Slashdot Mirror


McCain Asks For Committee On Wikileaks, Anonymous

Trailrunner7 writes "In the face of continued attacks on federal agencies and contractors such as Booz Allen Hamilton and IRC Federal that do highly sensitive security work for the U.S. government, Sen. John McCain has asked Senate leaders to appoint a select committee to look into the attacks and data leaks that have plagued Washington throughout 2011. In a letter to Democrat leader Harry Reid and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, McCain (R-Ariz.) said that a temporary Senate committee is necessary in order to get a handle on all of the disparate cybersecurity legislation proposals and to address the threat posed by groups such as Anonymous, LulzSec and Wikileaks."

26 of 268 comments (clear)

  1. Yep, a committee. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That oughta solve the problem, by garsh!

    1. Re:Yep, a committee. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it worked in the 50's!

      we found SO MANY unamerican commies back then. we blacklisted their asses. really worked well and america is really proud of that era.

      (see woody allen film 'the front' for an easy-to-digest education on what went on in the 50's).

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:Yep, a committee. by LifesABeach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the honorable senator from Arizona should let the F.B.I. do their job of hunting down bad guys. Maybe the honorable senator should focus on America's political obsession with maintaining inequitable Trade Balances? And while the honorable senator is on the subject of what to do today in Washington D.C.; how about the honorable senator look into closing tax loopholes for Oil Companies, and Hedge Fund Managers? Just a thought, senator.

      Republican since '71, and damn proud of it

    3. Re:Yep, a committee. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      McCarthyism seems to have a lot in common with our new War on Terror.

      To be fair, the rabid fanatical commy hunters actually caught some commies. And, the terror warriors have actually bagged some terrorists. But, the cost? Just not worth it . . .

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    4. Re:Yep, a committee. by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      About fucking time. It's a crime to leave your car running unattended (being for reasons of promoting theft). So when you are in charge of 3rd party's data, it should be a crime to use security measures so weak some script kiddies can hack in for Lulz, that should be a federal felony.

      Thank God they are finally getting around to addressing this criminal negligence. Go Committee Go!

  2. Difference being? by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Informative

    In America, you have a choice between the party that works for one set of corporations, or the party that works for another set of corporations.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
    1. Re:Difference being? by Nadaka · · Score: 4, Informative

      The set of corporate masters are not mutually exclusive, they overlap more than they do not.

    2. Re:Difference being? by gnick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is blatantly unfair and derogatory. Suggesting that the parties discriminate between which set of corporations they work for is ridiculous. All dollars are created equal.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    3. Re:Difference being? by bit+trollent · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Uh.. let's see...

      The republican party is fighting to cut funding for important government programs while cutting taxes on the rich.

      The other party is seeking to raise taxes on the rich to fund important government programs. Programs like pell grants, infrastructure, education, and health care.

      Only a total fool wouldn't be able to tell the difference as they parties play a dangerous game of brinkmanship with our national credit rating.

      People who don't know the difference between our conservative and progressive parties are part of the reason that our political system is so broken. Politicians are playing us for fools, because we are too ignorant to tell the difference.

    4. Re:Difference being? by Nadaka · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The democrats are a conservative party. The republicans are a regressive party. We don't really have a progressive party.

    5. Re:Difference being? by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ahh, but they have to pick and choose between which corporations they get bought by. I think this scene from The Distinguished Gentleman explains it all:

      TOMMY (Eddie Murphy) Sugar price supports. Where do you think I should be, Tommy?
      O'CONNOR Shit -- makes no difference to me. If you're for 'em, I got money for you from my sugar producers in Louisiana and Hawaii. If you're against 'em, I got money for you from the candy manufacturers.
      TOMMY You pick.
      O'CONNOR Let's put you down as for. Now what about putting limits on malpractice awards?
      TOMMY You tell me.
      O'CONNOR Well, if you're for 'em, I got money from the doctors and insurance companies. If you're against 'em, I got money from the trial lawyers. Tell you what, let's say against. Now how about pizza?
      TOMMY I'll stick with the salad.
      O'CONNOR Not for lunch, shmuck, for PAC money. A lot of the frozen pizzas use phony cheese. There's a law pending requiring them to disclose it on their labels. Where do you stand?
      TOMMY If I vote for the labels...then I get money from the dairy industry...
      O'CONNOR Good...
      TOMMY And if I vote against the labels, I get money from the frozen food guys.
      O'CONNOR Excellent! And don't forget the ranchers, because they get hurt if pepperoni sales go down!
      TOMMY A pepperoni lobby. I love this town.
      O'CONNOR So which is it?
      TOMMY Fuck the cheese people. Thanks to them my office smelled like smelt for a week.
      O'CONNOR All right. For.
      TOMMY So Tommy, tell me -- with all this money on every side, how does anything get done?
      O'CONNOR It doesn't! That's the genius of the system!

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    6. Re:Difference being? by guspasho · · Score: 4, Informative

      Democrats may (as a group) be more conservative than european progressives, but that doesn't change that democrats are the progressive influence in American politics.

      Hardly.

              Economic stimulus - that failed to do more than keep the economy from catastrophic collapse, and did nothing to actually improve the economy
              Universal healthcare - that forced every citizen to become captives of the private insurance market
              Financial reform(including consumer protection) - HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! (that means I think you're joking because that's so transparently wrong)
              Unemployment insurance extensions - yeah, minor
              US Auto industry bailout - and don't forget banking industry bailouts! Now how exactly is it progressive to bail out the biggest, most powerful companies and fail to bail out any one else, particularly the millions of victims of the massive fraud perpetuated by the banks?

      Now we have a "progressive" party that's offering to gut Medicare and Social Security, two of the most critical and important parts of the social safety net - and fix a budget problem that's caused by securities fraud, while the fraudsters are lavishly enriching themselves even further with bailout money!

      Sorry, but you're wrong. There may be a few progressives among the Democrats, but they have no power to enact any kind of progressive policy, and as Obama should have taught us, could simply be outright lying. Democrats stopped being progressive when they sold their souls to the corporatists. Now it's just two conservative parties battling for the attention of the big bucks and completely lying to the rest of us.

  3. Re:Ted Stevens will get to the bottom of this! by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ted Stevens is dead.

  4. Horrible summary by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Informative

    The summary is 10% facts and 90% moronic rambling by the submitter. If you actually read the letter, you'll see that McCain was specifically referring to insider threats such as the Bradley Manning case. He doesn't mention Anonymous or LulzSec at all.

    1. Re:Horrible summary by zill · · Score: 4, Interesting
      McCain:

      I write to renew my request that the Senate create a temporary Select Committee on Cyber Security and Electronic Intelligence Leaks. I feel this Select Committee is necessary in order to develop comprehensive cyber security legislation and adequately address the continuing risk of insider threats that caused thousands of documents to be posted on the website Wikileaks.

      Emphasis mine.

      I wish there was a "Parent is right. This story is 50% bullshit and 100% trolling. Let's delete it." mod. When 5 people use that mod then the story gets automatically deleted.

    2. Re:Horrible summary by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      don't agree with deletion.

      I do agree with modding it down into negative oblivion.

      but deletion smacks of filtering and censorship. we are NOT for things like that, here. simple reminder.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  5. Re:Ted Stevens will get to the bottom of this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Dig him up!
    I bet he still knows just as much about the internet now as he always did!

  6. Examine the phrase "freedom of the press" by X86Daddy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We keep seeing court cases and lively debate over "Freedom of the Press," usually with regards to whether this blogger or that product reviewer etc... have a right to say what they say without "press credentials" or a large corporate news organization backing them, etc... A lot of self-professed "patriotic" US citizens want Wikileaks destroyed.

    So where does the phrase "Freedom of the Press" come from? First Amendement of the US Constitution:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    At the time this was written, what was "the press?" What was the relationship between the authors and founders of this country and "the press?" The press was a nifty machine that several of these men owned... a printing press. They used these devices to take their speech and propogate it further than mere voice could. They used this kind of speech to foment revolution against an unjust government and the press was a vital tool in this effort. Upon establishing a new government, they sought to extend that protection to all citizens.

    So, when someone issues communications through technology, that is the press protected by the 1st Amendement.

  7. Re:False Flag Working! by mcvos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they really want to do something productive, they should investigate how it's possible that government contractors are so incompetent when it comes to computer security.

  8. Re:False Flag Working! by Translation+Error · · Score: 4, Informative
    Except he's not talking about going after the evil terrorists. He's talking about coming up with plans to protect key systems from cyber attack

    We must act now and quickly develop and pass comprehensive legislation to protect our electric grid, air traffic control system, water supply, financial networks and defense systems and much more from a cyber attack.

    and prevent leaks at the source.

    developing adequate safeguards to detect and defeat any insider threat of disclosure of classified documents such as we experienced with the Wikileaks fiasco

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
  9. Re:False Flag Working! by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Funny

    The problem is government contractors.

    --
    Time to offend someone
  10. I'll translate what McCain said; by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We cannot have private groups picking up the slack for our stenographer media. After burning Dan Rather and firing numerous other investigative journalists, and imprisoning more reporters in the Iraq invasion than were imprisoned in all other wars combined -- I thought we made it clear that we do not want investigative journalism.

    Whistleblowers like Bradley Manning, are a threat to our incompetence and graft -- and we'd really appreciate being able to continue this "war on whatever" scam so that we can burden the middle class with lots of debt that will require austerity -- we cannot train your kids to be indentured servants if we continue this concept of "RIGHTS" and such, now can we?

    The only way to win the war on Terror, is to allow your military, government and secret services, total access to everything, no responsibility or questions on failure or missing Billions, and to be able to say; "nothing to see hear, move along." With the lack of transparency, we reserve the right to humiliate and/or jail the people who speculate on Conspiracies. Not that they are a threat, we just don't like those geeky twerps and we enjoy crushing the nuts of someone -- so it might as well be them.

    After that brain fart, McCain would go back to his soft spoken tones as if he were a reasonable adult, and use words like "concern", "responsibility" and "prudence." As if he gave a rats ass and wasn't thinking about the Poker and Prostitutes party at Boehner's house this Friday night.

    --
    >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
  11. Re:False Flag Working! by geoskd · · Score: 3, Funny

    The problem is government .

    There, Fixed that for you.

    -=Geoskd

    --
    I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  12. Re:False Flag Working! by devjoe · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just to clarify... He is taking the steps to investigate the vulnerabilities, and take precautions against further intrusion. This is not to be confused with "let's go catch these boogeymen."

    This just seems like a reasonable reaction (for once), unless I am mis-reading here. I did not RTFA.

    Well, the article is not really much more informative than the summary on this matter, but both of them suggest that at least part of the focus is on improving security at these sensitive sites rather than going after whichever baddies this week hacked into a government contractor's network and divulged sensitive info they found there. And that is indeed the right focus; it is obvious that the knowledge necessary to break into these sites is in the wild and capturing one group of attackers is going to do little to secure the information stored on other, as-yet-unhacked networks. The problem is that inadequate methods have been used to secure the information in the first place. So I have to agree with you.

    Furthermore, what is pointed out in the article is that there are multiple Congressional committees claiming at least partial jurisdiction over the issue and suggesting cybersecurity legislation. McCain proposes a single committee to clearly govern this area and thus to consolidate this legislation in one place to avoid conflicting bills coming from different groups. I can't say whether this will actually succeed in doing something useful -- it really depends on whether they get knowledgeable people on the committee -- but it has a better chance than the current approach. In theory, the knowledgeable people, even if they aren't on the committee or even in Congress, should know to address this group; hopefully the committee gets populated with Congressmen who are able to distinguish the ideas of value from those of everybody else who wants to restrict computers or the Internet in whatsoever way.

  13. The US WAS crawling with communists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The United States WAS crawling with communists. The Venona intercepts generated leads. Of course, it was classified, so most did not get access to that information.

  14. alot of those 'leads' were complete bullshit by decora · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the venona decrypts were fascinating but there are several reasons i disagree with your interpretation (which has been repeated by many others)

    1. the actual decryption took decades, and was not finished until the 70s or 80s, so during the actual mccarthy period of the late 40s early 50s, many of the contents of the crypts were not known.

    2. alot of the decryption was of poor quality

    3. alot of it used various code names

    4. the biggest problem of all, is that you are decryption messages from KGB(NKVD)field agents back and forth to headquarters. the Soviet Union was built on a system of faking your reports and your production numbers, no matter what your field, in order to meet quotas and keep from getting executed. they couldnt even get a reliable census going in the 1930s because politics worked its way into every bureaucracy of the country. to believe the venona decryptions at face value, you have to believe KGB(NKVD) agents statements to moscow at face value, which to me seems like a horrible way to research history.

    5. alot of them are 'proven' by cross referencing them with the statements of elizabeth bentley or others. what was her source? the same agents who were writing the cables back to moscow.

    the venona has a lot of fascinating information in it and shows a lot of soviet inlfuence in ameirca, but alot of those 'leads' were fucking bullshit.

    you can just look at the 'Silvermaster Files' for information, take Bela Gold for example. they put his wife under surveillance. what intelligence do they get? she went shopping. she met with other suspects for an hour here, an hour there. she went shopping. she got pregnant. case closed. Thats the 'damning evidence' somebody wanted to use in a courtroom.

    since in America the courts are somewhat independent (unlike, say, the soviet union) the government dropped these cases. Venona couldnt be used in courtrooms not simply because it was 'classified', but because it was unreliable garbage.

    then take alger his and whittaker chambers. they decided the laws were not good enough to prosecute him, so they broadened them. what did that leave us with? the Espionage Act subparagraph (e) , which is now being used against whistleblowers like Thomas Drake...

    and of course the Emergency Detention Act, completely unconstitutional and cancelled by Nixon when he became president. Think about that. it was too draconian for Nixon.