Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Air Force Firewall Now Designated a Weapons System (gazette.com)

Posted by timothy on from the my-name-is-a-killing-word-now-pay-up dept.

An anonymous reader writes with a report from the Colorado Springs Gazette that the U.S. Air Force Space Command has declared its first cyber "weapons system" operational. The weapon, deemed fully operational this month, is basically a big firewall designed to protect the Air Force's internal 1 million-user network from hackers. It will be a hot topic at the Rocky Mountain Cyber Symposium, which is expected to draw hundreds of computer experts to The Broadmoor for a four-day confab starting Monday." More from the article about why a firewall would be called a weapon: The biggest reason for the weaponization push is financial: When it comes to budget battles, weapons, even those with a keyboard and a mouse, get cash from Congress. "Designating something as a weapons system really does help us justify our funding," Col. Pamela Wooley, who commands the Alabama-based 26th Cyberspace Operations Group, which includes the new weapon.

137 comments

  1. sadly no details by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 0

    Sadly no details in TFA about what this firewall does. Is it just a NAT box? Is it a full-fledged IDS with dashboards that can flash “TERRORIST HACKING ATTEMPT” in big red letters while everybody scrambles to cyber battle stations with klaxons going off?

    *sigh* I remember when the word cyber was a verb that meant to have online sex on IRC. Hmm, actually, that gives me a strange new way to interpret stories about cyber stuff! Not unlike oblig xkcd (oblig for this comment anyway).

    1. Re:sadly no details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here are pics

      https://cumuloquoise.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/wargames-09.jpg

    2. Re: sadly no details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The DOD seems to prefer Cyber because it's another C, like in C4I. You can now have C5I, no matter the horrible connotation.

  2. it's a "weapon". it gets funded. by turkeydance · · Score: 4, Insightful

    profit!

    1. Re:it's a "weapon". it gets funded. by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      "firewall".... so it erects a wall of fire? Fund that sucker! Put one on the Mexican border!

    2. Re:it's a "weapon". it gets funded. by ls671 · · Score: 1

      No need to fund that, don't you already know? The Mexicans will pay for it.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    3. Re:it's a "weapon". it gets funded. by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      It's probably easier than finding a justification that it "keeps out them terrorists" or something like that. Had it been civilian, they'd probably asked for extra funding "to stop the kiddie porn" or otherwise "to protect the children".

    4. Re:it's a "weapon". it gets funded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't a wall of fire on the Mexican border be the normal result of BurritoFest?

  3. "weapons... get cash from Congress" by ffkom · · Score: 1, Funny

    So maybe the poor should re-define themselves as "potential suicide-bombers" to be treated just as generous?

    1. Re:"weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suicide bombers are considered terrorists, not "weapons" the military can use. So, no dolla for the poor.

    2. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 0, Troll

      Suicide bombers are like viking berserkers and japanese kamakazi pilots. They are the walking, talking embodiment of courage and dedication. The fact that you are their enemy doesn't diminish that in the slightest. Oppose them or not, when you disparage them, you diminish yourself.

      The ones who deserve contempt are the drone pilots. They're walking, talking embodiments of cowardice, deserving of utter contempt.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    3. Re:"weapons... get cash from Congress" by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Oh, be serious. The poor should refer to themselves as veterans so when a suicide bomb finally does go off in the United States the Republicans will finally be interested in helping them!

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    4. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death is the cowards' way out.
      In a battle, the only thing that matters is who survives.

    5. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Beeftopia · · Score: 1

      Suicide bombers are like viking berserkers and japanese kamakazi pilots. They are the walking, talking embodiment of courage and dedication. The fact that you are their enemy doesn't diminish that in the slightest. Oppose them or not, when you disparage them, you diminish yourself.

      It is true that suicide bombers are badass. However, they are fighting for extreme limits on freedom, fighting to take autonomy and power away from the populace and give it to the ultimate nanny state. That's regrettable. In virtually all cases, they are anti-education, anti-science, anti-technology, anti-liberty.

      The ones who deserve contempt are the drone pilots. They're walking, talking embodiments of cowardice, deserving of utter contempt.

      If combat were purely a dick-waving contest (war is to a certain degree, but I'm talking about actual tactical combat), then this might be true. However, combat is about winning, as quickly, efficiently and safely as possible. Very Art Of War-esque. As such, drone pilots play an important role in force protection, threat identification and threat neutralization. They save our troops' lives and advance the mission. As such, I consider them extremely effective and worthy combatants. They're a manifestation of the West's technological dominance, something suicide bombers and their handlers will never understand or achieve.

    6. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Suicide bombers are like viking berserkers and japanese kamakazi pilots. They are the walking, talking embodiment of stupidity and brainwashing.

      FTFY.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    7. Re:"weapons... get cash from Congress" by mjm1231 · · Score: 2, Informative

      That won't help at all. The Republican party does a decent job of creating veterans. Helping them, not so much.

      --
      Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    8. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I describe things only as they are. In war, there is no honor - thus no contempt for the drone pilots. Your job is not to die for your country but to make the other son of a bitch die for his. The idea of honor (so quaintly also included in the Geneva Convention) is gone in war. Chivalry died its final death (even if it ever was there) in WWI.

      That does not mean that some acts are not honorable and some acts are not deserving of contempt. It's not cowardice to not want to give up your life if it can be trivially prevented. Are we cowards for having everyone charge, woman and children, on the hill with rocks when we have rifles?

      I guess we could say it's cowardly but I'm not sure I agree. Where does that line get drawn? Is it static? How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go? Are you a coward for flying higher than FLAC or an ARM? Are you a coward for shooting from a distance? Are you a coward for wearing clothing? How mano y mano do you need to go, needlessly, before it's not cowardice?

      I'd say it's smart to hang out in the drone cave instead of wanting to needlessly risk additional lives. I'd not call them heroic for doing so but I'd not call them cowards either. If there's no need to risk a life of your own, why do it? What the hell? That's not even a good moral code. If you can do the same task with fewer lives of your own side lost then, by all means, do it. You don't needlessly risk lives just out of some sense of chivalry.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    9. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here ibwas thinking that the most important thing in battle was having a moral justification for killing.

      Being civilised appears to be an obsolete concept. We're barbarians. We just happen to have cell phones and LCD TVs. But barbarians nonetheless.

    10. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      If combat were purely a dick-waving contest (war is to a certain degree, but I'm talking about actual tactical combat), then this might be true. However, combat is about winning, as quickly, efficiently and safely as possible. Very Art Of War-esque

      George S Patton expressed this very well:

      The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    11. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      You are an idiot.

      Being civilized has never meant being "more" moral (whatever that means). That's a fairy-tale idiots such as yourself spout to feel better about having to live behind a wall.

    12. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Civilisation is self-defining: It means having the characteristics of the culture of the speaker.

      There's a good line from one of the ancient Greek philosophers, I forget which, contrasting the funerary practices of Greeks with those of a far-off people in Africa. He concluded that both of them would consider the practices of the other to be savage, offensive and an abominable practice - and questioned if either can be said to be more right.

    13. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Stupidity and courage can manifest in the same way externally.

      As for brainwashing, it's unavoidable. Basic human nature from childhood - copy the ambient tribal views.

    14. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fighter pilots are walking, talking embodiments of cowardice for relying on guided missiles instead of dogfighting.

      American revolutionaries are walking, talking embodiments of cowardice for not lining up their troops and having a fair shootout.

      Archers are walking, talking embodiments of cowardice for attacking from afar. They should be on the front lines with a sharpened stick like the pikemen.

      Pikemen are walking, talking embodiments of cowardice for not fighting with a slightly longer stick than a knight.

      Knights are walking, talking embodiments of cowardice for wearing armor.

      etc, etc, etc

    15. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are from a long line of cowards. Those chickenshit traitor bastards who hid behind trees and wouldnt fight like men, even after the French came to save their asses. Thus, being craven comes easily to you.

    16. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using a weapon? That gives you an advantage, you walking talking embodiment of cowardice!
      REAL warriors use their teeth and claws only. Anything else is only deserving of utter contempt. Or posting on /., which is much the same.

    17. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fight like 'men'? You sexist!

    18. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Dogers · · Score: 1

      REAL wars are fought butt naked in the dirt, last man standing wins.

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
    19. Re:"weapons... get cash from Congress" by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      Oh, be serious. The poor should refer to themselves as veterans so when a suicide bomb finally does go off in the United States the Republicans will finally be interested in helping them!

      I hope they do better than the VA under the Democrats - helping them right into the grave!

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    20. Re:"weapons... get cash from Congress" by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Actually the Republicans cut their funding in 2015.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    21. Re: "weapons... get cash from Congress" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they are fools. They won't go to paradise, because there is none. They won't get 72 houris, because there are none. They won't please their God, because there is none.
      They are fools.

  4. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not label all IT as weapons for secured funding? Are the budget managers really so ignorant?

    1. Re:Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once it is classified as a weapon system then a whole bunch of rules dealing with changes come into force. Doing it with a generic Windows 7 client would mean that if you needed to add software that was not part of the weapon system would require additional paperwork and tracking. Also patches cannot just be added, they have to be tested against all modification versions and then released on a scheduled basis.

    2. Re:Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pgp encryption was classified as munitions so that they could limit its export

    3. Re:Nonsense by jc42 · · Score: 1

      pgp encryption was classified as munitions so that they could limit its export

      Hey, I've still got my t-shirt with the 3-line perl implementation of pgp, and the explanation on the back that it's legally a "munition". I still wear it once or twice a year to some inappropriate event where I know there'll be lots of them furriner types. ;-)

      (So far I've never been arrested for wearing it to public events, and none of my acquaintances who also have one have been arrested either. I've been disappointed to not be able to follow the fun that would follow if they actually tried to punish someone for wearing such dangerous t-shirts.)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    4. Re:Nonsense by cfalcon · · Score: 2

      Well, much like you aren't allowed to build a bomb, but you ARE allowed access to gasoline, you're of COURSE permitted the PERL implementation. You're much more likely to self immolate than do damage to anything else, after all...

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

      It was illegal to export any form of pgp, even printed on a t-shirt or tattooed on a person.
      http://www.cypherspace.org/adam/shirt/

      There have been some changes to the law recently

    6. Re:Nonsense by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      In 3 lines of perl.. are you actually implementing encryption, or are you just using some CPAN package and implementing the protocol only?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    7. Re: Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Three lines of sufficiently leet perl can do as much as, like, 300 lines of merely competent C code.

      IOW, yes, it's an implementation. Check it out here: http://www.cypherspace.org/adam/shirt/

    8. Re: Nonsense by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Yup; and that's certainly 'leet perl; it looks like line noise. ;-)

      But we might dispute the comment that it'd take 300 lines of C. 300 lines of readable, well-formatted C, perhaps, but C can be made nearly as cryptic and compact as perl. It's mainly things like pattern matching and table manipulation and such where C requires the use of libraries to be so succinct. For basic bit/number crunching, perl isn't really much more compact than C.

      I wonder if the Obscure C folks have tackled this problem. Maybe I should google it ...

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  5. Why not labell it a deflector shield? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless it's going to generate a reverse reaction of equal strength, destroying the attackers, it's not a "weapon"

    Heck a $5000 is more of a weapon by definition.

  6. Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by brian.stinar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Unless this has some ridiculous hack-back-attack capabilities, complete with a nerdy looking airman typing as fast as humanly possible to "execute" the hack back attack, Congress may have to start looking a bit closer at these "weapons systems."

    We need more toilet paper for the bathroom.
    Here you go.
    WTF? Why does this toilet paper have pictures of guns on it?
    This is weaponized toilet paper. It helps with allocating funding...

    1. Re:Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by p0p0 · · Score: 1

      Hey as long as it's a 2-ply weapons system I'm all for wide-scale deployment.

    2. Re:Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Hey as long as it's a 2-ply weapons system I'm all for wide-scale deployment." ~ pOpO

      I think I found my sig comment for the year. Thanks!! : p

    3. Re:Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by Velox_SwiftFox · · Score: 1

      It's dual-use. One side sandpaper, the other toilet tissue. Reading the instructions is highly recommended.

    4. Re:Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes all that cyber cash is starting to spread wide and deep.
      The back part has been on the books for a while now.

      "U.S. spy agencies mounted 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, documents show" (August 30, 2013)
      https://www.washingtonpost.com...
      under GENIE for "“.. covert implants,” sophisticated malware transmitted .."

      For first time, US military says it would use offensive cyberweapons (Mar 14, 2013)
      http://arstechnica.com/securit...
      "This is an offensive team"

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re: Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can backup the firewall on a really big hard drive and go clobber someone to death with it. Weapon system certified.

    6. Re:Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does this toilet paper have pictures of guns on it?

      Nonsense. Their toilet paper has the Constitution printed on it. Not for reading...

    7. Re:Hack Back Attack AUTHORIZED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the used toilet papers are going into moisture and temperature controlled containers for the benefit and enjoyment of the future generations?

  7. To cyber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do know it is still the computer geeks' term for sexy time. It was an in joke to see if you could insert that into the popular lexicon. And now, it is cyber this and that. Without a trace of humour.

    1. Re:To cyber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know it is still the computer geeks' term for sexy time. It was an in joke to see if you could insert that into the popular lexicon. And now, it is cyber this and that. Without a trace of humour.

      I know, it's amazing........ haha
      cyber cyber cyber cyber

  8. You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    some contractor got rich off of this.

    1. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just more corporate welfare.

    2. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we want to survive we should flee America as fast as we can.

      The spew here doesn't talk about fleeing as much as it used to.

    3. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is how the Republican's corporate welfare works.

    4. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans are all about corporate welfare. All about corporate welfare.

    5. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, and there are just too few of u progressives left to win, but u still fight. I respect u 4 that

    6. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, and there are just too few of u progressives left to win, but u still fight. I respect u 4 that

      Thank you. With the CONservative control of congress, the executive branch, the judicial branch, and nearly all corporations, the fight is hopeless, but a few brave progressives are still fighting.

    7. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. I was part of that at one time, I'm ashamed to say. I cashed my paycheck because I needed the money for my family. After in if their thugs in blue killed my wife and daughter, I was able to afford to take an honest job.

    8. Re: You just know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people left here are not the equal of those that were here before

    9. Re: You just know... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Perhaps some people looked into the alternatives. If you don't speak Icelandic or Norwegian they start getting iffy.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  9. extra benefit by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    Plus, if we call it a weapon and we catch you with one, we'll just ignore all of your rights and treat you with "extreme prejudice". And no second amendment bullshit, the second amendment does not say that you have the right to own a firewall.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:extra benefit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or catch somebody from "knocking the door." That's like hitting a tank with a baguette, or a assault rifle with a lollipop, which is a clear assault towards a weapon system holding national security implications and having the corresponding punishment.

    2. Re:extra benefit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Common sense firewall control people! The founding fathers never envisioned control at level 2.

  10. Obviously by penguinoid · · Score: 3, Informative

    weapon [wep-uh n]

    noun
    1. any instrument or device for use in attack or defense in combat, fighting, or war, as a sword, rifle, or cannon.
    2. anything used against an opponent, adversary, or victim:
    the deadly weapon of satire.
    3. Zoology. any part or organ serving for attack or defense, as claws, horns, teeth, or stings.

    It's no more surprising than storing weapons in an armory.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Obviously by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room!"

    2. Re:Obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "These hands and feet are registered as deadly weapons."

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/31/these-hands-and-feet-are-registered-as-deadly-weapons-in-guam/
      http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=460

    3. Re:Obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it's obviously and let me explain why:

      - by defining a firewall or other computer system as 'Weapon System' it becomes a military object.
      - attacking this military object will be considered as an act of war
      - an act of war against this system makes it possible to react with conventional weapons

      So you ddos the weapons system? ... nukes incoming for you.

    4. Re:Obviously by quenda · · Score: 1

      weapon [wep-uh n]

      noun
      3. Zoology. any part or organ serving for attack or defense,

      Or love.

    5. Re:Obviously by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Esp. if you're a snail. (Look it up.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  11. Re:Trump will save this country by davester666 · · Score: 0

    When will the commanders just declare their dicks to be weapons, and demand cash from Congress in order to keep them in good working order and to use them as necessary on the battlefield?

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  12. Weaponize TETRAS by Required+Snark · · Score: 1
    1. Weaponize Tetras

    2. ???

    3. Profit!!!

    Note: ??? == Congressional Funding, for all values of ???

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  13. firewall a weapon? by no-body · · Score: 1

    Do i need a weapon license now?

    1. Re:firewall a weapon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, tinfoil hat time here, but what if you do? If a firewall is a weapon, then maybe the next step is to make it illegal to protect your computer against the NSA etc.

    2. Re:firewall a weapon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firewalls have always needed licenses. (audio)

  14. military targets by sittingnut · · Score: 2

    so people working on such 'weapons' are now legitimate military targets?

    1. Re:military targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already were. They aren't civilians.

    2. Re:military targets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, no. Cisco or Lockheed are civilian companies. It doesn't matter if they are making weapons, those workers are civilians. The weapons and their manufactories are legitimate targets, but the people are usually not. At the same time, if they get killed while destroying a legitimate target, it is considered legal.

      So you could blow up Cisco HQ, but not assassinate the Cisco CEO, and justify it under the laws of war.

  15. 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    According to Wikipedia:

    308,016 active personnel
    180,084 civilian personnel
    71,400 reserve personnel
    106,700 air guard personnel

    That is only 666,000 people.

    1. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Republican-ruled media lies.

    2. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This, and that is something every human has the right to know.

    3. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One reason is because of the self-imposed exile by so many journalists after the shrub was reelected. They know so much more about what is happening than the average person.

    4. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have too much influence over the media.

    5. Re:1 million is wrong by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      Maybe they counted the 350,000+ wannabees that walk around the shopping mall dressed in camo?

    6. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikipedia is a joke. Anyone could have added those lies.

    7. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our media has betrayed us

    8. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish they would just kill us. We all know their kind wants us to die.

    9. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. You just know those repubs have more than a million in their air farce.

    10. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They always have gun in hand.

    11. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps everyone is wrong...

      Just kidding.

    12. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The few surving true progressives are too few to fight against Wikipedia.

    13. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One reason is because of the self-imposed exile by so many journalists after the shrub was reelected. They know so much more about what is happening than the average person.

      Anyone else notice that the liberals are making even less sense lately than usual?

    14. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are diminished by them

    15. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had this beautiful dream the other night that the Republican-ruled media was gone. Unfortunately I woke up.

    16. Re: 1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They truly are the party if death.

    17. Re: 1 million is wrong by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      In fairness, reality itself is making a lot less sense than usual. Did you catch them girls at the Trump rally singing "Deal from strength or get crushed every time?"

      Cracked (reasonably liberal site) has a summary, but the mere fact that it is happening is a pretty serious glitch in the Matrix.

      http://www.cracked.com/video_1...

    18. Re:1 million is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      500k overpaid contractors. We like contractors. They don't get VA benefits.

    19. Re:1 million is wrong by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      The civilian count is likely only counting Civil Servants. Contractors could very easily make up the difference.

  16. The firewall is next to useless .. by tetraverse · · Score: 1

    "The weapon .. is basically a big firewall designed to protect the .. network from hackers."

    A basic firewall blocks connecting based on a table of IP address and port combinations. If the 'firewall' can't identify malicious connections then it's next to useless. So called 'stateful inspection firewalls' utilize a man-in-the-middle hack, only work by installing a fake cert on the client browser, decrypts passing data and supposedly identifies malicious code. Which begs the question, if the MITM firewall can decryption your communications, what's stopping some malicious third part doing the same. So basically here we have someone diluting security in order to increase security. If the 'firewall' can't identify malicious code then it's next to useless. Most of todays rich web applications can't function without running embedded code. Clicking on a URL that downloads and runs someone else's code makes the firewall next to useless.

    stateful inspection firewall

    1. Re:The firewall is next to useless .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most corporate networks work this way. It isn't a hack when you own the equipment and do it on purpose with permission. The malicious third party doesn't have a trusted certificate your computer will accept. Adding in this type of system doesn't decrease security. Have you ever heard of Snort? It's an IDS system that's constantly updated to spot and block zero-day exploits before companies even have time to create a patch. It works, it works well. I don't think you know what you're talking about.

    2. Re:The firewall is next to useless .. by Livius · · Score: 1

      Maybe 'firewall' is a metaphor and it really is something different.

      (I doubt it, but it is possible.)

    3. Re:The firewall is next to useless .. by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That's only one subset (there's a lot of traffic that is not encrypted) and IMHO an incredibly stupid thing to do but people still do it. I'm waiting for the obvious to happen and someone in charge of one of the devices with fake certs running off with a pile of credit card details resulting in a bank suing the criminals employer into oblivion. Those increasingly common firewalls with the MITM attack are mostly just there to keep people off facebook on work time and few have worked out how much of a liability they are.
      Change your employee computer usage agreement to include "we will spy on all your credit card transactions" and see how they react, because that is exactly what these things do. If you deploy them you need very good reasons (eg. classified info upstream), need to be able to trust anyone with access to the system and need the users to be aware that everything they send "securely" now has extra people with access to it. Most things like this fail on all counts and do not have a good reason to be there other than somebody read about them in Forbes.

  17. ITAR by PPH · · Score: 1

    If it's classified as a weapon, it is covered by ITAR and can't be easily exported. So other nations can't install one of their own from a regulated vendor (country) and block attacks from Pentagon cyber warfare systems or probes by the NSA.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:ITAR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And those other countries will:

      1. Come up with their own "weapons-grade" firewall systems.

      2. Persuade (with a $5 wrench) a regulated vendor operating within their borders to cough up the tech.

      3. Buy the tech from a supposed ally.

      4. Buy the tech on the black market.

      5. Commit an espionage operation to steal the tech.

      6. Type in the source code from a dead tree book.

      7. Etc....

      Laws are only effective so long as people willingly enforce them.

      Eventually, the entire world is going to need to start building it's own tech completely in house, (at least for government operations), or watch as every other nation hacks them into oblivion. (At least as far as their own sovereignty is concerned.)

  18. nothing too low for these people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't believe (well, yes, unfortunately I can) that these people are so brazen as to openly admit they will do anything to get our money. The military industrial complex has run completely amok. It's even infiltrating our civilian life - we have tanks and storm troopers patrolling the suburbs for chrisake. And here's the irony - I'll bet dollars to donuts that almost all of these government subsidized sucklings vote against anything and everything that has to do with welfare.

    1. Re:nothing too low for these people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "we have tanks and storm troopers patrolling the suburbs for chrisake" What country are you talking about? And welfare is just paying people not to work. Welfare can help someone that has had some bad luck get back on their feet but welfare isn't meant to be a life long career choice. And the "military industrial complex" would not be necessary if all the major worlds powers also eliminate their own "military industrial complex". In today's world military power is the only thing preventing real international warfare from happening. The only thing preventing WW3 are the nuclear weapons that keep the major world powers from initiating real military conflicts that make today's squabbles in the ME look like love and freedom conventions.

  19. Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fair warning/full disclosure: I"m an Airmen in the USAF.

    A 'weapon system' is a special designation. Lots of things are weapon systems. A truck is a weapon system. Every weapon system gets a System Program Office (SPO) that is responsible for developing, managing, updating/upgrading/improving the weapon system. Weapon systems have full certification processes that the SPO oversees. Think change management on steroids.

    Want to modify the weapon system? Better clear it with the SPO. If you don't, it just became de-certified and you can't deploy it. If it were a plane, that would mean its grounded.

    Without knowing more details other than their is a weapon system that is a firewall, that would mean that the hardware and software gets certified before it is deployed (turned on/plugged in). Chances are there are standard configurations that are then mandated.

    This also means that its going to be heavily vetted. Chances are its not a commercial-off-the-shelf device., but if it is they'd be taking it apart looking for backdoors and other exploits.

    So personally I'm excited by this, but then I know what it means...

  20. Re:Trump will save this country by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 1

    Never... you are an idiot.

    --
    5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
  21. Blaming janitors for shit they clean up? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    The ones who deserve contempt are the drone pilots. They're walking, talking embodiments of cowardice, deserving of utter contempt.

    If anyone ever deserves contempt it's the people giving the drone pilots contemptible orders. The pilots don't set the missions or pick targets.
    Do you also think pilots flying in a clear sky with no risk of anti-aircraft fire are also cowards?

  22. Fucking NORAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That nonsense has been a "weapons system" since the fucking 60s, slashdot just goes clickbaitier.

  23. Would you like to play a game? by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    How about global thermonuclear war?
    bash>

  24. Re:Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    So the misunderstanding, as so often happens, is because a word has a specific meaning within a certain community that differs from the meaning of that word in the general population?

  25. What will they call it? by haruchai · · Score: 1

    After all, they can't call it FW-1 or , if you prefer, Firewall One.

    --
    Pain is merely failure leaving the body
  26. Re:Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by Cederic · · Score: 1

    It's still not a fucking weapons system.

    Good luck btw getting the SPO to respond quickly enough to keep the damn thing patched and properly configured.

  27. Higher salaries by AxeTheMax · · Score: 1
    Another idea for a weapons system - more pay for the top brass.

    You could justify it in the same way that in many / most companies, senior management claims that higher pay and bonuses for directors motivates them to make more profit. Could you depend on a general who does not get at least, say, twenty times as much as the ordinary airman?

  28. Re:Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I"m an Airmen in the USAF.

    Do you clean floors?

  29. Should be called 'Nerd Net' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its a software weapon written and maintained by PFY nerds running around with pocket protectors, and when it goes beep, the nerds get busy and attack with high tech keyboards and mice.
    General: I think the Queens bulldogs or Bagpipe MP3's would go a better job. More replays of Trumps thoughts. Can't we just redirect them to a cable companies complaint line.

  30. Re:Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Disclaimer: I am US military officer (not the same AC as above), not an expert on cybersecurity or the legal details of US foreign weapons sales. I agree that firewalls are not a weapon.
     
    That being said, I suspect that, in addition to the funding aspect mentioned in the summary, this is a legal maneuver to protect the details of this particular firewall. Generally firewalls are fair game for export worldwide (as they should be in my opinion) under the terms of the Wassenaar Arrangement (see Category 5). However that means the USAF has very little legal recourse against anyone leaking the operational details of the firewall, including the source code and what system it is deployed on, to either the intelligence apparatus of foreign powers or to the general public. Classifying the firewall as a weapon brings it under the purview of the Arms Export Control Act of 1976, which has a lot more teeth to it and can carry some pretty severe penalties. By classifying it as a weapon, the USAF blocks their firewall, and only their firewall, from being sold to foreign powers, without limiting the ability of cybersecurity companies to sell firewalls to friendly foreign powers.

  31. Re:Best firewall system vs. modern threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Weaponized APK

  32. 26th Cyber Command? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What were the first 25?

  33. Most threats = host-domain names - not IP addy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    -

    FREE, not 'souled-out' to advertisers + adds speed, security & reliability.

    Does far more w/ far less more efficiently vs. addons (clarityray blockable, redundant + RAM/CPU wasteful & 'souled-out' crippled by default) & local DNS servers @ home.

    It fixes DNS' security issues & stops tracking @ webpage + DNS levels via 1 file you NATIVELY have!

    (Firewalls do the rest on far less used IP address trackers/threats vs. host-domain names).

    -

    Obtains data vs. threats & adblocking via 10 reputable security community sites - easily edited by you.

    -

    SPEEDS YOU UP 2 ways:

    Adblocking ALL ads + local RAM cached favorite sites @ TOP of hosts for faster resolution vs. remote DNS (aids reliability) vs. other "so-called security 'solutions'" SLOWING YOU!

    -

    All via what you already have vs. illogically "bolting on browser addons 'MOAR'" (clarityray detected/blockable + usermode slow & increased messagepassing, cpu + ram overheads)

    -

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee verified it's source as safe http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... ) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    &

    MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per a VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    32-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    &

    Installer-> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    -

    * "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend".

    APK

    P.S.=> By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

    "The image this title brings to mind is a mighty military commander who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" -> https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & THE WORD = hosts!

    (Accept NO substitutes!)

    ...apk

  34. 6 respected security pros disagree w/ you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    E.G. #1 - Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) CLEARLY disagree w/ you:

    A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:

    http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

    "The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."

    Speed, and security, is the gain... others like Mr. Day note it as well!

    "From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."

    ---

    E.G.#2 - OReilly:

    For security -> http://oreilly.com/pub/a/windo... & For speed -> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/...

    ---

    E.G.#3 - Steve Gibson:

    Steve Gibson endorses hosts as good https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-045....

    ---

    E.G.#4 - Aryeh Goretsky of ESET/NOD32:

    It works Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    ---

    E.G.#5 - Brocke Wilders of WILDERS' SECURITY does too:

    By creating an inferior clone of MY PROGRAM though -> http://www.wilderssecurity.com...

    ---

    E.G.#6 - Mr. Steven Burn of Malwarebytes does also:

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts' Admin hosts + RECOMMENDS my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    APK

    P.S.=> Myself as well makes 7, so, SO much for your bs jealous little off topic troll... apk

  35. Best firewall system vs. modern threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    -

    FREE, not 'souled-out' to advertisers, adds speed, security & reliability.

    Does far more w/ far less more efficiently vs. addons (clarityray blockable, redundant + RAM/CPU wasteful & 'souled-out' crippled by default) & local DNS servers @ home.

    Fixes DNS' security issues & stops tracking @ webpage + DNS levels via 1 file you NATIVELY have!

    (Firewalls do rest on FAR less used IP address trackers/threats vs. host-domain names).

    -

    Obtains data vs. online threats & ads via 10 reputable security community sites - easily edited by you using my program.

    -

    SPEEDS YOU UP 2 ways:

    Adblocking ALL ads + local RAM cached favorite sites @ TOP of hosts for faster resolution vs. remote DNS (for reliability + speed) vs. other "so-called security 'solutions'" SLOWING YOU!

    -

    All via what you already have vs. illogically "bolting on browser addons 'MOAR'" (clarityray detected/blockable + usermode slow & increased messagepassing, cpu + ram overheads)

    -

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee verified it's source as safe http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... ) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    &

    MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per a VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    32-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    &

    Installer-> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    -

    * "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend".

    APK

    P.S.=> By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

    "The image this title brings to mind is a mighty military commander who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" -> https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & THE WORD = hosts!

    (Accept NO substitutes)

    ...apk

  36. Programmer's Creed by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 2

    This is my computer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

    My computer is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.

    My computer, without me, is useless. Without my computer, I am useless. I must comment my code in detail. I must hack truer than my enemy who is trying to pwn me. I must pwn him before he pwns me. I will...

    My computer and I know that what counts in war is not the darkness of the cubicle, the temperature of the coffee, nor the dust of the Doritos. We know that it is the lines of code we commit. We will commit...

    My computer is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strength, its parts, its accessories, its CPU and its memory. I will keep my computer patched and updated, even as I am patched and updated. We will become part of each other. We will...

    Before God, I swear this creed. My computer and I are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. We are the saviors of my life.

    So be it, until victory is America's and there is no enemy, but peace!

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

  37. Re:Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope this is not a descriptive summary for this story.

    "The Air Forces decided to put all their firewall eggs in one basket. It's SPO is very proud of it. They plan to call it Maginot"

    I also hope this does not stop one from thinking the old fashioned way with layered defense in depth.

  38. Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Death Star is "fully operational"

    1. Re:Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Death Star is "fully operational"

      I believe I see a rebel assault squadron and the Millennium Falcon headed your way. Just sayin'.

  39. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll say what we're all thinking.

    SKYNET

  40. Re:Firewall is a weapon system? GOOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    under that system, if the firewall was found to be defective (say a zero day was found) what is the time to go through all of the steps required to bring about a change? and would you then have to take down the firewall until it can get re-certified?

    i'm curious, because while you can ground a plane, shutting down the firewall does not have the same effect, in fact it would be much better to keep the firewall operational until a suitable fix can be found. software changes happen more frequently than physical systems, can the weapons system process handle updates of the weekly or even daily type?

  41. Redesignate! by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    So to get decent funding, we just need to redesignate our physical borders as weapons!