an M.Ed. in instructional design, and I'm mostly pleased with that program.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    4. Re:Expensive and Job Outlook is... by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Thanks, and good luck!

  28. The root of the problem... by stagg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...is legal and cultural. The US penalizes innovation and experimentation more than anyone. The US government is responsible for the DMCA and massive efforts to punish people for hacking their own hardware and software, ludicrous prison terms, and so forth. On top of that you have a move away from generic, "hackable" computers to walled garden, Apple style technologies. That kind of culture doesn't really nurture a generation of future hackers. We don't encourage youth people to explore technology, we want them to play by the rules and keep their noses clean. With hacking hardware and software so stubbornly discouraged, it's no wonder that not very many people have the desired skill set.

    1. Re:The root of the problem... by Americano · · Score: 3, Informative

      The US penalizes innovation and experimentation more than anyone.

      Really?! For a country that penalizes this stuff more than anybody else, we sure do whole lot of it!

      http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_res_and_dev_exp_of_gdp-economy-research-development-expenditure-gdp
      http://ideas.repec.org/a/eaa/eerese/v5y2005i5_9.html
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation#Measures

      Perhaps next time you should engage your brain before spouting off Slashdot banalities designed to curry you favor with the mods!

    2. Re:The root of the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      today's generation of kids is growing up in a padded, cushy, sterilized walled garden, with any curiosity being muffled immediately to "protect them" from themselves.

      The last "greatest generation" of "rocket scientists" in this country grew up in an environment where they could freely experiment with available technology, play pranks and live out their curiosity.
      Back then it was "OK" to mix your own black powder, blow up a few things and see what happens when you build your own 2 watt FM "pirate radio".

      Kids would build kites and balloons and learn about aerodynamics at age 4. Today, they learn how to beg mommy to buy them a new video game at WalMart.
      Teenagers would screw around with the carboureators of their '55 dodge to impress the girls when they're cruising the miracle mile. Today parents buy their teenagers a new honda civic, and kids learn how to bolt on purple neon lights..... 'cause grandpa's '55 Dodge doesnt pass Emissions Checks, and is not safe enough without 16 airbags and electronic stability control.

      Today - the only thing kid's are supposed to experiment with is pushing buttons on the remote control of their TV set.

      Most of what "cool and interesting shit" i did growing up would probably get me on a terrorist watch list in no time. (hence posting 'Anon... ;))

      With kids growing up in this "coddled" and sterile environment..... this country will be up for taking in ~50 yrs, when the last person dies who knew how to fix the electronics on a stealth bomber, or how to build a nuclear power plant.

      Has noone noticed yet that any "significant progress" was made ~30-40 years ago, and since then, we have mainly made "incremental optimizations"?

      The last two generations had any curiosity "bred out of them" and been told that "curiosity" only gets you in trouble... it's safer to stay indoors, and play by the rules.

    3. Re:The root of the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really now?

      How about the people who hack docsis cablemodems? Oh, that's right, the cable companies heavily harass them with legal trouble.

      What about the people who make the homebrew channel for the Wii? Oh, that's right-- Nintendo bricks their consoles for them.

      How about the people that hack on the PS3? Oh, Sony removed the OtherOS function, citing "piracy" concerns..

      Iphone jail-breakers?

      I think you get the idea. Next time, try to do more than just cherry pick, and actually look at the systemic problem, k?

    4. Re:The root of the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When they come, they toss flash bangs at your head, rip the front door off the hinges and zip tie you and anyone else in the residence.
      Then they wonder why no one with the necessary skill set give a fuck about THEM or THEIR big picture.
      This is a hostile government to the people, I don't need protection from the terrorists, I need protection from THEM!

    5. Re:The root of the problem... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and is not safe enough without 16 airbags and electronic stability control.

      You're actually complaining that cars are safer and more technologically advanced? You're actually *complaining* about that? Really? Wow.

      Sorry, but I'll take my 7-speed, twin clutch roadster over that '55 Dodge any day. It's a convertible. Is that unsafe enough for you?

      Damn, I hope I don't turn into a bitter old man like you.

      You entire post has been said by every generation before you, and will be said by every generation afterward.

      Cheer up and go have some fun. Get drunk and hire a hooker or something. Sheesh.

    6. Re:The root of the problem... by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

      DMCA punishes people just for TALKING about vulnerabilities. It's amazing that MS/Adobe/Apple don't push to imprison the people who find security flaws.

      Software patents also kills innovation. What the point of playing "Lego" in software when you are not allowed to use some basic blocks? If you come up with something innovative, you'll get sued into oblivion because you used applied-math that someone else owns. That means you must exit the SW patent zone to sell/distribute your software. Innovative mean you have a brain therefore another potential "Cyberwarrior", gone.

      Any country that enforces either DMCA-style laws or Software patents will be hacked into oblivious in the future.

      BTW: Cyber-anything is so 80s.

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    7. Re:The root of the problem... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Get drunk and hire a hooker or something.

      Just like playing with a chemistry set, both those things are illegal in most places. (You can get drunk legally, but you can't legally leave your home or other private place in a drunken state. This is called "drunk in public". Hiring prostitutes is quite illegal, and really quite stupid of you to suggest to someone who's complaining about too many things being illegal.)

      You're actually complaining that cars are safer and more technologically advanced?

      Actually, he's complaining that cars are harder to work on, and also that today's youth don't know how to work on cars anymore, other than bolting on lights or whatever. How many kids these days change their own oil or do other required maintenance (which even the newest cars still require)? No, they just take it to the dealership to let a "qualified technician" do it for $75/hr.

      Not all newer cars are hard to work on. The Hondas I've owned and worked on from the late 90s were quite easy to work on, in fact, but I've heard a lot of horror stories about other brands, particularly American brands. Things like having to remove the engine to change the spark plugs. There's no reason for newer, safer cars to also be hard to work on; in fact, they should be easier, because of modern 3D CAD/CAM software which makes it much easier to make sure repair/maintenance procedures are optimized before even building a prototype, but certain car companies don't bother to do this, because they can make more money for their dealerships by making repairs a nightmare. Again, I don't know about Honda's latest cars, but I've been very happy with all the ones from 1994-2001 that I've been around, and also some Toyotas from the same era. The Japanese seem to do a far better job of engineering cars for serviceability, whereas the Americans seem to intentionally design cars to be a nightmare to work on. I've seen Chryslers that require jacking the car up and removing a wheel just to replace the battery, an operation that needs to be done every 18 months here in Phoenix, and at the very worst times when it's hottest outside. With my Honda, I just get a jump-start and drive to the nearest AutoZone, and with nothing more than a 10mm wrench, the guy there replaces my battery in 5 minutes because it's easy to get to (I let him do it because the last time I did it, battery acid ate holes in my shirt!, and I'm typically wearing my work clothes when the battery suddenly dies). With a Chrysler, he'd probably tell you to take it to the dealership because it's too much trouble and he doesn't have an impact wrench handy in the parking lot to take the wheel off with, plus it's 115 degrees.

    8. Re:The root of the problem... by stagg · · Score: 1

      As a fan of 80s cyberpunk, I think the name "cyber-warrior" is a keeper. ;)

    9. Re:The root of the problem... by Americano · · Score: 1

      How about the people who hack docsis cablemodems? Oh, that's right, the cable companies heavily harass them with legal trouble.

      Examples? Are you talking about people hacking their Docsis modems to increase their connection speeds? So they're violating their terms of service, and then you're surprised when the cable company makes them stop?

      What about the people who make the homebrew channel for the Wii? Oh, that's right-- Nintendo bricks their consoles for them.

      Citation? I can find no information about Nintendo "bricking" Wiis because of Homebrew Channel being installed - I see references on wiibrew.com talking about how installing an update after installing homebrew *can* result in a brick, but that's a bit different from "Nintendo intentionally killing" the console, innit?

      How about the people that hack on the PS3? Oh, Sony removed the OtherOS function, citing "piracy" concerns..

      I see, so Sony = "The US" when it comes to penalizing "innovation" in the form of running Linux on your PS3.

      Iphone jail-breakers?

      Um. Who's being penalized for jailbreaking their iphone?

      I think you get the idea. Next time, try to do more than just cherry pick, and actually look at the systemic problem, k?

      Next time you want to discuss how the US is penalizing innovation, try discussing how the US is penalizing innovation, not how some companies have tried to limit the hacker-friendliness of a few specific pieces of hardware, and then calling the inability to install Linux on your PS3 "stifling innovation."

    10. Re:The root of the problem... by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Just because we're currently coasting on previous developments and impetus doesn't mean that the current legal system isn't stifling the next generation.

    11. Re:The root of the problem... by crndg · · Score: 1

      Because there is no control group, it's impossible to say, but the parent raises a valid point. If the U.S. Government wasn't so far in the pocket of corporate interests (a situation that has lead to the DMCA and other anti-curiosity laws), who knows how much farther ahead we would be?

      Compare this to the 1960's, as America prepared to land on the moon. (Not all of America landed on the moon, obviously--just a few crazy white guys, but you know what I mean.)

      Back then the country had goals. Mostly to beat the USSR, but still they were goals. Now we're all about short-term gains and reality TV.

      I was going somewhere with this, but now I can't see my own point through the crushing depression and loss of hope for humanity.

    12. Re:The root of the problem... by Americano · · Score: 1

      Pick a country. Any country that you consider the government to "not be in the pocket of corporate interests." Explain why they do or do not innovate more than the US. I'm interested to see what countries you consider friendlier to innovation and experimentation, because I don't really think there are a whole lot that consistently rank much higher than the US in most measures of innovation.

      Are our laws and business conditions "optimal" for innovating? Probably not. We could make some changes that might encourage a higher degree of innovation and experimentation, and I think you can make a strong case that unlimited copyright & existing patent law need some overhauls as part of that optimization process.

      But, to the point of the post I responded to - are we actively "penalizing innovation and experimentation more than anyone?" The answer there is an unequivocal "No." In fact, we are not anywhere near the bottom of the pile when it comes to restricting/penalizing/curtailing innovation and experimentation. The only reason that poster was modded "Insightful" was because it's a clever soundbite which fits nicely with the "Copyright bad, Patents bad, OSS and freedom good!" mindset of Slashdot. Moderators see snarky comments that echo that sentiment, and the immediate response is to mod it up.

    13. Re:The root of the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's one straw man who will never get to see The Wizard.

    14. Re:The root of the problem... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hiring prostitutes is quite illegal, and really quite stupid of you to suggest to someone who's complaining about too many things being illegal.

      You really couldn't tell that was a joke? Really?

      Actually, he's complaining that cars are harder to work on, and also that today's youth don't know how to work on cars anymore, other than bolting on lights or whatever.

      Ok. So? The world has moved on. People voted for safety and emission controls and performance and whatnot.

      How many kids these days change their own oil or do other required maintenance (which even the newest cars still require)? No, they just take it to the dealership to let a "qualified technician" do it for $75/hr.

      Wow. Exaggerate much? They go to Jiffy Lube and have it done for $20 and the oil gets disposed of in an approved manner. I never understood the boner "car guys" get over changing your own oil. Some of us just are not interested in working on cars and have other interests. And, yes, I used to change my own oil way back when I was in college and didn't have a fraction of the responsibilities I have now.

      With my Honda, I just get a jump-start and drive to the nearest AutoZone, and with nothing more than a 10mm wrench, the guy there replaces my battery in 5 minutes because it's easy to get to (I let him do it because the last time I did it, battery acid ate holes in my shirt!,

      OK. My Ford and my Dodge are both 5 minute battery replacements. My friend had a Mercedes where you nearly had to disassemble the rear end to replace a tail light. Another one had a Mini where it seemed a replacement part had to be shipped from Pluto it took so long. We could trade individual anecdotal cases all day and never prove anything.

    15. Re:The root of the problem... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      People voted for safety and emission controls and performance and whatnot.

      That's all fine, but it doesn't prevent car companies from making cars easy to service. These are completely orthogonal issues.

      Wow. Exaggerate much? They go to Jiffy Lube and have it done for $20 and the oil gets disposed of in an approved manner.

      No exaggeration. Go ask your dealership how much it costs to have a CV axle replaced (a pretty typical job for a car with 100,000 miles, as the rubber boots eventually wear out and crack open; it's typically much easier to replace the whole axle with a remanufactured unit than to rebuild it yourself). Their standard labor rate is probably $75/hour, plus they overcharge you on the parts. You're probably looking at $300-500 for one axle. By contrast, it costs me about $60 at Autozone for an axle with a lifetime warranty--if it ever fails, I can get a free replacement. As my labor is free, and I'm pretty quick at changing axles, this works out quite well for my and my wife's Hondas, which are both 10+ years old.

      As for Jiffy Lube, it takes more time to go someplace to have a job like that done (and wait while they do it), as to just do it myself in the garage. Plus, I don't have to worry about someone sabotaging my car, or showing me some dirty old air filter from a F-150 and claiming it's from my car and should be replaced (yes, this really happens at Jiffy Lube). Plus, I can do it on my own hours, instead of having to take time away from work. Jiffy Lube isn't open at 9PM when I'm out of work, but my garage is.

    16. Re:The root of the problem... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      No, I meant exaggerating by tying in a simple oil change with dealer service. Was that you or the other guy? I've lost track. :) I think everyone who owns a car knows what typical labor rates at the dealer are.

      I have no idea when I would have the time to learn how to replace an axle. We all have different skill sets based on our particular interests in life. You guys are saying I should be able to service a car from front to back. Behind you is the Linux guy telling be to build my own PCs from scratch, and how dare I use a higher level programming language where I can draw my GUI beforehand! Behind him is the one telling me to build my own DVR. Next to him is the guy saying I need to be a master carpenter and do all my own home improvements. And so on. Savvy? I don't want to be working 24/7.

      You labor is free only if you place no value on your time.

  29. Many problems by Caerdwyn · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    There are several serious problems at work here.

    The first is that highly-talented hacker-types tend to be very libertarian (note the small-L) in their outlook. They believe in doing everything possible to minimize governmental authority and governmental interference in private lives; recent administrations and Congresses/Senates have been dead opposites. The caliber of people that the NSA wants are tuned into what's really going on, and propaganda (meaning; lies) that the government is not spying on US citizens for the political gain of the Capitol Hill gang are not going to be believed. When a prospective employer lies to you, it speaks volumes about the contempt they hold for you and whether they can be trusted. While the NSA may indeed be concerned with protecting Americans without being intrusive, the NSA's masters in the White House and Capitol have no such concerns.

    Secondly, THIS administration has shown a willingness to retroactively throw its intelligence officers under the bus in return for political gain. When someone in the intelligence community asks "Is it okay to do [redacted]?" and are told "It's legal and approved"... four years later, they find themselves on trial. When we change administrations, the NEXT administration is going to remember this and roast THIS administration's intelligence officers over open coals. The precedent has been set. Who would ever want to take risks for a nation that holds them in contempt, and be demonized to squeeze a couple more votes out of an ignorant public?

    Then there's the pay issue. If someone is good, THAT good, they know they can strike it rich in private industry. While the NSA recruiters at Black Hat say "oh, we'll pay you very well, we want to make sure you're living well enough to be bribe-resistant", they have an east-coast idea of what "good pay" is. Founders of Silicon Valley companies, even in this day and age, are paid mighty well when the exit strategy comes to fruition. That's what the NSA has to compete with, and the bean-counters don't believe it.

    Work for evil, burned at the stake for the privilege, for less pay than other options. WHERE DO I SIGN?

    --
    Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
  30. Working for the goverment blows by malice95 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    People who are typically drawn to computers are often not very good canidates for the military lifestyle. And to become good at Securing systems or hacking them.. you need be breath, eat and sleep computers (especially hacking them).

    Hacking skills are not taught in schools and working for the goverment pays c@rp.. why would someone who spent years developing highly saught after skills work for the latest cyberwarfare agency when they could make big bucks in the private sector.

    There are plenty of highly skilled security folks out there "Defend the nation" to. I dont see any real recruitment efforts going on that are worth while.

    1. Re:Working for the goverment blows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually some will pay for your education if you agree to work for them for 2 years afterward; however it's still not even close to equivelent pay.

    2. Re:Working for the goverment blows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I second this.

    3. Re:Working for the goverment blows by Krahar · · Score: 1

      Hacking skills are not taught in schools and working for the goverment pays c@rp

      Hey nice! I love carp!

    4. Re:Working for the goverment blows by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Hacking skills are not taught in schools and working for the goverment pays c@rp..

      Right... Most hackers would surely prefer Herring.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    5. Re:Working for the goverment blows by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I will settle for nothing less than Copper River Salmon.

  31. Well, Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As an educator, specifically a computer science educator in higher education, I have to say that this is a shortage that the US has created. Let's see, if we outsource all IT jobs, and then allow various industry groups to sue the snot out of people based on their IP address; let's tell all potential students that jobs in this area can be done overseas, and that there is no reason to go into this area; let's pay low, low wages, and accept low-quality work from people who rose through the ranks due to politics rather than ability; let's reward people for paper certificates that they obtained through cram sessions and cheat sheets; let's do everything within our power to make this an unattractive field of study. And now, when bright, curious, intelligent people are needed in this field, let's wonder why they're not there.

    Cynicism - the last refuge of those people who want to simply say, "Well, duh!"

  32. Skills and knowledge AND... by terrahertz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In part, it's due to a severe shortage of computer security specialists and engineers with the skills and knowledge necessary to do battle against would-be adversaries.

    Based on my own experience, I would argue that there is a severe shortage of computer security specialists and engineers with the skills and knowledge and desire to do battle against would-be adversaries. Whether it's a personal financial concern or a personal ethical concern, there are lots of great reasons for skilled and knowledgeable experts to seek employment elsewhere.

    --
    Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.
    1. Re:Skills and knowledge AND... by Angst+Badger · · Score: 1

      Based on my own experience, I would argue that there is a severe shortage of computer security specialists and engineers with the skills and knowledge and desire to do battle against would-be adversaries.

      Same here; I got into computing, at least in part, to help people, not harm them. But even if I had any interest in working for the state security apparatus, their insistence on seeing everything in terms of "battle" is a major turn-off. Securing systems is not in any way like battle, nor is compromising your opponent's systems. Their very phrasing tells me that the people doing the hiring haven't got the faintest clue about what they're hiring for, so it wouldn't be a very appealing job opening even in an entirely benign field of work.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    2. Re:Skills and knowledge AND... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>> seek employment elsewhere.

      That's it but the clowns in Uniforms/suites don't get it. Anyone who is smart enough to do such job will realize that it is a complete waste of his/her talent to worry about these far fetched Sci-Fi scenarios presented as imminent threats by the paranoid, delusional power hungry "veterans" and "experts".

      All these clowns want to do is get more funding for their think-tank or contracts for their consultancies or projects. So they keep inventing threat after threat.

  33. Poor Recruiting by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Where are the recruiting posters, TV spots, and in-game adverts? I know the Marines and Army are looking. Where the heck does one sign up for cyber-warrior boot camp? What's the web site, email address or 1-800 number? Even the article leaves out that information. What a missed opportunity.

    Hint: hire a marketing team first.

    --
    the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    1. Re:Poor Recruiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets be honest, the Army's "Cyber Warriors" are contractors not enlisted servicemen. That's because the two cultures clash, it sounds like going to another nation is the solution for America's cyber warriors who are out of work. If the US Gov follows the business world (as they tend to) our cyber security will be outsourced further anyways.

    2. Re:Poor Recruiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hire a marketing team? From the sound of it, the current team is only a bunch of marketdroids.

      Cyberwarrior? *snort*

    3. Re:Poor Recruiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you need a bootcamp, you're not the right person for the job. If you need to be advertised to, they probably don't want you.

    4. Re:Poor Recruiting by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      Every main branch and the NSA and CSS all have their own cyber warfare units. There's a US Cyber Command established and run by the NSA to organize all of them. Of course, going into Army, Navy, Marines, or Air Force requires getting past a boot camp of skills that are completely useless to a desk jockey working out of an office building in the US. I don't know if the NSA or CSS have similar boot camps (they're both defense agency groups too, so I wouldn't be surprised). Most of the US intelligence agencies (There's 16 of them) have some jurisdiction or missions involving the internet. Probably only a handful actually go out and bring systems down on purpose, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Dept. of Energy's OICI cracks foreign systems to see what they know.

  34. That's Not What's Doing It by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    The problem is a culture of insecurity that is pervasive throughout the entire country. Corporate entities do the bare minimum required by law to enforce security "standards". Government contractors don't seem to take security into account any more than they have to either.

    I worked at Data General for a while, on their B2 secure UNIX. My job was to audit functions in the C standard library for unexpected side-effects. I have never seen another company that pays that sort of attention to security. Data General's selling point was a secure platform, and they ended up going out of business and being purchased and gutted by IBM.

    It would take a lot of work to actually mandate that the culture change for the entire government and private companies that build infrastructure components. Much easier to just pin the blame on a "lack of hackers." We'll know we're moving in the right direction when a exploit is released and a company fixes it immediately instead of blaming the people who found the exploit for releasing it.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  35. Culture by codepunk · · Score: 1

    The culture (wage,work environment, hiring, management) is all wrong to attract true talent. I would really have to be hard pressed for work to consider a government job.

    --


    Got Code?
    1. Re:Culture by Telecommando · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's pretty funny, you used the words, 'work' and 'government job' in the same sentence.

      Years ago, a friend of mine got a civie job at a heavily secured military base. The pay was good, (better than mine) and he had full benefits. He had to pass a background check, drug check and a lie detector just to get the required security clearance. He bragged to me, "Man this is some intense (stuff) I'm getting into" and I'll admit I was a bit envious.

      Once he got there he found out what the job entailed:

      At 0800 he went to the motor pool and requisitioned a hand cart, which he pushed to the supply depot. There, he signed for 3 boxes of white, 5000 page, continuous form, tractor-feed printer paper, which he carted to secured building 'A'.

      At the door, his clearance was checked, the boxes inspected to ensure they actually contained paper, and then he was escorted to a heaviliy secured, windowless room by two Marines; one wearing a sidearm, the other brandishing an M-16. (I should mention that none of the marines had any rank insignia.)

      The guards at the door let them in and he proceeded to replace the paper in the three printers in the room. After each change, he was required to press the button to print a single test page (ABCDEF...12345... etc.) and pass it to the sidearm-wearing Marine.

      The Marine would inspect the page, apparently checking that the margins hadn't been messed with and then the page was shredded on the spot.

      He did this for each printer and when finished, he was escorted back to the entrance, where he was signed out of the building.

      At this point, he was supposed to take the three (unused, mind you) boxes of paper he had just replaced to the secure document destruction building, dump them down a chute, and go pick up three new boxes of paper to be taken to building 'B', where the same proccess was followed. And then do the same for buildings 'C' and 'D'.

      That was his entire morning shift and his afternoon shift was exactly the same. Changing printer paper, five days a week.

      He soon figured out that none of these printers ever printed anything except the test pages. He marked the edge of the top page with his thumbnail when he installed the paper and the next time he went in to replace it, there was the mark, right where he had left it.

      No one at the supply depot was cleared to know what he was doing so they had no idea how many boxes of paper he was supposed to be getting each day, only that if he asked for paper, they were to give it to him.

      So he started taking the 'used' boxes of paper from building 'A' and installing them in building 'B', 'B' to 'C', 'C' to 'D' and then he'd stop over at the commisary for coffee and a snack and watch TV. As well as chat with other civie contractors, flirt with the gals behind the counter, shoot some pool or play video games (all free) and then have lunch.

      At 1300, (he wasn't allowed to start earlier) he'd take his cart of 'used' paper from building 'D' to building 'A' to start the whole process over again.

      After he finished with the second paper change at 'D' he'd take the three practically unused boxes to the shredder building, return the cart to the motor pool and go home, at least 2 hours early every day!

      He did this for nearly eight years and ended up buying a Corvette with all the money he made. But his IT skills were nearly useless by the time he left there and he had to go back to school to get back up to speed before he could get another job.

      Your military tax dollars at work.

      --
      Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    2. Re:Culture by codepunk · · Score: 1

      Yes, you pretty much summed up my experience as a govt worker. My situation was not exactly as you described but I have little doubt what you written is exactly true. If you are a worker just looking for a job then it is a great place to be. If you are however looking for a job that is career enhancing and mind stimulating, run like hell.

      --


      Got Code?
  36. You could be. But I'll disagree. by khasim · · Score: 1

    Our government needs MASSIVE improvements in their computer security. But the requirements of the government (get it secure now) are the opposite of the requirements of business (keep it just sucky enough to be able to sell the next version).

    And with that situation, no matter how many smart people you have working in government, there will always be more work than they can do. Which leads to hiring people who are less smart. And just about anyone in IT can tell you what happens when you put less skilled people in charge of a system.

    1. Re:You could be. But I'll disagree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While in the military during the 80's and 90's, a good portion of my experience was gained external to any training offered on computers, communications suites, or even security development. My collateral duties always seemed to be fixing someone's computer screwup while the people getting sent to training were for political or good 'ole boy support. I'll never forget debugging a GYK-3 series issue in my off-time only to be told that someone else (with no desire to be a programmer) was being sent to the school for diversity. At one command, the person sent to SQL training (one per year) returned to promptly ride in DIRSUP while the rest of us had to pay for our own training out of pocket and develop databases.

      I particularly liked my last command where the junior officers were sent to Visual Studio classes with absolutely no expectation of ever exercising that training. Officers do not actually perform technical work, no matter what TV fantasy you subscribe.

      The NSA has (still) a world of intelligent people they could use from the military but they would rather bitch and moan because someone else isn't taking the lead. Maybe they should lead or get new leadership. The IT personnel in the military need to be trained on IT instead of ass-kissing. Unfortunately, as long as ass-kissing generally pays more you'll get more ass-kissing.

  37. The army you wish you had... by Akido37 · · Score: 1

    'We don't have sufficiently bright people moving into this field to support those national security objectives as we move forward in time,'

    All we have are a bunch of morons here.

  38. Working on the wrong tasks by clyde_cadiddlehopper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More than 850,000 people in the US hold Top Secret clearance. There are a lot of "sufficiently bright" technologists at NSA, CIA, DOD, etc and their contractors. Perhaps the issue is more one of priority than spending?

    --
    Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
  39. Ah, better to crack'em down. by alexborges · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Go look for the idiot that started the Hacker's Crackdown in th 90's. The result of this attitude was to either push some kids to the edge where the russian mob recruited them in on form or another, or plain make them corpodrones, albeit very good at typing crap into a cisco console, but perfectly worthless in the underlining of the net.

    Bravo, idiots, might I remind you that here in the net, we forsaw and told you about this. And now you come complainin....

    --
    NO SIG
    1. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This will just be another case of Problem, Reaction, Solution.

      They already know what they want, this is just their horse and pony
      show to justify what they will do to get it.

      Likely some more Visa workers to drive down wage costs.

      I did a search for CISSP jobs and that ilk and there is not
      thousands of them out there waiting to be filled.

      I call Deja moo.

      Deja moo is like Deja Vu, but it refers to having heard this BS somewhere before.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    2. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 4, Informative

      On monster.com I had the grand total of 11 hits for the whole US.

      Deja moo might be an understatement.

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    3. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by BenVis · · Score: 1

      This 'Cyber-warrior gap' discussion echoes a similar discussion about the 'Science gap'. One perspective is that not enough smart people are going for a particular career. Another perspective is that actually the smart people consider that career, and decide pursuing that career is for chumps.

      If you want to attract smart people, you need to make the career look good. In the science gap, the career is unappealing because the effort/reward ratio is unfavorable (get a Ph.D., do some post-docs, then hope a search committee picks you out of the hundreds or thousands of other applicants for one of the three jobs opening up this year in which you might eventually be offered a permanent job). It sounds like for "cyberwarriors" the situation is similar: spend your time doing stuff that might get you arrested or that nobody cares about and then hope the government suddenly decides to actually start hiring.

      --
      "Preceded by itself yields falsehood" preceded by itself yields falsehood.
    4. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I'm not sure that NSA's Information Assurance Directorate advertises on Monster. That seems like it would be counter-productive. I think there are more jobs (certainly more than 11), but they're the ones that either you have to go looking for SPECIFICALLY and not just casually come across, or where they come to you.

      I heard the story on NPR yesterday morning as I was driving to work, and it sounded like they were counting in all the government, intelligence and military positions, too -- not just corporate positions. And they're not going to fill the black-bag gigs or core routing positions at tier1 ISPs, or the blue-badge jobs, with H1B visas.

      I think another part of the problem is that a lot of the people who have the skills and knowledge to do this type of work very well are also the same people who don't particularly support the organizations that do it, often times because of wildly inaccurate assumptions fed by crazy Hollywood story lines.

    5. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      I think another part of the problem is that a lot of the people who have the skills and knowledge to do this type of work very well are also the same people who don't particularly support the organizations that do it, often times because of wildly inaccurate assumptions fed by crazy Hollywood story lines.

      Or, perhaps, because of things like warrantless wiretapping, and not wanting to work on enabling the government to spy on everyone.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    6. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a pretty decent set of security credentials myself (including a security focused masters, patents and active in several security working groups) and my monster resume focused on security got little interest as well. My other, plain vanilla engineer resume got me a job.
      There is no demand for security in the industry inless you are focused only on IT (Im a software/system architect).

    7. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couple of points:
      1. The folks that they likely want to hire probably don't possess CISSP certs.
      2. The folks that want to do the hiring probably don't advertise on Monster.com.
      3. The folks that they need to hire probably aren't especially interested in working in highly structured environments.

    8. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      On monster.com I had the grand total of 11 hits for the whole US.

      Don't look for job advertisements. Look for contract advertisements (not for individual contractors but actual contracts to provide services) - there is a regular (daily?) publication from the federal government that contains pretty much all federal contracts (everything except the ones that you have to be cleared to even learn exist in the first place), I think its the Federal Register, but I really can't remember the name off the top of my head.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny that you mentioned this, because this is exactly why I have vowed never to work for the NSA, despite the fact that they recruit out of the (mostly machine learning) conferences I go to like crazy. I did not spend the better part of a decade preparing for a career illegally and immorally spying on people's phone conversations.

    10. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out www.usajobs.com and search for computer security. There are lots and lots of hits. A lot of the listings have multiple openings too.

    11. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by rcamans · · Score: 1

      Deja Boo Hoo

      --
      wake up and hold your nose
    12. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by White+Flame · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the public school system's increasing destruction of any sort of creativity or outside-the-box thinking/behavior of students, strict punishment of students who are smarter than their teachers (who are treated increasingly poorly, and losing the better ones), and extra rewards to sub-par performers.

      They actually expected "sufficiently bright people" to continue to rise from that system?

    13. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      I like your Deja moo and vote for it to become accepted phrase amongst /. readers...as it seems a lot of stories are deja moo!

    14. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So maybe monster.com isn't the best place to look for CISSP jobs... there are 337 jobs matching keyword 'CISSP' on clearancejobs.com alone. Go to a specific company's career website, if the company does IT work there will be plenty. There's a whole lot more to the world of job searching than monster.com.

    15. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to look at USAjobs.gov, the fed own monster.com. There are 104 jobs in the US for "Cyber security"

      Also the post stated that people lacked the qualifications. I am sure that one of the qualifications is the ability to work like a dog for shitty pay and be brow beat by an idiot manager.

    16. Re:Ah, better to crack'em down. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      On monster.com I had the grand total of 11 hits for the whole US.

      And scarily, there were none for deep undercover spies in Russia or for elite Special Forces snipers. Your country is really going down the pan.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  40. here you go, folks. free code. by swschrad · · Score: 1

    if (ugly or terrorist or other_party or undesireable)

    then (set off required little bomb in computer)

    endif

    you're welcome. the definitions table is up to you.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  41. Impossible art.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't get into this field legally because of the DMCA...

  42. They do employ them as informants. by elucido · · Score: 1

    So I guess its not traditional employment because its an offer the hacker cannot refuse.

  43. There isn't a shortage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Anyone who has ever worked in government IT knows that it is the last place for a competent person. The average bureaucrat considers IT to be one of the easiest ways to launder kickbacks for party supporters. Competence ONLY gets in the way. Worse, they'll even try to get you to make that slop work. Fall on your swords now, "cyberwarriors". (snort!)

    1. Re:There isn't a shortage by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is a shortage. I do security code reviews and we have a challenging time finding good people. The prepress report talks about a lot more than dusty old government jobs.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
  44. YouTube by nOw2 · · Score: 1

    Could it be because they're recruiting from the wrong place?

    All the keyboard warriors seem to have moved to the YouTube comments section. If they're still recruiting Internet hardmen from Usenet then they'll not be getting the best.

  45. Not enough incentive by __aajbkr4289 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work for a local government agency and have over 20 years experience in IT, with almost 10 in security. Due to a "small world" situation, my name came across the desk of someone at the FBI. I was informally asked what level of interest I would have working for them. I asked the guy several questions and came away with the following: Take a substantial pay cut, move my family over 400 miles away from most of our relatives, forfeit the retirement at my current employer, go through the FBI academy (no desire to go through another boot camp at my age). About the only upshot to the whole thing would be some good training. I'm sure there are jobs with other federal agencies, but I imagine that except for the academy, all of the other negatives apply. The thing that got me about this is that my skills are nowhere in the ballpark of what I imagine should be the skillset for this type of job. Maybe they're targeting people that they feel can be groomed into the position, but it seems to me that if they're going to take the issue seriously, they would be going for some top dogs and offering some real incentives to those people.

  46. The enemy is not who you think they are. by vlm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    necessary to do battle against would-be adversaries. The protection of US computer systems essentially requires an army of cyberwarriors

    Who is the enemy? If you think its a nebulous "them", then you're wrong, its us.

    "security" where I work is primarily focused on giving as many employees parking tickets as possible, monitoring our every move (although car breakins are of course not monitored), protecting the company from downsized employees, and generally being bullies.

    I can assure you that "leet cyberwarriors" are not going to be used against enemy nation of the week, but against Americans. Against people with the mistaken idea they live in a free country. Against anyone standing in the way of the big corporations that pay for our elections. Against anyone whom does not understand they exist to serve the govt, not the other way around.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:The enemy is not who you think they are. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget your tinfoil helmet. All the l33t computer warriors wear them.

  47. Hackers in uniform??!! by BangaIorean · · Score: 1

    Hackers, in general, tend to detest interference and authority. Hard to think of hackers in a top secret Government agency taking orders and working 9AM to 5PM, in an extremely straitjacketed environment. More importantly, I'm guessing the wages wouldn't be great

  48. They are full of it... by elucido · · Score: 1

    The economy as it is right now has plenty of talented individuals just waiting to get hired. Theres 10% unemployment so there is no shortage of the labor force, as for qualifications these are skills which aren't learned in school so the government must already know who does what, they have enough fbi informants and others who gather information on anybody with any shred of credibility as far as computer skills go.

    So either they people they want to hire would rather remain unemployed than work for them (which means the job must suck and not pay well), or they are using this shortage as an excuse to raise the pay rates. The fact is theres plenty of people from the dot com bubble or from before that, who would be qualified to do most of this. Most of the people on slashdot have the skills to do the job, now the security clearance on the other hand thats where there will be shortages of qualified individuals.

  49. Obligatory Dr. Strangelove reference? by timepilot · · Score: 1

    General Turgidson: "Mister President! We must not allow... a NERD gap!"

  50. Privatise it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    let the market sort it out!

  51. We need a boot camp for this with out the PT / yel by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    We need a boot camp for this with out the PT / yelling in your face part.

    Also open it up to the people who are good with systems but not with dealing with people / PHB BS.

  52. BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone knows that before 9/11, the pentagon had a ton of computer security contracts out to private companies. After 9/11, they cancelled or failed to renew those contracts. Frankly, they needed the money for bullets. Now, nine years later, surprise surprise, they are hugely behind in computer security.

    There's lots of talent out there. Part of the problem is that they are ignoring all of the talented young CS graduates who are only a few credits away from being 'security experts.' Hire CS graduates. Train them. Problem solved.

  53. Exploit rewards are a joke by HiveMind118 · · Score: 1

    I could have gone into security but whats the point? Working for the government is not an ideal job (see posts about offices like caves and inane security clearance requirements). If you lucky enough to have gotten a job in the security industry instead of the gov't things tend to go like this: Any new exploit you find will either be (a) swept under a rug by the vendor, (b) accepted as an exploit but never patched, or (c) get the researcher sued by the vendor. If by some small chance you end up finding an exploit for a vendor that actually pays for such knowledge, the average is about $500 per exploit I believe. Not really worth a month of my time no matter how you look at it. If we want a security industry, we have to foster a security industry, not try and hide the fact that we need one (as most companies do now).

  54. They arrest them, turn them into CIs. by elucido · · Score: 1

    A CI is as close as a hacker ever will get to working for the government. Nobody volunteers to be a CI so they are forced into it. The option is usually to continue getting raped in prison, or become a CI. The problem is the life of a CI generally sucks.

    So no hacker is going to be able to really become a government employee. The hackers broke a federal law and this disqualifies them from ever serving in an official capacity. Why? It's so difficult to get security clearance that felons have no chance.

    So the government still has options. They can approach the hackers who never committed a felony. They can approach the ones who were smart enough to never get caught. They can approach individuals who have a lot of experience programming, or doing the type of work they need, or they can just take talented young individuals and train them just like the marine corps and army does.

    I think if they are serious they should train the cyber warriors themselves.

    1. Re:They arrest them, turn them into CIs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's a CI?

  55. If you train them, they will come by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

    If the U.S. government were to offer training and good-paying jobs in "cyber warfare" or whatever they want to call it, I believe there are plenty of people who would rise to the opportunity. Full scholarships, retraining for displaced professionals, that sort of thing. What they seem to expect instead is an unlimited pool of highly skilled, motivated workers all ready to hit the ground running as soon as a job is (eventually) created for them. It doesn't work like that.

    When they say "critical shortage of talent," read "critical shortage of people already highly trained yet inexplicably unemployed (or willing to take a massive pay cut to leave private industry for a government job)." In other words, they're basically whining about not wanting to pay enough.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  56. Open it up to Rain Man like people who are good wi by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Open it up to Rain Man like people who are good with computers but are pass over for the army over there Autism / other things like it. There are people with stuff like Autism who can do good just as long is there some way to keep the all the non tech work bs way from them.

  57. Defcon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they should get themseleves down to Defcon next week and bag themselevs a few cheap white hats (or should that be green hats if you work for a .gov?)

  58. This could result in HUGE changes by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Every time the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) gets involved, big changes will occur. In this case, if the government/military gets serious about this, it could mean serious changes for the industry. The internet, PCs an other gear have essentially grown up in peace-time. The focus has been on user-friendliness, ease of use, (paying for) upgrades and updates and the like... all very consumer oriented and "defective by design" keeps people buying more and more. It's a great model for consumerism, but not great for the military/government.

    And if they are to get serious, we will see a better Windows (because let's face it, Microsoft WILL change if they want to keep selling to the government) and increased focus on secrecy and privacy in computing/data processing technologies. Undoubtedly, I would also expect to see even more development of Linux as well. (I can't imagine what involvement Apple might have but I presume little to none.)

    But one thing is always true -- the military industrial complex creates lots of action and lots of change. The focus will mean improvements of great interest to IT people. Of course, I would also be concerned about any legislative action and change that might come of it as well.

  59. Check IRC, or AOL chatrooms, train script kiddies. by elucido · · Score: 1

    We don't have sufficiently bright people

    well DUH, the 'cyber warriors' that the government wants are hard to find. mostly because they are either trained IT security professionals or a kid who figured out how to hack his school to change his grades. the first of the 2 will be easy to get with the increase in IT students. however unlike china, there is sever punishment for committing cyber crimes. china and other countries have the right idea of hiring the hackers instead of locking them away like we used to do

    There is almost always a script kiddie in there somewhere. They can take these kids and train them to be cyber warriors. You can take a script kiddie and train them to be an elite hacker. This is probably easier than expecting elite hackers to work for the government which spends all its time trying to arrest them.

    It's simple, most of the time if a hacker is bold enough to change their grades they've already broken federal laws. The difference between the script kiddie and the elite hacker is a difference in scope and goals. The elite hacker wants to hack elite entities like big corporations, or very important individuals, while the script kiddie just defaces websites and hacks people over IRC or whatever.

    The point is the government has the resources to take every script kiddie in America and train them to be a cyber warrior if it were as necessary as they make it out to be. You don't learn to be a script kiddie in school, you don't learn to be a hacker in school, but if you have the instinct to be either one of these you can be trained to become an elite cyber warrior. It's about finding the people who have the instinct.

  60. There's probably a good reason why... by pongo000 · · Score: 1

    ...the government can't get qualified applicants. Go to usajobs.gov and search for "computer security specialist." You'll find that many of the job requirements require an existing TS clearance, previous military/DoD experience, a PhD and/or three years of graduate work, and/or less than 24 hours notice for travel, etc. It would appear to me, based upon the results of this unscientific survey, that the job requirements themselves effectively rule out many who would otherwise be qualified.

  61. There is no shortage. by AnonymousClown · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Government mouth piece is talking out of his ass.

    There are plenty of people who know how is just that the knowledge leads to suspicion by law enforcement and practice of said skills are illegal.

    It's the same thing if this guy said, "There aren't enough people who know how to murder and our spy agencies are having a hard time finding assassins! "

    --
    RIP America

    July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    1. Re:There is no shortage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse than that, this is a clear cut case of targeted marketing. And it's being implemented stupidly, I might add.

      "ZOMG, we have a shortage of h4xorz for national defense!" C'mon.....if this is to attract the desperately unemployed techies with some skills, dream on. Odds are, if they REALLY have the skills they actually need for their cybertheatre operations, then they are probably NOT looking to work for the U.S. government, anyways.....not enough money in it.

      More likely, as the above poster suggested, they're fishing for idiots at the bottom of the food chain so as to get leads on whoever's paying them to circumvent their security, so that they can justify more "War on Terror" funds for the DHS. That, and to plug any activist leaks that might bring light to some of the more heinous activities being committed in the NAME of National Security, without actually securing anything but the status quo for the powers that be.

      The really stupid part comes in where publicly announcing this "deficiency" is effectively the equivalent of parading in front of our adversaries in tights whilst pinning a C-note to their own posterior, yelling out "come aand get it!" whilst carrying a tub of petroleum jelly in hand.

      And just think, your tax dollars might actually PAY for this inanity.

  62. They're doing it wrong! by sea4ever · · Score: 1

    You don't hire them.
    You start a project on Sourceforge requesting help.

  63. It's not easy to get into the airforce. by elucido · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In fact getting into the military is very difficult right now precisely because there is no shortage of people trying to enlist. So to tell people to enlist or talk to a recruiter is not that simple. Also most hackers probably wear glasses or have other issues which will completely rule them out from the military service. So unless the military somehow makes exceptions, the vast majority of hackers just aren't going to get accepted into the army nevermind the airforce.

    USA jobs? That's useless as well. Unless they are lucky enough to come from a military family and be born with top secret clearance, they aren't going to have top secret clearance and without that they wont be hired for the vast majority of jobs at USAjobs. On top of that, veterans have preference at USAjobs so even if the job does not require clearance if someone is a veteran they'll be chosen for the job instead. On top of all of this there is no shortage of people trying to get jjobs on USA jobs. So there is a very slim possibility of getting a job from USA jobs and probably not worth the time of applying unless you want to take a gamble.

    1. Re:It's not easy to get into the airforce. by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      .."probably wear glasses or have other issues which will completely rule them out from the military service"

      wearing glasses does not disqualify you from military service.

    2. Re:It's not easy to get into the airforce. by elucido · · Score: 1

      .."probably wear glasses or have other issues which will completely rule them out from the military service"

      wearing glasses does not disqualify you from military service.

      I know that, I just chose a bad example. Having asthma on the other hand will disqualify you and a lot of people who live in urban areas and who have skills have asthma.

    3. Re:It's not easy to get into the airforce. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There may not be a shortage of people trying to enlist, but with a college degree, one might become an officer quite successfully. Furthermore, however bright 17-year-olds may be as hackers, there is large difference between single-user hacking and systematically protecting the national computer grid. E.g., the Air Force alone has over 700,000 computer systems broken into hundreds of networks and intranets--and the AF is but one part of the Department of Defense, and indeed the entire US Government.

      The problem, I imagine, is that Microsoft and Google pay a lot more for the brightest minds than any security company, including the US Gov't, ever will. Why protect the country when you can protect Apple/Cisco/Microsoft/etc for 5x the pay?

    4. Re:It's not easy to get into the airforce. by raddan · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, this is what ruled me out. After high school, I was being hounded on the telephone by an army recruiter (I was not interested). I tried various responses (Me: "I'm gay", Him: "Our modern military takes all kinds!"), but when I finally gave up and started answering his interview questions in earnest, and mentioned that I had asthma, the calls stopped immediately. This was c.1997.

    5. Re:It's not easy to get into the airforce. by Haxzaw · · Score: 1

      Actually, you're a bit misinformed about USAJobs.gov. While it is true that veterans with compensable disability have preference, they must still be qualified for the job. A lack of security clearance isn't a problem unless you are unable to get one due to past history, the government will happily do a background check and if eligible you'll get a clearance. Yes, there are a lot of people applying, but again, if you're the best qualified, you'll get the job, and if the Government is having trouble finding cyberwarriors, none of what you mentioned is an issue, and certainly not worthy of the "interesting" mod your post earned.

    6. Re:It's not easy to get into the airforce. by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Or eczema. I have a silly little patch on my arm that -might- get irritated if the stars align correctly... but nope, sorry.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  64. Want talent? Bring money. by couchslug · · Score: 1

    Uncle Sugar isn't exempt from having to pay for talent, or from having to pay that talent to do work they may not enjoy under conditions of employment they surely won't enjoy.

    Want badazz hackers? Cough up enough money to get their attention.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  65. apple lock down is greed and the fcc wants to open by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    apple lock down is greed and the fcc wants to open it up.

    Just think how fast the FTC smack down M$ if they tried to lock down windows in that way.

  66. How about making better software that is where the by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    How about making better software that is where the big holes are.

    Super locked work sometimes but for all.

    Even if a super locked down os what is the point if the app is easy to hack on it's own.

    Not putting it on the network does not work that well when you need to talk to other systems.

    Why can't we have more of the hard to hack cable and sat systems!

  67. The private sector is not hiring, lets be real. by elucido · · Score: 1

    People who are typically drawn to computers are often not very good canidates for the military lifestyle. And to become good at Securing systems or hacking them.. you need be breath, eat and sleep computers (especially hacking them).

    Hacking skills are not taught in schools and working for the goverment pays c@rp.. why would someone who spent years developing highly saught after skills work for the latest cyberwarfare agency when they could make big bucks in the private sector.

    There are plenty of highly skilled security folks out there "Defend the nation" to. I dont see any real recruitment efforts going on that are worth while.

    The government does have the advantage of a weak economy. This means that the vast majority of hackers you mention will be unemployed. No the private sector is not hiring hackers because the private sector is looking for people with relevant work experience, not just skill and talent.

    And you are right there are no recruitment efforts at all. That is probably the main reason they cannot find anyone. If they go to IRC they'd probably find some people, theres chatrooms they could go to if they want to recruit people. It's not difficult to find script kiddies, they are literally everywhere.

    Are they going to be a world class hacker? Probably not, but thats because being a world class hacker leads to a prison cell. This is why even when people have the talent to be world class hackers, they don't actually want to become world class hackers. The US government in my opinion will have no problem finding individuals who have the technical skill to be cyber warriors, as thats not going to be difficult to find. What will be difficult to find is people who can handle the top secret security clearance.

    As far as the job goes, it's probably stuff an ordinary script kiddie can do, and if the script kiddie can't do it they can be trained by experienced cyber warriors in how to do it. I don't see it as a big deal finding people unless there is some political concern. And I'm not buying the idea that there aren't enough bright people on the internet, as that assumption isn't based on reality.

    1. Re:The private sector is not hiring, lets be real. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No the private sector is not hiring hackers because the private sector is looking for people with relevant work experience, not just skill and talent.

      It's worse than that. The private sector is only hiring people with exactly applicable work experience, in the particular technologies used for that position. So if the position is using Python, and you have experience in Perl, C, C++, and a dozen other languages besides Python, you're not qualified for the position. Or, if the position involves writing software for financial applications, and you have 10+ years of experience writing similar software for a different industry, then they don't want you because you don't have experience in their particular industry.

  68. See you at the next 2600 meeting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Minneapolis, MN Plus the coffee shop that hosts the meetings here has $1 PBRs :)

  69. Well I'll be... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    spend the last couple decades solving all technological security issues by branding hackers as criminals. Furnish them with outrageous civil and criminal penalties. Then you wonder why there isn't a ready supply of "sufficiently bright" individuals to lock down systems. They've been telling you all along these systems are unsafe and wide open to attack. They even provide you with step by step directions of how they can be exploited so that it can be fixed. How do you reward them? You throw them in jail! Well played sir.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  70. Exactly. by elucido · · Score: 1

    If they actually had a cyber warrior bootcamp where they take a script kiddie and train them to be a cyber warrior, they'd probably have hundreds of thousands of people sign up. The reason they can't find anyone might be because they aren't actively recruiting.

  71. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no shortage of security experts. It's just that most of them are not from the 'Norman Rockwell' background the intelligence services are hoping for, and are far more intelligent than the PHBs in charge in these places. What this alleged shortage is really about is conning idiots into going to a Kaplan/Devry-type diploma mill for-profit private 'universities' to get a piece of paper saying that A) You are stupid enough to be conned into paying for a useless 'education' (and clearly are not smart enough to be a threat), and B) you have the training needed to operate point-and-click commercial 'security' software.

    They don't want actual experts, they want drones.

  72. Re: Future Job Skill = dead end. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you think are the future job possibilities for this? Talk with the interviewer: I was a cyber security warrior/hacker who tried to break into other computers at a moments notice. Hmmm, where are the engineering and software development skills necessary to do this when one has been trained to further mankinds knowledge and the bottom line of ones future company in making a product?????

    Looks like dead-end job to me and boring...regardless of what they pay!

    If worse comes to worse, it is easier to disconnect the network cable to the outside world and reload the computer system to get rid of the attacks and the so-called cyberwar is over in about an hour...

  73. Obviousman to the rescue! by zmollusc · · Score: 1

    You know how Teh Eevil Terrarists were going to crash every aircraft in the world into New York, but the gov spent $90 gazillion on Homeland Security and prevented it?

    And how Evil Sadam Husane was going to obliterate the west with his Nucular warheads, but the gov spent $90 gazillion on some wars and prevented it?

    Maybe, just maybe, if Teh CybarWar Dept was to pay its warriors at a higher rate than bankers and lawyers get, smart people would be clamouring to demonstrate their skillz ( in cybercombat against the existing warriors for control of mock-up systems ) and get a job. And it might cost less than $90 gazillion.

    --
    They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
  74. Intelligence isn't the issue by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

    The problem is that real security work doesn't pay the bills. Oh sure, you can make tons of money as a pen tester. But how many people make more than a pittance looking for new security vulnerabilities in the legitimate market? Not enough to justify specializing in it. I could have gone into security -- I enjoyed writing the occasional buffer overflow attack in high school -- but the only people willing to pay you to do this for a living are also the people that are willing to kill you and your family if you screw up.

  75. They're hiring. by blair1q · · Score: 1

    I won't repeat myself on this:

    http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=14443498

    I'll just point out that the sensationalist version of this got posted to /.

    And that if you think you can do a better job than they can, here's your chance.

  76. There's no shortage by Atrox666 · · Score: 1

    There are lots of us.

    Unfortunately for them, any (icky term) "Cyber warrior" who isn't a masochist or mentally defective is not on the government's side. A few kids trying to legitimize their egos occasionally try to get some validation there but most of them are script kiddies.

    The spit shined, brush cut types the military loves tend not to be able to think laterally which is cripling for this kind of work.

  77. I've been trying... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to become a cyberwarrior, but my team lead keeps having me interview people and auditing STIG compliance! That's government security for you. Is this registry value set to 0? Yes? Rock on, we're secure!

  78. Stupid polygraph by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many real hackers - and I am not talking about some dude who took a 5 week certified ethical hacker cert - are going to be stupid enough to take a full scope polygraph?

    And if they were that dumb, how many would pass?

  79. This story is a crock by QuantGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This story is the biggest bunch of BS.

    I listened to this story on NPR. Instead of actually relying on hard data, the reporter simply found someone who estimated there are only 1,000 qualified "cyber" professionals in the US. The source presented no hard data, just a gut feel that there aren't enough people. This figure is about as well-sourced as the claim (often repeated) that the underground malware economy is bigger than the market for illegal drugs.

    Meanwhile, instead of calling outside the beltway, NPR also called up Alan Paller, the head of the SANS Institute, who parroted the same line. How Paller can say that there are less than 1,000 qualified security professionals with a straight face is beyond me. SANS claims to have trained over 150,000 people. Does that mean that 99% of their "graduates" are therefore unqualified?

    The worst part about this is that NPR did not even bother to disclose Paller's blatant conflict of interest. Contrary to popular belief, SANS is NOT a non-profit. It's in business to make a buck. I can't think of a better way to plump up the attendance rolls than to manufacture scare stories about "shortages" of professionals.

    I've got no real issues with Paller other than the fact that he's just another garden-variety huckster. I've got a bigger problem with NPR, who was just plain sloppy.

    1. Re:This story is a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your first mistake was listening to NPR in the first place.
      Your second mistake was then telling everyone about your first mistake.

  80. The answer is obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When was the last time you saw military recruiters at HOPE or Defcon talking about the how important we are to protecting freedom and democracy? And how many of these "cyber warriors" do you think are in prison for non-violent crimes of curiosity?

    1. Re:The answer is obvious by spiffmastercow · · Score: 1

      1999 I think it was.. That was the last time I went to Defcon, and there were tons of Feds giving speeches about how much they needed good hackers.

  81. Let's bring this to meaningful context... by Aphoxema · · Score: 1

    I don't believe we need more "cyberwarriors" for a "cyberwar" with "cyberterrorists", but on the whole we certainly could use more in the way of competent, every day users who won't install every bit of shit on their computer because they're aware of the risks and who can independently reinstall their OS if they get compromised.

    The harm isn't in people not knowing how to "cyberfight", it's not understanding the value of "cyberdefense". It is all the compromised home computers and small business servers that create weapons that can hurt our ability to communicate and look at porn.

    --
    "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  82. If Banks can protect their systems... by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 1

    and people are willing to trust them with their life savings, why can't the government get it done. What's the difference between protecting a financial transaction and a national security secret?

    Furthermore, why not just hire Bruce Schneier!!!

  83. They want drones, not experts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no shortage of security experts. It's just that most of them are not from the 'Norman Rockwell' background the intelligence services are hoping for, and are far more intelligent than the PHBs in charge in these places. What this alleged shortage is really about is conning idiots into going to a Kaplan/Devry-type diploma mill for-profit private 'universities' to get a piece of paper saying that A) You are stupid enough to be conned into paying for a useless 'education' (and clearly are not smart enough to be a threat), and B) you have the training needed to operate point-and-click commercial 'security' software.

    They don't want actual experts, they want drones.

  84. Go the dark or the "bright" side? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who can afford to gain official certification? Taking SANS classes (or similar) is akin to going to college for 4 years at your local state campus. Too expensive for many.

    If you practice the craft on your own and polish your skills you're classed as a parent's basement dwelling nerd by the business world (and even fewer people take you seriously) and are subject to interest/scrutiny from the government.

    In either case, you can emerge with great skills and go nowhere fast as businesses are still in the dark or passing the blame on the security game. Accordingly the pay and benefits are also all over the place.

    Until businesses and organizations take security seriously, this is a waiting game to see how things evolve in the world and hope that the thrashing doesn't get too harsh...

  85. You know, I would happily apply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    You know, as a U.S. citizen with a data systems security background, university degrees, CISSP, etc., I would happily apply for work with the U.S. government.

    However, every position I've discovered requires an existing security clearance, something you cannot just go out and get, at any price.

    1. Re:You know, I would happily apply by iamwahoo2 · · Score: 1

      Or training from some US Government specific training center for some internal government certification.

  86. three letter acronym needed by zelik · · Score: 1

    They need to attach a cool sounding 3 letter acronym. FBI, CIA, CID (not USA), etc... sounds cool. The latest acronyms the white house have been coming up with just suck.

  87. Is there ever not a "desperate shortage" ? by walterbyrd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have been in IT for 30 years. I started in the USAF, and went on to work for defense contractors. Have held several clearances, including top secret. Have degrees in math and comp sci. I am presently long term unemployed.

    It seems to me that these "desperate shortage" articles come out routinely. No matter how many major IT layoffs, or how many CS grads can not find a job, or how depressed wages are for IT pros.

    Why are these articles never specific? Exactly what skills do they need that they find so hard to fill? Exactly what credentials are they looking for: BSCS, PhD, CISSP, CCIE, or what?

    Why do these articles seem to reek of corporate/government propaganda?

  88. Stop mistreating introverts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If people in our society would stop mistreating introverts and encourage their introspection instead of attacking them emotionally, socially, physically, etc., then their would be sufficient numbers of smart AND decent people to fight cyberwars. But...that's what our society gets for NOT thinking!!

    The deeper problem is rooted in our society turning from the knowledge and understanding of God through His Word. If Americans would turn back to God, then they wouldn't have to oppress each other to enforce decency and introverts wouldn't be treated as badly as they are. Start with the 10 commandments taught to children in school - that would raise the bar of decency so that we wouldn't have to rely on oppressing ourselves through culture, excessive policing, and ostracizing people who don't fit the norm in order to "keep the peace."

    The way our society is now, we over-compensate for our lawlessness by creating a false definition for what's normal and socially acceptable. Then, we assume anyone who does not meet that norm must therefore be one of the lawless ones and attack those. True, in some cases, it does suppress lawless behavior that would otherwise undermine our "ethics," but it's not wholesome in that it hurts innocent people in the process. The ONLY solution is turning back to God, who gave us this great country in the first place!

  89. Advertise! by SeanFlotre · · Score: 1

    They ought to advertise the way the military does..make it all glam and junk. "I'm Dale and I'm a Cyber Warrior..hiyaaa!" smash some foreign guys computer to bits. Fox would be all over that.

  90. Hiring practices by pootypeople · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good IT guys don't want to go through the nonsense associated with these positions. They can get jobs with private industry that don't have the headaches. I live in the Washington area and there are plenty of IT jobs here. You just have to have a TS/SCI or plan to get one. I'm much happier not having the FBI asking my neighbors questions and crap like that.

  91. Where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will be graduating with a CS degree in the spring and would love to get into the field, however there is a glaring problem.

    1. Most if not all of those I have talked to within my class have no interest in a military career, we don't want to go into the military or be classified as a "soldier".
    2. There is no job listings for entry level CS careers in computer security, look around if you want, you will not find one.
    3. I have heard tons of posts and information about this issue but have yet to see an a job to start doing this, they all require vast amounts of experience and knowledge not provided by current education.

    As someone who is very interested in the subject, I have no ability to go into the field. They want security experts but are not willing to train them. Basically its like saying, we need more fighter pilots, apply if you already are one.

    I would love some insight on getting into the field beyond the generic, read a book, take a class, all things which at the end of the day mean nothing as far as experience.

  92. Cyer Warrior by kaoshin · · Score: 1

    I'm the trouble starter, frakkin' instigator
    I'm DRM restricted, license terms dictated

    I'm a cyberwarrior, terrific cyberwarrior
    You're the cyberwarrior, twisted cyberwarrior
    I'm a cyberwarrior, terrific cyberwarrior

    I'm the noob you hated, ego over-inflated
    Yeah. I'm the brain you wasted, drag dropped and copy pasted

    I'm a cyberwarrior, terrific cyberwarrior
    You're the cyberwarrior, twisted cyberwarrior

    I'm what you disgusted, kind vindicator
    Yeah. I'm work inundated, twisted code creator

    I'm a cyberwarrior, terrific cyberwarrior
    You're the cyberwarrior, twisted cyberwarrior
    I'm a cyberwarrior, terrific cyberwarrior... warrior... warrior... Warrior...

    1. Re:Cyer Warrior by MaxiCat_42 · · Score: 1

      That would sound good with Keith Flint singing it.

      Phil.

  93. Fuck the feds! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    As an infosec professional, why in the hell would I ever want to work for the feds? The amount of regulations, bureaucratic requirements and searches of my asshole makes me run the other way. Not to mention the pay is not that great to begin with, as I would have to take a paycut to move into the government sector.

    The last thing: stop calling it a fucking cyber war!!!

  94. Would these cyberwarriors need '24'-like skills? by lamer01 · · Score: 1

    Maybe the govt stiffs are watching too much '24' and are looking for those non-existent skills.

  95. Same propaganda from December 2009, and before by walterbyrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They typical run these propaganda campaigns about every six months.

    http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/u-s-faces-shortage-cybersecurity-workers/2009-12-23

    Screaming and crying about desperate shortages is just a routine part of business. It keeps the poor saps studying for a career they will probably never get. It keeps the markets nice and glutted.

    IMO: what really gives this away as propaganda, is the lack of specificity. They will never tell you exactly what credentials are supposedly in such short supply.

  96. It's a game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The propaganda machine wants to drum up supply so wages can be kept low. Solution: the currently existing cs/it people should develop mutiple identities. Hundreds for each real person. That's the only way to turn the law of supply and demand around. That way the too highly paid drones at the top will not be able to manipulate wage prices downward through competion. Each real person will control an army of identities and the managers will get the same brick wall when they pit one against the other. As a side benefit, the paper pushers will have to work a lot harder and maybe then their ranks will grow forcing their wages downward and into line with ours.

  97. University paper mandate killing security. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is not with the lack of skill or talent available, it is the mandate that the person have a four year degree.
    I have 13 years in IT and the last few years have been dedicated entirely to security, but the Department of State won't even consider me as a potential candidate because I do not have university papers.

    While I certainly don't object to those who put their time into academics getting preferential treatment, don't complain about a lack of talent when what you have is a lack of ACADEMIC talent.

    I can understand the private sector not caring, but I would expect the Department of State to have use for a former Special Operations Marine (Force Recon - 1991 - 1994) with an IT background to be useful to them.

    But without University papers, they don't want me securing their systems for them.

    So, I'll continue to do the same thing for the largest companies in the world, where such mindless barriers aren't so apparent.

    - Don't blame me, I voted for McCain.
    - US national unemployment is teasing 10%, know what 11% unemployment is to socialist Spain? An improvement. La même chose pour La France.
    - Ever read the definition of the word "Socialism" - "the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism"

    Way to go America - you waltzed a Communist into the White House.
    Don't bitch about the results.

    Its' your own damn fault.

    Idiots.

  98. No shortage by Weezul · · Score: 1

    There is no shortage, geeks love security issues, they're just not paying them enough. In fact, we might have more people going into security if they'd ignored kids that got their hands dirty in the 80s and 90s, but there are still oodls of people loving the field. You know, all those black hats would happily take an NSA jobs if the salary was high enough, but we're talking like 250k, not the 100k paid by the NSA.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  99. My advise... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you can't play the game, change the game...or don't play at all.

    there should be enough talent in the US to protect government networks. tax-payers should not be paying the government to protect private networks, i don't care how vital they are to the national infrastructure. shit happens. people clean up their shit. that's the system. it works.

  100. you think your joking, but no. by Weezul · · Score: 1

    An italian friend of mine was hired by a French defense contractor as basically a highly paid concierge for dictators who came to buy weapons, not exactly a deep job, but it required a French security clearance. He's not French, but he's an EU citizen, fair enough.

    In fact, he only got the job because his idiot boss wanted to hire a Chinese girl. I shit you not, the idiot boss lady wanted to give a French security clearance to a Chinese national. Not even a dual citizen who spoke French as well as Chinese, but an honest to god Chinese national.

    Of course, the French government said no dice, and my Italian friend got the job. Guess what? bitch fired him after a while, she then tried another Chinese national. Not sure how that panned out.

    To me, you're "modest proposal" fails for being way too close to the truth.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  101. Move the Jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They could also, you know have jobs outside of DC... Usually if your not in DC your be stuck as a glorified help desk person at some level.

  102. Wrong mindset by penguinman1337 · · Score: 1

    Ok, let me preface this by saying that I am a military man, and somewhat skilled in IT and computer systems. So I have something of a unique perspective on this debate. The problem is that information warfare goes beyond simply trying to secure your site/server against remote attacks. You can have the greatest armor in the world and someone will eventually breach it. True cyberwarfare involves both defense and offense, just like traditional warfare. The offensive portion is essentially black hat cracking. The problem is is that in this country, we've marginalized even the white and grey hats to such an extent that their natural distrust of authority and independent streaks are intensified to an even more ridiculous extent. Especially with the current trend of DRM and locked systems with corporations trying to sue you or throw you in jail when you actually do manage to take them apart to see how they tick. That either drives a young hacker to back off and do what he's told, in which case he loses the necessary mindset for cracking, or to give them the middle finger and try to skirt the laws and stay hidden. But this also drives them into a "you can't tell me what to do" mindset. The problem is that to someone like that, the military is the absolute last place they want to be. And, unlike your typical street thug who wants out of the life and the military becomes their last chance, the typical cyberthug has lots of legitimately marketable job skills. Therefore, they can chose to go the civilian route while doing their hobby on the side.
    Also, the military, even today, is a very "Jock-centric" culture, for lack of a better word. Doesn't matter how good you can do your job, if you can't do X number of pushups in Y number of minutes, you'll never get promoted or even be able to re-enlist. Very often PT failures are even subjected to disciplinary action. While this might be fine for an infantry unit, it also serves to drive away the people who are more concerned about how a new OS is put together than how much they can bench. And even within the military, people in non-combat units are often looked down upon as not being "real soldiers." Basically, until the military mindset is adapted to foster a more geek-friendly culture, the people we truly need on the digital front lines will never be there.

    1. Re:Wrong mindset by Casandro · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but you can safe at least 99.99% of the problem in defence. If you write your programmes correctly nothing of this would be an issue.
      If you know about computers, why do you waste your time in the military, why don't you do security audits?
      Locking people away in the military is not much better than locking them away in prisons.

      The only realistic thing an army could do in that area would be to shoot really bad programmers who greatly overestimate their abilities. (i.e. many PHP or C(++) coders)

  103. I could get into cyber-warfare, but by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 1

    I've been told by some coworkers about a cyber-warfare reservist program in SE San Antonio, but I figure I'd be under the boot of the US government in terms of monitoring what I do online for the rest of my life, so no thank you.

    Some people are willing to give up all privacy for God and country. Not me.

  104. the "cyberwarriors" (ugh) already have jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're in the private sector and already in daily "combat" -- tweaking spamassassin, jailbreaking iPhones, pleading with users to stop installing malware, and doing anything else that is needed when ownership of a computer is disputed.

    The very idea that the government is the only entity that knows anything about or is capable of waging cyberwar, is laughable. If they're still gearing up for the future, then they're decades behind.

  105. srsly? by Therilith · · Score: 1

    "Cyberwarrior"?

    Really?

  106. Education and strict rules by nukem996 · · Score: 1

    I'm currently in a computer science undergrad program. While my university offers many different tracks to focus on(AI, OS, networking, etc) there is no security/reverse engineering track. There really aren't that many security courses either. The first thing is universities have to start offering more courses on security. This should get more people interested as well as more skilled people in the field. I did have a friend who applied to become one of the governments cyberwariors. He passed everything with flying colors but didn't get the job. Why? He admitted that he downloaded music. The kind of people they want for being a cyberwarrior are the kind of people that will download music, movies, games, break DRM, and possibly even break into a system or two. Thats how they gained the knowledge the government wants. But doing any of those disqualifies you from the job. The government needs to realize this and allow people who have done these things in.

  107. Blame apple by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

    apple might be easy to use and have a cool image but without all the teenagers deleting comand com by mistake; mucking around with open source; and writing some code. no one will get any experience, but they will be really good at that game where you pop the virtual bubble wrap.

    --
    Rocket Surgeon.
  108. Perhaps they are just interested in the applicants by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Perhaps they are just interested in the applicants ...but not for the purpose of actually hiring them.

    -- Terry

  109. you need the skills first by Dr+Max · · Score: 1

    Boot camp is what the problem is you think you can just grab a bunch of people of the street put them in basic training for six months, then set them lose inside china's firewall. You need thousands of hours of practice hopefully with a young developing mind, preferably something they did most of on there own time. but in this age of kids raised on iphones no one is fixing there computer; or screwing around trying to get a game to work in dos; and most of a computer programming courses is about making it look pretty.

    --
    Rocket Surgeon.
  110. Unemployed by WhiteHorse-The+Origi · · Score: 1

    Unemployed security specialist here...

  111. There is no shortage by w00tsauce · · Score: 1

    The requirements are just too high. How the fuck is your average joe supposed to get a top secret clearance in a timely manor? The people who are seriously good at this stuff aren't IT professionals with years of experience, they're unemployed nerds.

    1. Re:There is no shortage by NickGnome · · Score: 1

      Getting a clearance is no problem... if the employer will cover the costs, and pay and train you while waiting to find out whether you will be cleared. Those costs can add up. And it's not cheap sending people out to talk with most of the people you've ever known, checking up on places you've lived, gone to college/school, teachers you worked with, tracking down former co-workers and employers, and relatives for that matter, searching your web postings...

      I think they should do the same with every applicant for a visa. It would avoid many of the Shahzad-like fiascos, and charge the applicant and sponsor for the costs. But, of course, neither the Reps nor Dems really want to do something that would be effective like that when their goal is an excess of cheap labor.

  112. Sorry Mr. Grosler, you're wrong. by s13g3 · · Score: 1

    There are plenty of bright, intelligent and hardworking people already in this field, and others trying to move into it. The problems are two-fold: the people who want in but aren't already are stifled by egos of the current batch of professionals and lack openly available tools, materials and jobs to be able to transition readily, and, the people who are already in don't want to work directly for the Federal government for any number of reasons, both good and bad, real and imagined. Personally, while the cybersecurity of my nation is indeed very important to me, I have yet to feel compelled to go work for that gigantic bureaucratic nightmare and potentially sign away who knows what rights as a government employee in such a sensitive sector. My suggestion: continue to screen and vet candidates as normal (or even better, step up the screening process) and farm the work out to private companies.

    --
    "Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus" 'We will find a way... Or we will make one!' --Hannibal of Carthage
  113. I can't be a cyberwarrior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You see me now a veteran of a thousand psychic wars.

  114. Beyond a Jobless Recovery by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    I put together this Knol on the general issues you raise about the declining value of human labor:
    http://knol.google.com/k/paul-d-fernhout/beyond-a-jobless-recovery/
    "This article explores the issue of a "Jobless Recovery" mainly from a heterodox economic perspective. It emphasizes the implications of ideas by Marshall Brain and others that improvements in robotics, automation, design, and voluntary social networks are fundamentally changing the structure of the economic landscape. It outlines towards the end four major alternatives to mainstream economic practice (a basic income, a gift economy, stronger local subsistence economies, and resource-based planning). These alternatives could be used in combination to address what, even as far back as 1964, has been described as a breaking "income-through-jobs link". This link between jobs and income is breaking because of the declining value of most paid human labor relative to capital investments in automation and better design. Or, as is now the case, the value of paid human labor like at some newspapers or universities is also declining relative to the output of voluntary social networks such as for digital content production (like represented by this document). It is suggested that we will need to fundamentally reevaluate our economic theories and practices to adjust to these new realities emerging from exponential trends in technology and society."

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  115. Is there any pay involved? by lpq · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone is focusing on government crackdown on hackers...but no one is focusing on standard reasons -- like how does government pay compare to what the person might earn in the private sector?

    Ok, now ask -- how much has the government done to cultivate love for country in the past quarter century?
    How about patriotism? No...paying people to snitch on their neighbors is not considered something that builds loyalty to country.

    Ok...now put the pay item into perspective....
    What are the pay and job prospects for software types, in general in the US -- compared to say, 15 years ago?

    Add all that up...ignore the curiosity=jail trip...
    standard job market indicators would tend to say this type of job isn't going to be a big attractor these days...

    Now add the curiosity=jail nonsense and get tough on US-citizens/war on US citizens rhetoric that is so popular with the conservatives that have been in power for most of the past 30 years (the Reagan generation, 1980 and beyond).

    The dominant paradigm is to keep voters and consumers stupid. Education is *bad* -- since percentage wise, the more educated people are, the more likely they are to have liberal or progressive views. Not a bright prospect for American future -- at least not for the majority -- for those who run the big Corps, the landscape looks brighter and brighter...

    I doubt I'll live long enough to see the worst of it, or a turnaround...

  116. Shortage of soldiers threatens building stability by Casandro · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, but that's just utter bullshit. You don't secure IT systems by joining an "cyberarmy" you secure them by building them correctly. Thus everyone knowing about computer security and joining such a "cyberarmy" instead of just going out to build correct systems or teach people about security actually makes the systems less secure.

    It's like drafting all the good builders. Eventually we're left with all the bad ones and the standards of building will deteriorate.

  117. Yea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Evil Empire, The United States of America, will be dead in 24 months.

    Jo Blow Biden with his head up his ass-hole will be knocking over the water coolers, ... again.

    "I Never Saw a Pinus I Wouldn't Suck" Barak "The Former Barry" Hussain Obama will be desperitely trying to suck Somebodies Pinus.

  118. Show me the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even a half-assed job is better than no job. Some of these security jobs involve cleaning crapware from users machines. Its not official work people wind up doing. Its mundane, janitorial crap (and when I say janitorial, I don't mean cyber-janitorial although thats part of it, I actually mean carrying a bucket and vacuum and cleaning out computers for people. And the pay is shit. You can be university trained and educated in IT, with a BSc in Computer Science, and still expected to vacuum. And all the while, take less pay than some guy who drank his way through his business diploma (note I didn't say degree) from the 2 year college, and now he's your boss and getting paid more. So now 'no cyber warriors'. Follow the money trail. Show me the money. If the job you give me is going to be shit anyway, at least pay well for it. But security in IT, like most things IT in general, are viewed as 'utilitarian' and 'we can get anyone from the local high school to do this'. Zero job satisfaction, or respect, and crap pay, and out comes the headlines "WE HAZ NOTT ENUF DA CYBERWARSIRS". Well what the hell! Imagine that! Perhaps its a matter of pin heads in pin suits getting haxored a few dozen times before they approach cluefulness. Perhaps hoping that calling someone in Bangalore from Minneapolis will cause all of the cyber-goodness to return. I hate to place all the blame on corporations and their disregard for IT in the last 25 years, but it has to go somewhere. Suggestions for better systems from IT staffers go unheeded. Systems are put in place by people who are unqualified non-IT, then responsability for those systems are passed to IT. IT is left with managements mess, always. People are justifiably less likely to give a shit. Without paying well for every 2:00 AM callout, (perhaps not paying at all), people are likely to shut the pager and phone off. WE WANT SERVICE! is the cry. Show me the money and respect or go fuck yourself! is the reply.

  119. Try PAYING them... or us... as the case may be. by grikdog · · Score: 1

    And don't ask or you'll get an electronic fly up your nose. Seriously, how will you incentivize a dead end job for a bunch of trebuchet-hurling libertarians who appreciate ANYBODY'S code as much as or better than their own? The two worlds are immiscible. And I suspect the perceived problem exists only on the side that salutes small bits of brass. Frankly, it's been obvious for at least forty years that Bletchley Park was a British psychological warfare op, and that Turing was sacrificed to reinforce the appearance of competence in an area of contrary-to-fact depressing limits which Turing knew better than anyone.

    Perhaps the obvious was not lost on a few nerds, hackers, crackers, black hats and Belgian and Israeli mathematicians who also realized they could spin better "uncrackable codes" in their sleep, and tended to regard ALL governments as the proverbial Ted and Alice. It would be fun just to know (not necessarily to read, but just to know) the white paper on this subject has been written and flushed by interdepartmental rivalries twice already.

    Grikdog's Law: Never delegate a job you can't do yourself.

    --
    ``Tension, apprehension & dissension have begun!'' - Duffy Wyg&, in Alfred Bester's _The Demolished Man_
  120. Qualified People don't like the Gov by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Qualified People don't like to work for the Government. Many of us used to work for the government and matured enough to know that we don't want to do that anymore AND the pay scale sucks when compared to private security consulting.

    Also, we know we can't keep our mouths shut for the rest of our lives and need the ego stroke of announcing hacks to Adobe, Apple and Microsoft products.

  121. Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Translation = Anyone with half a brain doesn't buy into our snake oil scam to keep the plebs scared. They realize ther "cybersecurity" is a total sham, and that the power grid is not hooked up to the internet.

    The sky is falling?

  122. Obvious solution by Issarlk · · Score: 1

    Step 1 arrest hackers
    Step 2 make them work from jail for peanuts
    Step 3 Profit !

  123. Sad Panda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm only a cyber ninja, can I play too?
    Maybe they should just draft the blackhat conference in Vegas ( think it's next month or sooner ).

  124. Anon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out of curiosity, what can someone with good skills who sets up a white hat consultancy make?It has to be more than the NSA is offering, or they would be a lot of applicants, right?