Slashdot Mirror


US Missile Defense Staff Told To Stop Watching Porn

An anonymous reader writes "John James Jr., director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, who is responsible for the nation's missile defense system, recently sent out a one-page memo warning employees and contractors to stop using agency computers to visit pornographic Web sites. That's right; apparently they were watching the wrong type of bombshells."

124 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Why? by Githaron · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why is this considered news?

    1. Re:Why? by Desler · · Score: 5, Funny

      Because they were playing with the wrong type of missiles?

    2. Re:Why? by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Funny

      Because watching pr0n isn't being productive like those of us who read Slashdot.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    3. Re:Why? by jhoegl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The real question is, why arent these less than half a dozen getting fired?
      If they have time to watch porn, then the position they are filling is not required.

    4. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The real question is, why arent these less than half a dozen getting fired?

      If they have time to watch porn, then the position they are filling is not required.

      Because they're government civilians. They're damn near impossible to fire. It almost takes an act of congress to remove a GS civilian from a position.

    5. Re:Why? by ppanon · · Score: 2

      Because flash animations and other movie formats have been used as vectors for malware in the past. So if they're using missile defense computers to watch porn, they are potentially infecting critical defense computers with trojans that could be exploited by an enemy.

      I suppose that if they're bringing their commercial DVDs, or personal home movies through the security checkpoints it might be OK, but then they would need to explain their collection to their wives/SOs.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    6. Re:Why? by kubernet3s · · Score: 4, Insightful

      actually, yeah, most of us would be out on our asses if our employers caught us looking at porn. The reason people tag links NSFW is because you can get fired for even accidentally clicking on non-pornographic nudity.

    7. Re:Why? by jank1887 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      because of this tidbit in the Bloomberg article:

      "Using what is called steganography, Cunningham said, a programmer can embed malicious computer code that infects computers, opens ports, steals data or gains access to networks when photos, videos or other files are downloaded."

      Now, THAT's news. So, now, instead of malware writers using steganography to hide commands or payload data accessed by normal executable malware code, we have steganographic malware that autoexecutes just by being downloaded! I'll get started on the GIMP payload filter...

    8. Re:Why? by magarity · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The people who need to be fired are the network administrators who aren't filtering external traffic properly in the first place. And why not fire this director who doesn't see that's the true source of the problem?

    9. Re:Why? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      actually, yeah, most of us would be out on our asses if our employers caught us looking at porn. The reason people tag links NSFW is because you can get fired for even accidentally clicking on non-pornographic nudity.

      So these guys might have just been looking at Wikipedia, or perhaps at Wikipedia? Caution, some Wikipedia pages (like those two) might actually be considered NSFW in really incredibly prudish places, simply because they contain photos of human genitalia (but non-prurient photos).

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    10. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why is this considered news?

      It's news to me that what are supposed to be professional soldiers/airmen have to be reminded not to engage in non-work related activity while on duty. (Whatever happened to "You can review the field manual during periods of inactivity. No, you absolutely cannot read the newspaper while on duty.")

      It's news to me that people are using what are probably supposed to be secure or semi-secure systems to browse non-work-related sites on the public Internet.

      It's news to me that the government's response to the above was to send a memo instead of busting them all back to private and assigning them to toilet duty.

    11. Re:Why? by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      What else should missile defense staff do to pass time?

    12. Re:Why? by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why blame the network admin? He didnt make you go to those sites. Sure you could say that if it was filtered they wouldnt go to the sites but that is not the point. These are adults, working in what is a pretty important function with major security concerns. There is no one to blame but those who typed in the address and clicked enter.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    13. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, still better if only a meat-rocket goes off, instead of a minute-man. ...wait

    14. Re:Why? by v1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The people who need to be fired are the network administrators who aren't filtering external traffic properly in the first place.

      That doesn't really fix the problem. It sounds like a good idea until you realize you're pitting the network admin against the users. His job isn't to get involved with a game of cat and mouse. Most admins grow tired of being expected to have an airtight physical defense when there's no complementary policy in place.

      A better response is to have the network admins place reasonably good filtering in place. Not airtight. Not filters that interfere with legitimate traffic. Filters with a zero-false-positive. Then if someone is still watching porn, it's easy to demonstrate that they're taking steps to bypass the filtering. Make it clear to the staff that deliberately bypassing the filters is a fireable offense.

      This solves most of the problem all at once. No collateral damage, no borderline unfair calls, reasonable expense, and accountability where it belongs.

      It also makes the perps easier to catch, since they don't have to spend hours trying to different things before they finally find the inevitable crack in the armor. They'll try basic things like proxy or direct IP etc. Those are easy to prove as deliberate while at the same time being easy to detect. If you're placing the entire onus on the net admin, the users can dig at your defenses all day long without so much as a wrist-slap, and when they finally discover another way, they've' not only beat you, you may have a difficult time noticing you've been beat. And then you are the bad guy for having "allowed" them to violate policy.

      I've been in charge of cat and mouse before. I'd set something up, they'd find a way around it. I'd add another net. They'd stop for a bit and then they'd find a way around it. Rinse and repeat. All the while the manager wouldn't bother to yank one of them into the office and discuss the perils of working hard to break company policy. The filters finally got tight enough that the manager started having problems with some of his downtime, and then things really got weird. You don't want to be here.

      "against company policy" needs to mean "you don't do that here", not "we're going to try to stop you from doing that here".

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    15. Re:Why? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      If they have time to watch porn, then the position they are filling is not required.

      So taking breaks is good for productivity - unless you're a government employee?

    16. Re:Why? by xlsior · · Score: 1, Troll

      Unlikely as it sounds, it's definitely possible... For example, a number of years ago a bug in the windows gdi rendering system could allow arbitrary code execution when viewing a malformed jpeg picture: http://tinyurl.com/c5z3rfy And later, an even easier exploit came along where a legacy printer macro file format (don't remember the extension) simply renamed to jpeg would allow the execution of a script when the 'image' was viewed in Internet explorer since both file formats were supported by the same windows decoder libraries.

    17. Re:Why? by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember reading about an indestructible cookie that some academic had created. It was actually a number of cookies sprinkled around the system. They checked on eachother constantly and in the case that one was deleted the others would recreate it. One part of it was actually a graphic file, possibly a GIF if memory serves.

    18. Re:Why? by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think the GP was claiming that it doesn't happen. Image formats are relatively complex, and compressed audio and video formats doubly so. If you're going to have a security hole in an OS or a browser, odds are good that it will be in a codec somewhere.

      That said, what we have here is a pretty egregious misuse of the term steganography. Steganography refers to hiding data inside other data. A trojan image file that exploits a bug in your browser to load malware isn't steganography because there is no actual image. There's no hiding. It is merely the misrepresentation of one type of data as another type of data, which is a trojan horse, not steganography.

      Steganography would be Chinese dissidents using image files that contained a subtle watermark in the least significant bits to send coded messages to one another, or someone embedding a piece of software in the low order bits of an MPEG stream. Those examples meet the core requirement that the enclosing data be at least ostensibly plausible data. Note that opening such a photo or MPEG stream reveals a photo or a movie. It does not execute anything, because if it did, the secret payload wouldn't be very hidden, now would it? :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    19. Re:Why? by sycodon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Whatever...they tell me to stop looking at porn all the time too.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    20. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      be the first recorded case of premature ejaculation that made the earth move for her too

    21. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's a technical solution to a management problem.

    22. Re:Why? by IceNinjaNine · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but when I surf porn at my missile defense job I kick it old school.

      Say what? Nike Ajax?

      Sheeeit.. say WHAT? Nike Herc?

      Pfftt.. I got your "Herc" right here! Nike Zeus?

      How 'bout I Sprint with his homeboy Spartan.

      Too bad neither of these were hit to kill and packed nukes.

    23. Re:Why? by datapharmer · · Score: 2

      How is the president supposed to tweet the launch codes if they don't have internet access?

      --
      Get a web developer
    24. Re:Why? by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 1

      The fact the DoD hired an imbecile who can't configure a proxy to block access to porn IS news to me.

    25. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "US Missile Defense Staff Told To Stop Watching Porn"
      "No problem!" says US Missile Defense Staff, "What is you present location?"

    26. Re:Why? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      Now, THAT's news. So, now, instead of malware writers using steganography to hide commands or payload data accessed by normal executable malware code, we have steganographic malware that autoexecutes just by being downloaded! I'll get started on the GIMP payload filter...

      I wish I knew what the guy really meant, because that's pure bullshit.

      Images that "autoexecute"??? The only thing that it might reference is some overflow in in whatever displays the image. But that is certainly not "steganography".

      Or of course, there is the old trick of "install this codec to view Anna Kournikova blowjob video! Is anyone who works on missile defence really that dumb? There certainly are malware infested porn sites. But the images are just images.

      But I guess knowing what they did with Stuxnet, they are being hyper cautious. In missile defence, paranoia is in the job description.

    27. Re:Why? by Local+ID10T · · Score: 1

      No. This is not a technical issue, it is a personnel issue.

      On the technical side we can block access to sites by URL, IP, or keyword... but there are ways to get around these blocks, and implementing/maintaining these controls takes time and money away from more useful projects.

      It is far better to instruct employees that such activity is not allowed, and discipline (including termination if necessary) those who do not follow the policy.

      I can see an argument for the case that in a defense environment there should by default already be network usage monitoring and access control sufficient to prevent such misuse.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    28. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thanks. I just got fired.

    29. Re:Why? by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      "If they have time to watch porn, then the position they are filling is not required."

      Filling various positions is required in porn worth watching.

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    30. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "If they have time to watch porn, then the position they are filling is not required."

      Out of the multitude of agencies within the U.S. government, I'd think it would be fairly obvious that staffing levels at the U.S. Missile Defense Agency wouldn't be based upon the workload of a "typical" day. You'd want it staffed at levels that can cope with a "shit hits the fan" day. If we pay 90% of these people to sit around and pull their puds every minute of their career, but they're able to react quickly enough to save lives in the event of a nuclear attack, or quickly deduce an apparent "attack" isn't what it appears to be and prevent nuclear war, I'd call that money well spent. The stakes are WAY too high to staff this agency for rainy days.

    31. Re:Why? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      An image in the browser cache, with javascript reading the pixel values. The 'evercookie' also used a conventional cookie, and a flash cookie, and a few other methods too. Upon visiting the site, if even one of the cookie copies could be read it would recreate the others.

    32. Re:Why? by jcadam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Many years ago, when I was working on a large govt contract, one of the GS civilian managers got caught messing around with his secretary in one of the stairwells (security cameras? where?) and was not fired. He was instead 'promoted' into some position that, best I could tell, involved organizing social events and morale/team building activities. Since he couldn't be fired, he was placed in a slacker, low-stress position where he wouldn't be entrusted with anything that was actually important.

    33. Re:Why? by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It sounds like a good idea until you realize you're pitting the network admin against the users. His job isn't to get involved with a game of cat and mouse.

      I don't only agree, I'd go a step further: The admins job is not to filter content, but to keep the network running.

      Filter malware, yes. Content? Why should the admin care if that image shows a tit or a cat?

      Maybe I'm too open-minded but I don't get what the fuss is all about. If I came upon a co-worker or even a subordinate watching porn, I'd be more worried that he's not working than what he is watching. Sure it's not very tasteful, but as long as his hands stay out of his trousers (or skirt, let's stop pretending only men watch porn), I don't care all that much. Maybe if our society were a little less sexually repressed, we could focus on what actually matters instead of political correctness?

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    34. Re:Why? by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real question is, why arent these less than half a dozen getting fired?
      If they have time to watch porn, then the position they are filling is not required.

      There are quire a few positions where periods of activity and waiting alternate. Trying to "remove the slack" in such scenarios typically results in small savings in periods of passivity and huge disasters in periods of activity. This is especially true in scenarios like missile defense where activity periods depend on some unpredictable external factor - it's too late to hire staff when the air raid sirens start blaring, and having enough staff to handle a missile attack means that you'll have more than you need when an attack is not incoming.

      But even beyond that, human beings aren't capable of giving 100% 8 hours a day. If you try to make them, those who can leave for greener pastures and those who can't concentrate on looking busy, rather than doing their job. The end result is that you'll end up with incompetent, unmotivated people trying their best to deceive the management.

      But perhaps this isn't about wasted time but porn. If so, then please remember that this is a position that likely requires quite a bit of highly specialized training. Is punishing people for being impure sinners a good enough reason to justify the cost of training their replacements? Maybe, maybe not - but since this training would come out of taxpayer money, it would probably be best to not pay to enforce any moral code that doesn't absolutely have to be.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    35. Re:Why? by ultranova · · Score: 2

      So if they're using missile defense computers to watch porn, they are potentially infecting critical defense computers with trojans that could be exploited by an enemy.

      ...Why are any critical missile defense computers connected to the Internet? I mean, isn't that pretty much asking for that very scenario?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    36. Re:Why? by stretch0611 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pron IS productive for these people. Aren't they trained constantly to launch their missile and have them explode. Watching porn is no more than a training video.

      If we go to war and they are told to launch their missile and watch them explode, they will be ready and perform their duty well.

      And if they watched enough "training videos" they will be able to control the timing of that launch and subsequent missile explosion with remarkable accuracy due to all their practice and training.

      --
      Looking for a job?
      Want your resume written professionally?
      DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
    37. Re:Why? by Chibi · · Score: 1

      I spent some time working with the FAA. The person I replaced had been fired for viewing porn at work. The case was still in litigation up to two years after he was fired, due to the union. I'm not really sure what was being argued, but my manager had to go to hearings every once a while.

      I kind of assumed these would be military positions, but the summary mentions employees and contractors, so perhaps that is where the union is getting involved (In the case of employees. Contractors are used in a lot of cases because they are supposed to be easy to replace, at least from what I was told)

      --
      If all you have are silver bullets, everything looks like a werewolf.
    38. Re:Why? by downhole · · Score: 2

      Disagree. There are lots of jobs out there where your role is to basically wait for something to happen, and if it does happen, handle it. They may even be pretty highly paid and important jobs, depending on what "something happening" is what exactly what "handling it" involves. I'd say that the guys responsible for handling an incoming nuclear missile attack are pretty damn important. There's not many things where it's more important that they be handled properly if they happen, or that we hope they don't ever actually happen.

      I'm inclined to say that these guys can slack off however they please on duty as long as they can be at their station ready to go in under a minute or so. And give 'em a separate computer for movies and websurfing so they don't risk messing up the one that controls trying to intercept incoming nuclear missiles.

      --
      I don't reply to ACs
    39. Re:Why? by sumdumass · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Fun fact,
      Almost every time I view the router logs and find porn sites in them, it happens that someone violated the security policy and brought unsecured media from home and infected their work system, clicked yes for a popup and installed something or somehow infected the computer with malware that the Antivirus didn't pick up. I don't know if it cause and effect where the malware caused the porn lookups or if the malware was the result of the porn lookups, but I know a symptom of the malware was pornographic popups. Often times, the infections like the rogue AV infections where the result of infected otherwise legitimate sites using exploits in MS internet explorer or Flash to infect the user's system with no interaction of their own.

      As for being prudish or open-minded, it's really a cover your own ass thing. In the US at least, simply watching porn in front of other staff can be grounds for a sexual discrimination and hostile workplace action. In the 1980's, they even tried to keep Clarence Thomas from being appointed to the supreme court over an accusation by Anita Hill that he had a porn video tape in his hands and when she inquired about it, he ask her if she wanted to watch it too. This was being claimed as sexual harassment at a time when sexual harassment was considered more of the type with the boss requiring women to slep with then for a promotion of salary increase.

      This might be mainly a US centric concern too. And the amount of porn sites being visited might be a sign of infected computers more then bored employees acting inappropriately.

    40. Re:Why? by dcbrianw · · Score: 1

      This whole episode is clearly a misunderstanding. They were just thinking about the wrong missiles!

    41. Re:Why? by mellyra · · Score: 1

      Images that "autoexecute"??? The only thing that it might reference is some overflow in in whatever displays the image. But that is certainly not "steganography".

      might refer to the WMF exploit - WMF literally allowed an "image" file to contain code that would be autoexecuted when the image was rendered.

      However, this has obviously nothing to do with Steganography in any usual sense.

    42. Re:Why? by drkim · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well put.

      It's like saying, "We found that 80% of the time, the firefighters were just sitting around the fire station doing nothing. So we're going to reduce the fire department by 80%."

    43. Re:Why? by sjames · · Score: 1

      In many places, there is an assumption that the people working there are adults and don't need net-nanny and it's many false positives. Since the employees were caught and no malware got in, the network is apparently being properly monitored and filtered.

    44. Re:Why? by HapSlappy_2222 · · Score: 1

      So, they borrowed AOL's model, yeah?

    45. Re:Why? by sjames · · Score: 1

      We cannot block it all. Quick, where is the list, updated minute to minute, of every porn site on the net? There is none and cannot be one. If hjfwiufiwubfqwfuwwe.com serves up porn, how am I supposed to know?

    46. Re:Why? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I thought that flash and PDF vulnerabilities could be classified in that category. And there were some really old MP3 ones as well.

    47. Re:Why? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If you can configure a proxy with 100% success rate, you should be an NSA, not DoD. It's impossible with anything more permissible than a verified white list, and even then, you could still get errors.

    48. Re:Why? by harrkev · · Score: 3, Funny

      If hjfwiufiwubfqwfuwwe.com serves up porn, how am I supposed to know?

      It doesn't. That domain does not even exist. Thanks for the non-existent tip.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
    49. Re:Why? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Make it clear to the staff that deliberately bypassing the filters is a fireable offense."

      That's why people bring their own notebooks and watch porn with their phone's personal hotspot.
      Albeit that might not work for missile defense when they are a mile down a mountain.

    50. Re:Why? by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Sounds like officespace

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    51. Re:Why? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Funny

      > Apparently they were watching the wrong type of bombshells.

      Brian: Dumb joke.
      Stewie: You think it's so easy, name 12.

      Brian:
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of missiles.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of payloads.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of shots.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of O-rings.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of re-entry procedure.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of liquid coolant.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of emergency ejection.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of solid rocket.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of holding pattern.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of engine flameout.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of fire surpression system.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of throttle up.

      Stewie: Name 5 more.

      Brian:
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of loading the cargo bay.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of playing with the funny arm.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of rubber suit.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of trans docking.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of linkup.

      Stewie: Name 6 more.

      Brian:
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of system failure.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of manual procedure.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of stirring the tank.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of evacuation procedure.
      Apparently they were watching the wrong type of moon rover.
        Apparently they were watching the wrong type of boot to the moon.

      Stewie: (Throws guitar on the floor) F(bleep) you!

      Brian:
        Apparently they were watching the wrong type of separation procedure.
        Apparently they were watching the wrong type of Weiner von Braun.
        Apparently they were watching the wrong type of 'tang.
        Apparently they were watching the wrong type of ...

      Stewie: Now you die.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    52. Re:Why? by lxs · · Score: 1

      So these people spend their entire work life sitting around waiting, and when finally the emergency arrives, they simultaneously turn their keys and actively participate in ending life on Earth once and for all...

      Suicide seems like an honorable alternative to a life so thouroughly wasted.

    53. Re:Why? by v1 · · Score: 1

      That's why people bring their own notebooks and watch porn with their phone's personal hotspot.

      As a network admin, dealing with employees "wasting company time" isn't my job, so I really don't get too involved with it. So I really don't care if they jack up their personal computer. But I must admit I feel even less sorry for them when they wasted company time to do it in the first place. Serves them up a heaping fresh pile of "serves you right".

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    54. Re:Why? by lxs · · Score: 1

      Repeat after me: If it's a bit.ly or tinyurl link it's either a trojan or Goatse. (Or if you're really lucky it's only a Rickroll)

    55. Re:Why? by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 1

      I don't necessarily disagree with your scenario. Proxy wars do however have the advantage of not getting one's own country targeted by enemy ordnance. Such unwanted attention tends to complicate the matter of maintaining popular support back home.

      Even someone like Putin might find that inconvenient in the current political climate and opt for a less direct approach.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    56. Re:Why? by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, it is not the network admins job to enforce workplace rules. That's like firing the phone guy because some manager can't keep his guys from calling the wife too much.

      It's a personnel management deficiency not a technology deficiency. You will never be able to block everything that shouldn't be viewed from work unless you just pull the plug.

    57. Re:Why? by sumdumass · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think the most disparaging problem is how the west has treated Russia. Bush basically said, stop kicking and screaming, you not going to harm us with the missile defense shield. We ignored their concerns on a lot of other things and demanded they support our positions on others. We even bribed them to follow our stances. We were at odds with them on Egypt, Lybia, and I think Russia pretty much put their foot down with Syria- and China seems to support them.

      Putin is the wild card who is trying to reimplement some of the old soviet era internal policies and might just conflate the west helping the rebels in Syria against their wishes with a "terrorist attack" and use it to rally his people to a war they would willingly participate in. He already claimed foreign influences (specifically the US) staged a protest and attempted to interfere with their own elections.

      Their objection to interference with Syria is that it is a civil war and foreigners shouldn't be picking the winners of an internal struggle. Especially when Syria was a founding member of the UN and has spent effort and resources in the past to maintain the UN's objectives just to be overthrown by that same group. I understand the different opinions about Syria's behavior but it does seem that outsiders are attempting to topple several middle eastern countries and implement governments more favorable to them. This is one of the same concepts that caused Russia to Rally behind Putin in the last elections with a 64% victory. His campaign theme was mostly "enemies here and abroad are trying to destroy Russia" and his victory speech specifically said âoeWe have shown that nobody can impose anything on us,â

      I sort of think this is a thing Putin might welcome. He sees a natural order of things that is out of balance to him.

    58. Re:Why? by sjames · · Score: 2

      For future reference, in the /. porn detection protocol, I post a domain and you reply ACK, NACK, HUUUURL, or aOOOOOOOOOga

    59. Re:Why? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      And if you haven't enabled TinyURL Preview... well.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    60. Re:Why? by ppanon · · Score: 1

      I expect the critical computers are probably air-gapped. But then that was probably the case with the PLCs running the Iran centrifuges too. They may be concerned about somebody accidentally sneakernetting something onto the critical computers via a USB key or some other manual data transmission feature from a non-critical system while transferring logs, updates, data, or something else.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
  2. the right idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    make love not war baby!

    1. Re:the right idea by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Funny

      During a war, making love is what results in a war baby.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  3. In wonder if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...this means our missile defense has been shooting blanks this whole time?

  4. it became a problem by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It because a problem when some of the computers started getting viruses and trojans from the porn sites.

    That's what the first article says. The second article says that wasn't the reason. I guess this is why it's a waste to read the articles.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:it became a problem by AaronW · · Score: 4, Informative

      In that case I think that they should be more worried about the religious sites.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    2. Re:it became a problem by cpghost · · Score: 1

      It because a problem when some of the computers started getting viruses and trojans from the porn sites.

      Nothing against porn sites, but it IS a huge problem if their workstations are able to connect that easily to the global Internet. That's NOT supposed to be allowed in this sensitive environment. Then again, we're talking about the whole MDA bureaucratic personnel, not about the few NORAD staffers.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    3. Re:it became a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I thought Trojans were supposed to prevent viruses

    4. Re:it became a problem by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Only if you drop the word "like".

    5. Re:it became a problem by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I hope we aren't talking about the main systems.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  5. Why not? by shaitand · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not that this is really news worthy but who cares if they are watching porn? This is a legitimate job that has to be staffed 24/7 and probably requires about 20min worth of total combined labor in a typical year. Being the military that is increased to maybe a few days labor worth of redundant checklists over the course of the year.

    1. Re:Why not? by mkkohls · · Score: 2

      Not that this is really news worthy but who cares if they are watching porn? This is a legitimate job that has to be staffed 24/7 and probably requires about 20min worth of total combined labor in a typical year. Being the military that is increased to maybe a few days labor worth of redundant checklists over the course of the year.

      Having done jobs where your sole purpose most of the time is just to be there waiting I understand the lack of things to do. Still Gotta love the fact that beyond the normal workplace squimishness their main concern was viruses and malware, which porn sites have actually gotten a lot better about policing these days.

    2. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then they can buy their OWN computer to do it on cant they?

      Or are you comfortable with missile defense computers looking at porn sites (which have been consistent virus vectors in years past)? Even if those are not hooked up to the main computers all it takes is one mistake...

      Also when you sign up to the military you sign away rights. You also sign on for people telling you 24/7 what to do and where to pee.

      When I used to run a network. I told people do what you want on your own time and on your OWN hardware. I do not care what you do then. On this network we do not do that, its not work related unless you are in the porn industry...

      There is nothing wrong with telling people NO sometimes...

    3. Re:Why not? by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 2

      Even if those are not hooked up to the main computers all it takes is one mistake...

      But perhaps not watching porn increases the likelyhood of making a mistake? Who knows what they'll do when they get really bored and have no porn, video games or other distraction, they'll probably start screwing around with the missile systems...

    4. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, yeah - and YOU'RE going to be willing to push that button after Lance has been there jerking off all day. Fuck that - let somebody else launch the missile, I'm going to go get some chlorox and a gallon purel before I even think about touching it.

    5. Re:Why not? by drkim · · Score: 2

      Oh, yeah - and YOU'RE going to be willing to push that button after Lance has been there jerking off all day. Fuck that - let somebody else launch the missile, I'm going to go get some chlorox and a gallon purel before I even think about touching it.

      That's part of the failsafe system:

      #1: "Turn you key in 3, 2, 1..."
      #2: "I ain't touchin' it."
      #1: "We have a validated launch command sir. Turn your key!"
      #2: "You kidding? Lance was on this console today. I'm not going near this nasty thing."
      #1: (Points pistol) "Turn your key sir! That's an order! Turn your key!!!"
      #2: "Hey, I ain't touching it! Tell you what, let's trade consoles..."
      #1: "Hell no! I ain't touching it!"

      Result: World saved! All thanks to pr0n!

    6. Re:Why not? by westlake · · Score: 1

      This is a legitimate job that has to be staffed 24/7 and probably requires about 20min worth of total combined labor in a typical year.

      You can't know that.

      SAC in the fifties became known for its relentless drill and discipline. It is what the military demands and expects on assignments like this.

      Those who do not measure up get transfered out.

      There is somewhere worse than mainland Alaska in the U.S. Military. An island called Shemya in the Aleutians, a group of islands off the coast of the Alaskan Peninsula. According to legend, the wind never drops below 60 knots, the temperature never rises above -20 C and there's a 10-foot visibility fog 300 days of the year. Primary duty there is clearing the runway of obstructions. Every time someone left, they took a rock with them so someday there would be no more island and no one would ever have to go back. Or so that legend goes/

      Reassigned to Antarctica

    7. Re:Why not? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      I highly doubt the missile systems are tied to any sort of network. Either way toss up a guest wifi net and leave them alone. Believe me, there are worse ways for people with missile keys and too much time of their hands to vent their slowly building frustrations.

      There is also nothing about a porn site that makes it more likely to harbor malware. Most of the infections I've seen came from financial sites.

  6. cue to the missile jokes.... by schlachter · · Score: 5, Funny

    Johnson: [notices Dr. Evil's spaceship on radar] Colonel, you better take a look at this radar.
    Colonel: What is it, son?
    Johnson: I don't know, sir, but it looks like a giant--
    [cut to the sky in two jets]
    Jet Pilot: Dick!
    Dick: Yeah?
    Pilot: Take a look outta starboard.
    Dick: Oh, my God! It looks like a huge--
    [cut to a forest with 2 birdwatchers]
    Bird-Watching Woman: Pecker!
    Bird-Watching Man: [raises his binoculars] Oh, where?
    Bird-Watching Woman: Wait! that's not a woodpecker. It looks like someone's--
    [cut to a boot camp]
    Army Sergeant: PRIVATES! We have reports of an unidentified flying object! It is a long, smooth shaft, complete with--
    [cut to a baseball game]
    Umpire: 2 balls! [looks up from game] What is that? That looks just like an enormous--
    [cut to a Chinese school]
    Teacher: Wang! Pay attention!
    Wang: I was distracted by that enormous flying--
    [cut to a concert with Willie Nelson and another guitarist]
    Musician: Willie.
    Willie: Yeah?
    Musician: What's that?
    Willie: [looks up] Well, it looks like a giant--
    [cut back to headquarters]
    Colonel: Johnson!
    Johnson: Yes, sir!
    Colonel: Get on the horn to British Intelligence and let them know about this!

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  7. Oblig video response... by wbr1 · · Score: 1
    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  8. Meat Misiles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is not what they should be seeking.

  9. Make Love Not War by jphess2 · · Score: 2

    Make love not War....pass the hand cream

  10. doesn't matter.. by CheshireDragon · · Score: 1

    either way they are still watching missiles :/

    --
    "That's right...I said it."
  11. I get this... But. by mitcheli · · Score: 1

    Keep in mind that the folks we ask to stay on that bleeding edge of offense stay in a hole in the ground for 48 hours straight without any access to the world around them besides those systems. Perhaps the director would be willing to see if MWR can chip in some assets? After all, unofficial business is what MWR is for.

    --
    Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
  12. No content filter? by hawguy · · Score: 1

    The US Missile Defense agency doesn't have any sort of content filter that could block this type of thing? You'd think they could use a simple whitelisting system - there can't be that many sites outside of *.gov that Missile Defense workers legitmately need to access from work. Let them use a smart phone in the lunchroom (outside of secure areas) when they need to update Facebook (or browse porn).

    1. Re:No content filter? by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

      This surprises me as well: I work at a government facility, and it's locked down to the point where I can't get a fair number of sites that actually relate to my job, never mind something work-inappropriate.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
  13. FTA: Its not that big a problem by oic0 · · Score: 1

    Read that actual article lol. "MDA has more than 8,000 employees, and less than a half-dozen were found to have accessed restricted sites or downloaded inappropriate materials" Not that bad a record IMO, 5 or fewer out of 8,000 employees.

  14. Overblown story by addie · · Score: 4, Informative

    The article says that less than half a dozen individuals were found to be accessing inappropriate material. That's out of over 8,000 individuals who work at MDA - one memo was sent out to address the problem.

    This is not news.

  15. Check. by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

    From article: U.S. missile defense workers have been warned that porn on the job is not allowed. It's not just a question of public security due to distraction, but there's also the risk of computer security due to malware found on many such sites.

    So they're running Windows machines. Check. Thanks for the information. :>

    1. Re:Check. by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Wrong assumption. They could as well run Solaris/SPARC with Firefox, and getting infested with XSS and JavaScript viruses.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    2. Re:Check. by poofmeisterp · · Score: 2

      Wrong assumption. They could as well run Solaris/SPARC with Firefox, and getting infested with XSS and JavaScript viruses.

      Maybe I should expand.... In my comment there is a ":>" at the end. :> = humor.

    3. Re:Check. by cpghost · · Score: 1

      Right, I've missed it (obviously, I don't qualify for watching incoming missiles...). :)

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    4. Re:Check. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Funny

      The only people I've seen use :> are furrys. It's the bird-smily.

      Go on. Just admit it :>

    5. Re:Check. by poofmeisterp · · Score: 3, Informative

      *peck*

    6. Re:Check. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Caw.

  16. It's not porn... by Sinister+Stairs · · Score: 1

    It's not really porn they're watching -- it's terrorist missives encrypted in image files.

  17. Image vs. Reality by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    The military wants an image of a disciplined group of people focused on their job.
    Reality the bulk is a bunch of young adults in their sexual prime...

    What do you think will happen?

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  18. She Electrified Me... by kstahmer · · Score: 1

    And obliterated Manhattan when the 20 Megaton ICBM hit New York City.

    --
    HRH The Duke of Windsor
  19. These machines must be secure... by gstrickler · · Score: 1

    ...so from now on, bring you own porn to work in the form of a magazine.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
  20. Why isn't DoD using Websense? by schwit1 · · Score: 1

    Not just for blocking porn, but malware.

  21. Same thing at the SEC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    SEC staff were found doing the same thing. Lawyers – senior level people – pulling down 220k+/year were amassing porn archives. Madoff was still a market maker running an options exchange while this was going on.

    More recently the IT managers in Los Angeles have had to tell city 'workers' to stop streaming the Olympics due to network congestion.

  22. replace the men in the missile silos with computer by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    replace the men in the missile silos with computer control so we don't have to deal with this.

  23. New Designs by lilfields · · Score: 1

    Clearly they are just studying new shaft designs for missiles. We are always turning to nature to inspire us. Maybe we need to lube the rockets before we penetrate mother earth's atmosphere. You would never get such an idea without porn. Science.

  24. Re:replace the men in the missile silos with compu by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

    See the following documentary on why this is a bad idea:
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/
    It documents an early attempt to remove the humans from the loop, and some of the problems encountered.

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
  25. I am not allowed to view porn at work... by The+Faywood+Assassin · · Score: 1

    Adult pornography is not generally illegal, true, but unless you actually work in the industry it probably is not appropriate for the office.

    Fairly, however, an employee should be instructed as to what is and is not appropriate for work before they can be disciplined for violating it. I remember being presented with an internet use policy when I was hired, as well as sexual harassment training. So it you are told in advance not to do certain things at work, and you freely agree not to do them, you can then be disciplined for doing said actions.

    Otherwise one could argue the old "No one told me porn at work was not allowed!" a la George Costanza.

    --

    "I'm a humble person really,

    I'm actually much greater than I think I am"

    1. Re:I am not allowed to view porn at work... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Internet pornography is actually illegal in the US. It's just that even in the most conservative states, very rarely is any law enforcement agency dumb enough to try enforcing that law. Bush II made a try at it though - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscenity_Prosecution_Task_Force

    2. Re:I am not allowed to view porn at work... by drkim · · Score: 1

      ...you know the people actually working on porn are probably sneaking off to watch missile launch videos.

    3. Re:I am not allowed to view porn at work... by PPH · · Score: 1

      Fairly, however, an employee should be instructed as to what is and is not appropriate for work before they can be disciplined for violating it.

      The problem is: some employers leave the judgment of "appropriate" up to the employee. Right up to the point at which some crybaby complains. Surf porn sites at work. Generally not a good idea. But Tea party, anti Semitic, or racist sites? If they happen to be aligned with the bosses' political/social agenda, no problem.

      How is that right? I mean, I feel a lot less comfortable sitting next to someone immersed in fundie Xtian crap than the Naked News.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  26. Re:The less up tight these people are... by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

    This goes against the whole slashdot groupthink on this story, but you know what.. I don't care if they are looking at porn or not.

    These people are stuck in damn boring situations for long hours and I really don't need or want to know what they do with that time. If they really are using their tech well enough I am guessing a computer would pick up any incoming well before a human could comprend it anyway.

  27. Re:replace the men in the missile silos with compu by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

    I'd like to play global thermonuclear war, Joshua....

  28. Re:The less up tight these people are... by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    The less up tight these people are the safer I feel.

    Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh... I do not avoid women, Mandrake.

    --

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

  29. What's the worst that could happen? by coldsalmon · · Score: 1

    We shouldn't be so uptight, it's not like everyone in the world will die if they're distracted from their job for an instant.

  30. It's job-relevant by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    They were watching massive ordnance penetrators attacking and blowing their payloads in various soft targets :D

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  31. What they say about keyboards vs. toilet-seats... by rainer_d · · Score: 1
    I think, if I worked there, I would think about bringing my own keyboard then.

    Mouse too.

    --
    Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
  32. Well, it gives a whole new meaning to the term... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    "pocket rocket."

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  33. virus attacks by lkcl · · Score: 1

    there's actually a serious reason why they shouldn't permit internet-porn-watching in U.S. classified military networks. if they really really want to watch porn, they should provide *isolated* computers and DVDs - or the personnel should bring their own personal machines into the building (if permitted).

    criminals *know* that lots of people watch porn, so they make sure that such sites are loaded with viruses. even just knowing, now, that U.S. military watch porn, you can be damn sure that there will be foreign intelligence agencies who will now increase the number and severity of the viruses and trojans. this is even used as the plot in at least one sci-fi film i've seen, for goodness sake!

  34. Masturbating Men Miss Massive Missile Mayhem! by Ted+Stoner · · Score: 1

    Film at 11

  35. Missle Silos Underground for multiple days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't know how the missles are manned today, but they used to be underground in the middle of nowhere under many, mant tons of reenforced concrete. No cell signals.

    I think they worked 3-5 day shifts.

    After their testing is all performed daily and the place is cleaned, there isn't much they can do - jobwise. Their job is to be in that underground silo and at the ready should a command to fire come in. They are tested with firing commands all the time. The crews can't tell the difference between another test and the real thing.

    There's only so much reading and studying that a man can do with their finger on missles that can kill 100M people. They need to relax. No wives or girlfriends are allowed down there, so .... other stimulation is needed. For the generation today, magazines aren't stimulating enough. Porn is the answer and honestly, I don't have any issue with it, provided their other daily tasks are completed in a satisfactory manner.

    BTW, my father was a missleman ... many years ago.

    OTOH, I have doubts that men are still manning those silos. A remote control would be easier, unless the systems required on-site daily maintenance.

  36. Promote them all to management... by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Then prosecute them under sexual harassment law. As managers share legal liability with a company if they knowingly permit such a situation (such as participating in it). They can keep their jobs (government employees are almost impossible to fire), let people take them to civil court until they've had enough.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  37. Whitelist-only by jroysdon · · Score: 1

    I'm going to assume they have their critical workstations airgapped and these are their email/other workstations where they can access situational awareness information.

    Simple way to resolve this is to allow access to whitelist-only pre-approved sites. We do this in our SCADA control room. SCADA machines are airgapped, and email/documentation machines are white-list only.

    We do give them access to Terminal Servers in a DMZ which have less-restricted Internet access.

    Also, we allow them to bring in their own personal devices that are never connected to our networks. It's pretty boring at 3am on a 12-hour shift.

  38. didn't usa learn from Iran? by nazsco · · Score: 1

    Why places with devices like that even have internet connection, let alone browsers?

  39. Anyone get caught red handed? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Article didn't say.

  40. Trolling or ignorant? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

    Didn't click TFL (the fucking links). These were certainly the Wikipedia entries about goatse.

    So your browser does not tell you what the links are before you click them? Either you're using a lousy browser, or you're incompetent at using a decent browser, or you're a trollish coward as well as an anonymous one.

    For your edification, the links were to the Wikipedia articles on (i) the vulva, and (ii) the glans penis.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Trolling or ignorant? by kubernet3s · · Score: 1

      Here is the actual link. It is actually quite SFW! Enjoy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse.cx