White House Circulating Draft of Executive Order On Cybersecurity
New submitter InPursuitOfTruth writes with news that the Obama administration has been circulating a draft of an executive order focused on cybersecurity. This follows the recent collapse of an attempt at cybersecurity legislation in the Senate. According to people who have seen the draft, the order would codify standards and best practices for critical infrastructure. That said, it's questionable how effective it would be, since participation would be voluntary, and the standards would be set by "an inter-agency council that would be led by the Department of Homeland Security." The other agencies involved would include NIST, the DoD, and the Commerce Dept. "It would be left up to the companies to decide what steps they want to take to meet the standards, so the government would not dictate what type of technology or strategy they should adopt."
... proof positive of the existence of persistent fuck you overs.
many might say that but in reality it more factual evidence of the degradation of the government of which the Declaration of Independence has instructions by the founders for the peoples as to what to do about the failing of government of which they foresaw the probability of...... Go ahead and read it for yourselves, the instructions really are ther with real life examples too, so to be clear of their intent to communicate to the people in such a time of need..
Rule 1 of critical national infrastructure: Don't put it on the damned internet.
Rule 2: See rule 1.
Rule 3: Are you sure you saw rule 1? Quadruple check anyway.
Rule 4: Manufacture everything pertaining to the critical national infrastructure in your own country (microchips, resistors, diodes, final assembly, etc)
Rule 5: Keep it simple.
Now for big business:
Rule 1: Don't let anyone leave your office with a notebook or any form of portable media containing sensitive customer information unless it is encrypted and heading to your off-site tape storage facility.
Rule 2: Don't let anyone hook their own computers and gadgets up to your network.
Rule 3: If it needs to be on the internet, have a nice firewall between it and the internet.
Rule 4: Have your web browsers running in sandboxes.
There, now we don't need feel good, ineffective legislation.
led by the Department of Homeland Security
Anything led by the DHS is bound to go from "voluntary" to mandatory (or hyper peculiar) too quickly. I can't imagine the same band of brigands doing such things as this, this , this, or that, and so on and so forth could offer anything constructive to the interweb or anything else.
Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
I shared it before, but this Congress has passed a pittance of actual legislation. The trade off is whether to have no work or at least something that works. The separation of powers was to avoid abuses, not to obstruct the government from running itself.
Obama is a liberal? Are you nuts?
Obama is the best Republican president we've had since . . . Bill Clinton.
First it's purely voluntary.
Then it's voluntary... but if you want to be a supplier to the US Government, you must implement it.
Then if you want to continue being a supplier, you MUST implement it AND your own suppliers must do it, or you can't be a supplier.
By this point since "almost everyone is doing it anyway" and "those who aren't are clearly a threat to security" it will be mandatory.
E
That said, it's questionable how effective it would be, since participation would be voluntary
That "voluntary" part is inserted to throw off people so that they can't object to this executive order
After a while, the word "voluntary" would disappear, and participation would no longer be "voluntary" and the whole thing would be run by the Homeland Security or one of the many 3-alphabet-agencies
Count on it !
Cyber-security or whatever -security it might be, they are all designed to do one thing - to take away the freedom of the ordinary people and to concentrate all the power at the top
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
On one hand, efficacy and direct, immediate action.
No. There's been nothing efficient, fast, or direct about this. It's another power grab by the Department of Homeland Security, and pardon my french, but fuck them. They have incompetently managed every resource assigned to them, whether it's investigating domestic crime, securing airports, or anything else. They've created gulag prison camps within our borders to throw protesters in, encouraged the usurpation of local and state laws to further their interests, they irradiate their citizens and workers alike to the point that cancer clusters are now showing up in TSA screeners that are well-beyond being able to be dismissed as a statistical abnormality, and the list goes on.
And now they want a master kill switch for the internet, to dictate terms about how all our communications infrastructure is organized, and they have deep connections with media organizations -- of which only a few need to be manipulated to suppress information at the national level. The Department of Homeland Security has become the Ministry of Truth, and thanks to clever and covert manipulation of the media and the occasional use of deadly force and questionable laws, has all but silenced dissent or even knowledge of what its activities are.
No. It's gone too far. It no longer matters to me how well-intentioned or beneficial a proposal is; If it is administered or requested by Homeland Security, my advice is to resist it in any way you reasonably can... they're a dangerous and corrupt organization, unamerican and destructive of the very means it seeks to protect. I'd rather have a hundred Osama Bin Ladens out there plotting the downfall of my country than to turn over my personal safety and security to a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats -- at least in the former case, I know who my enemies are.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
...in the NIST SP-800 series of publications. Federal (US) agencies are already expected to abide by the standards described in that series, as well as other NIST/FIPS publications, e.g.FIPS 140-2 for cryptographic modules,or FIPS 200 for establishing minimum security requirements for specific systems.
Having had to study several of those publications for work-related tasks, I don't see where there should be any level of pushback from the corporate IT world, since a great many of them already have security measures in place that meet or exceed the requirements described in the NIST and FIPS publications. Individuals' systems, or SOHO systems and networks, would be a bit more problematic; a retailer throwing together an office network of four or five off-the-shelf boxes from (picking a name at random) Dell would likely have no idea where to start in trying to meet all the various technical specifications described just in NIST 800-59, if they even know that publication exists.
Bottom line...there's a great deal of education that will be required, not only with individuals and small-shop operators, but with network designers and custom-system builders. The days of ordering up a laundry list of parts from (again, grabbing names out of midair) NewEgg, throwing them together and delivering a completed machine to a customer with a pat on the back and a "have fun" are gone. Especially if the customer falls into one of the more ticklish areas of electronic security, such as a doctor's office or a law firm.
Just my 2p worth.
All the world's an analog stage, and digital circuits play only bit parts.