Slashdot Mirror
Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? (helpnetsecurity.com)
The Brexit shock continues to reverberate throughout the global economic and policy worlds. Andrea Limbago from the security company Endgame responds to a poll showing that most security professionals have concerns about Brexit:
Will it weaken cybersecurity because of additional bureaucratic hurdles to information sharing with the EU, as well limited cross-national collaboration in fighting cyber criminals? There is also concern about the possibility of a brain drain -- in-demand security talent pool fleeing the UK -- which could increasingly impact security and data protection.
Limbago suggests tech workers in Britain's financial sector may feel the impact, "with Bitcoin surging and the pound dropping.... London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit, the rise of digital currencies, and the EU's move toward greater digital integration." And there's also the possibility of "a push for digital sovereignty and greater national control over the Internet." But another poll found that 64% of information security professionals didn't think Brexit would affect Britain's ability to defend against cyber-attacks. Can security professionals continue their inter-nation cooperation, elevating data and security concerns over new administrative differences between Europe and the U.K.?
Limbago suggests tech workers in Britain's financial sector may feel the impact, "with Bitcoin surging and the pound dropping.... London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit, the rise of digital currencies, and the EU's move toward greater digital integration." And there's also the possibility of "a push for digital sovereignty and greater national control over the Internet." But another poll found that 64% of information security professionals didn't think Brexit would affect Britain's ability to defend against cyber-attacks. Can security professionals continue their inter-nation cooperation, elevating data and security concerns over new administrative differences between Europe and the U.K.?
No.
....or the UK pay around the 500k USD mark ?
Serious question.
I make 250k AUD now but feel the need for an overseas sojourn.
Big 4 ? Big corporate based in NYC ? Something hooked into Fed Gov near DC ? Financial firms in The City ?
What are your thoughts everyone ?
Yes, yes it will. Which is a good thing for everyone outside of 5 eyes.
Seriously though, fuck global panopticon.
My anus. The UK is larger than you might think.
The pound is above the lowest point just after the Brexit vote - and pretty much stabilized.
There are a lot of people trying VERY hard to scare you into thinking the Brexit is a disaster, when in fact it is a blip. This whole "computer cyber-security" angle is pathetic.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There is no magic or silver bullet in security, just a set of best practices (processes), technology and people working together. If done according to any major standard defense in depth will be used. There is no such concept as 'if national politics =X then Y. Best practices are widely publicized and available to any organization or government in the world.
Whether or not an organization follows security best practices has everything to do with their culture and nothing to do with their politics. There is no tool that any given country has a lock on.
What's next? Brexit endangers air supply?
Fear Uncertainty Doubt The campaign to turn people's opinion has started. It seems that the good people of Britain took by surprise some very powerful goups.
A recent slashdot reply caught my eye, because it succinctly sums up the situation in the UK.
In her department, which requires high-end medically-skilled professionals, her boss posted after Brexit. The basic gist was "Don't worry, everyone, your cancer diagnosis will still be safe in the hands of our department consisting almost entirely of Spanish, Italian, German, French, Polish, Greek, ...... personnel for the time being".
The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism.
Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job.
It could happen - right?
Globalism was sold to us as a way to increase our standard of living. It was well known that salaries would stagnate, but (we were told) the lower prices on imported goods would more than make up for the difference.
In hindsight, we see that salaries did stagnate, and also unemployment went up while per-capita gdp about doubled.
Globalism is good for a handful few people, while it has driven half the workforce to the brink of poverty.
The economic rationale says that the economy is doing great (which it is, actually) and ignores the dissatisfaction of millions of citizens as valueless.
Why should *any* country sacrifice the welfare of its citizens for the benefit of people in other countries?
If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.
It's the difference between a rationalization and actual evidence.
Systemd is fine! There is no problem at all. This is not something you should worry about.
Yours truly,
The NSA.
a diet :)
are traitors to their nation, in collusion with multinational business, power brokers, and foreign politicians to line each other's pockets at the expense of their constituents/citizens/slave dogs.
For all the talk about the 'Free world', it has just been indentured servitude under a different guise. You might be able to change jobs, but you can't really 'leave' the system. If you were to dispassionately compare history to modern times you would note it has been no different for periods with slaves or eunichs or under-represented groups than it currently is today, only the names and categorizations have changed, but the level of economic if not legal oppression is the same, or in some cases worse thanks to increases in recordkeeping.
The Globalists took a bit hit and are not happy. Of course the media outlets they own are trying to scare people in hopes of a fascist takeover to negate the vote. Hell, the day the votes were cast they started petitioning for another referendum trying to negate the first vote. That was the point in the claim that people were so ignorant and stupid that they had to Google search after the vote. I already spotted quite a few shill posts in this thread preaching that message.
Does cyber security get worse because people will be paid with Pounds instead of Euros? Nope, not at all. If the currency mattered we would never have an exchange. This is just more Globalist fear mongering. It's the easiest way to try and bend the public to their will, and has had huge success in the last 20 years or so.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Politics does have some impact, but not a tremendous amount in this case. The bigger question is: If a Brit gets paid a fair wage, would they work. Yeah, they would. Their bank would take the currency and convert it for them in almost all cases so that they could use their native currency.
TFA's question is fear mongering trash.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Compare and contrast:
Britain hacks Belgium Telecoms, nobody goes to jail because its a government hack, even though they spied on the EU Commission, NATO leaders and European politicians. The hack isn't even investigated as a crime.
Lauri Love, British hacker, hacks a US military website, is facing extradition on a 99 potential prison year sentence and the extradition treaty means, he won't even get to challenge the evidence in the British court before extradition.
With Britain out of the EU, it cannot subvert the investigations and prosecutions of British governmental spying on its EU partners. It does not make cyber security weaker, it makes their mass surveillance of us, more difficult to defend.
After all, when the corrupt members of the EU finish doing their plans and turn the block into a supercountry ruled by a group of unelected dictators with its own army and thirst for the rest of europe, they will attack UK both physically and via internet to take it down and conquer the land for themselves, thus indeed putting the UK's cybersecurity at risk.
London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit
UK's financial industry has nothing to fear from brexit, since Article 63 of the Treaty on Functioning of UE forbids "all restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and between (...) third countries".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
EU is irrelevant. Before the EU ever existed, nations functioned. If the EU stopped existing, nations would still continue functioning.
Outside of the EU there are nations that perfectly function, inside the EU there are nations that perfectly function, and inside the EU there are also nations that are regressing and degrading daily as there are outside of the EU.
Whether UK stayed or left the EU is of no relevance. The EU is not an economic litmus test, and it isn't a litmus test on this topic as well.
Whether the UK will get its shit together and stabilize and progress its economy, infrastructure, industry, all depends on the people themselves putting their backs into fixing shit instead of daydreaming about symbolic EU wankery. It depends on whether the people have the shrewdness and open-mindedness to make good trade agreements through other trade organizations, and with other sectors, or go about it individually with nations within the EU (because you know, sovereignty is a thing and nations withing the EU don't give a fuck about what the EU echelons thing when their national self-interest is in question).
For every listed negative consequence of leaving the EU, there is a counter-solution which only requires to put some work into it and some strategizing.
Everything depends on the people of the UK themselves doing shit with their own hands, not on some external stimuli like the imaginary nanny who makes shit work with magic simply because people say so.
So no, the Brexit will not hurt International Cybersecurity, because the only way it can hurt it is if the people involved actively pursue to hurt it and use Brexit as an excuse to be reckless in an associative attempt to intentionally connect the two events for political reasons.
Will a sudden pouring of rain hurt my attempts at fixing a car? Not unless i decide to abandon the repair because the rain started, no.
You forgot to do the Yoda hand-wave thing. Or is it the NSA-finger?
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
No Prime Minister wants to be remembered as the one who broke up the UK. And David Cameron has now placed the responsibility directly on the next PM (and parliament). It will not happen. Expect the next PM to blame it all on parliament not wanting it, etc.
As a non-Linux user, can someone explain why people here are so worried about systemd?
Has it ever been exploited, or has some sort of massive security/privacy implications?
Because even Linus Torvalds thinks systemd is a major improvement over init. He thinks it has a few rough edges, like any project, but that's about it.
As Torvalds said in the recent interview with slashdot...
"I don't really get the hatred of systemd. I think it improves a lot on the state of init" ... "I much prefer systemd's infrastructure for starting services over traditional init".
I personally think the biggest problem with Linux is no company and management* overlooking the project, and thus each developer at some stage having a tantrum and going off and forking the project to develop their own distro / windowing system / library / etc, etc.
And so, rather than all developers uniting under One great project and sharing the pool of talent, all the resources are divided, which also causes confusion for end-users with too much choice and very little difference between them.
The only success I've seen with Linux is Google taking (stealing) the code, and creating Android.
Or the devs uniting under Canonical to develop Ubuntu and other projects.
* if you don't understand the purpose behind a company and management, then you're probably too young, and / or have never worked in a successful corporate environment.
As long as our operating systems assume programs can be trusted, there will be no effective computer security. The Brexit has no effect on the current stupidity.
undo mod
Wow, those Bitcoin stories/fantasies are getting more ridiculous as they try to stay in the news.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Well gosh, if Torvalds, who has zero real world security experience, says its ok then by golly it is good enough for my company and our customer's precious data!
YOLO!!!
It was the way systemd was rammed into my favorite distro at the time, Debian, by a technicality. It was the hatred for its creator for being an arrogant ass, proclaiming that the way things were done in linux for decades were incorrect and stupid. His previous creation Pulse audio was a pile of crap.
I quit using linux for a while because of it. But then Windows 10 came out. The problems I have with the cloud based Windows 10 are far worse than anything that asshole has done. So here I am, running Mint 18 cinnamon (17.3 before that). When I run pstree, there it is at the top, systemd. Every day I struggle to accept it. Maybe one day I'll grow to like it.
Don't waste your time with Linux/systemd, I was a debian user/fan for literally 15 years, it was great and I was really happy with it. Then PulseAudio was added, my sound became consistently flaky - I said, fine, I'm a competent developer I'll just force the system to use alsa again. A bit of maintenance, but well worth it. Then systemd was added, my *network* became consistently flaky. I looked at how to remove it, and decided the cancer has spread too far to be salvageable. Very unhappy. Switched to FreeBSD, which is the best decision I've made. The system is clean and consistent, and just works. No regrets.
GCHQ does whatever it wants now. When the EU tries to attack it, Britain uses its veto to block action. Without Britain in the EU, EU countries can protect themselves from 5 eyes surveillance.
It is however bad for Britain, because Brits cannot go to the European Court of Justice to have this shit declared illegal.
And they can't rely on their own government, Parliament rejected Snoopers Charter bad in 2010, GCHQ did it anyway, and now the Home Secretary they helped put in power is trying to make it legal. So much for democracy in Britain.
Her side is trying to put her in as the next Prime Minister, and has access to all that mass surveillance data to help them do it.
... is "information sharing" the silver bullet to ensure "cyber security"?
That says that, among other things, anything classified and unshareable is therefore a threat against cyber security. Down with all government spooks, for great security! No? Not the case? Then how does it work, hm?
There was a clear majority of 4% and it was even more clear in England and Wales of nearly 7%. Turnout was 72%, a very healthy vote. It was not "1 vote difference".
Rigging the referendum so the stay vote has an inbuilt advantage is not democracy and you just need to accept the vote.
And there is no Brexit. It's a prank, bro.
" the petition for a 2nd referendum you mention was actually started BEFORE the vote -- as a precaution by those that wanted to leave so that if their "Leave" campaign failed the first vote"
The petition required 60% for a change in the law, why would a Brexit campaign demand a harder barrier to challenge?? You're claim makes no sense, Brexit campaign did not demand a 60% minimum for a change (i.e. exit) of the EU.
You sir are a liar.
That is always the answer to stupid posts formulated as questions that isn't "Ask /."
... will have the "cybersecurity" industry giving out press releases forecasting doom?
A bird shat on my car today. Cybersecurity will be weakened!
Toddler says first word. Cybersecurity will be weakened!
If they would shut up once in a while I may take them seriously...
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
The so called 'Brexit' is media hyperbole and nothing more. Mark my words. The slang 'Brexit' itself was invented by the media. Will there be change? Oh sure, there will be. Has there always been change? Yep. Is change bad? Nope. Will the world end as predicted by CNN or other news sources? Nope. Anything to drive the traffic...
Perhaps you could or should explain abbreviations... I kept reading "GB"="George Bush" (yeah, too much slashdot) and was wondering whether the father or the son was involved. But it made no sense at all until at length I realized that you meant "GB"="Great Britain".
Actually, the vote to leave was over the whole UK and not just Great Britain. Most of the difference between those geographic areas (Northern Ireland is not in Great Britain) voted to remain, along with Scotland and London (which are in Great Britain).
Yes the pound stabilized. For this week. There is not much on week end. let us see next week whether it drops further... Or climb back up. But this is taking the crown : "There are a lot of people trying VERY hard to scare you into thinking the Brexit is a disaster, when in fact it is a blip." It has not even started. There has been NO brexit yet. There has only been a referendum and the 52% leave vote. taht is it. It has not yet been officially announced, negotiated, and done. So before declaring victory and think that all those egg head economist had it wrong, maybe you should wait a few years. Now while you fire your victory and "there is no sky falling" you'll excuse me will I prepare the welcome mat for my city of Frankfurt : we are already starting to think of how many from the financial sector from london we'll be able to grab.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
The European Union will not allow it and Britain will become a protectorate. As a loyal European grown in the Erasmus Generation I am ready and willing to march on Britain and punish all those who oppose the great ideal of a United Europe, only legitimate ruler over the whole world! SIEG HEIL!
Try FreeBSD or PC-BSD. They're like what Debian was before Debian went stupid.
Just m$ shills attacking anything linux...
Unlike the US, EU, and China, we Canadians actually understand how to implement cybersecurity.
Having your entire country on a 19k2 modem line is _not_ cyber security.
Great Britain can secure it's borders physically and electronically... :-)
better that than to continue to be robbed and victimized by the E.U. - which took their fishing rights, and burdened them with too many fees, taxes and new laws.
FREEDOM !
People should give all this hyperbole and pent-up claims a rest.
The Brexit will be a bit of a re-adjustment for a couple of months, especially after (finally?) invoking article 50, but all in all, it'll just be a footnote in history. In 5 years time, no-one will even remember what the fuss was about, and things will continue to run as they did before.
But I *DO* expect the politicians to keep their word and brexit. They said they would abide by the referendum, well, the people have spoken, whether one likes it or not. If you're not going to keep yourself to the referendum when the outcome doesn't suits you, you can as well hold no referendum at all, then. that remains true, EVEN with the absolute deplorable and saddening - and despicable, in fact - behaviour of the top 'Leave'-advocates, who now seem to curtail and do everything to *not* leave the EU. It's incomprehensible. What kind of cowardly fucktards are they? I actually think they were right to leave, but for gods' sake, what a bunch of wussies, once they've won.
Point is, the referendum was clear. The remain lost. Deal with it. Now whining for yet another referendum doesn't make any sense at all. I mean, let's say the other side gets 52%, then. What then? Can the 48% of the populace then not ignore the outcome too, and don't they then have the same right in demanding yet another, third referendum? Ad infinitum.
No, the outcome was clear, the people have spoken... leave the EU. And do it now, not in 6 months. It'll already take 2 years to negotiate the departure as it is, and Junkers made it clear there were to be NO negotiations *before* article 50 ws invoked.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
For cyber security to be any worse in general?
Anything that makes data sharing between UK, French, and German spy agencies harder will be an improvement to cybersecurity and privacy. It's too bad that Brexit won't probably make a significant dent in it long term.
"Will it weaken cybersecurity because of additional bureaucratic hurdles to information sharing with the EU"
No, because EU bureaucratic hurdles was never the cause of weak cybersecurity, but defects in the computer Operating System connected at either end, namely Microsoft Windows, which is at the root cause of the vast majority of online breeches.
Not too long ago GCHQ, the British NSA, was in the news about cracking/hacking Ministerial phones and records across UK and EU (particularly Merkel and her neo-GDR aka Germany). With GCHQ in the EU they could share intel with the Stasi and Stasi would share intel with GCHQ. Now, GCHQ becomes a foreign intelligence Op and potential enemy of the EU, and Stasi. So the GCHQ's cracking/hacking Belgium (Belgacom) to get intel from the phones and records of the EU Komminisars in Brussels could now be interpreted as an act of war rather than just snooping to info to use for blackmail and extortion!
Fun fun fun in the Old World a cuming.
ha ha
Ref. https://www.peerlyst.com/posts/brexit-and-gchq-how-will-a-brexit-affect-gchq-hacking-newswatcher
I don't know why we have to put up with all these shadow funded, celebratory Brexit stories.
Top UN scientists have all agreed that Brexit is bad.
Please, focus on just giving us the truly negative side of the story, over and over, even if it's just a possible conjecture.
It's the only way for, profit!
Nonsense. Information Security (as it was called before "cyber" became the new black) is plagued by much more basic problems. For example that half of the companies in any given country basically don't have any. Or that we've still not solved basic problems like account enumeration or brute-force attacks (which, you wouldn't believe, way too many applications still allow).
There are essentially two games. The one is where baseline security is attacked, hackers looking for the weakest link, for targets of opportunity, and if you have adequate security, you're good. It's a case of not having to outrun the bear.
And then there are the target attacks on high-priority targets. Done by top-notch professional attackers, often backed by organised crime and/or nation states. Unless you have equally top-notch security, you're toast.
In both cases, Brexit or not makes little difference. In the first case, everything you need to know is in basically any "IS for dummies" guide. In the later case, the required information isn't shared by bureaucrats in Brussels, but by tech experts in conferences and informal meetings. Since the UK isn't part of the Schengen zone anyways, no difference in travel arrangements, Brexit or not.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org