Slashdot Mirror
Homeland Security Unveils New Cyber Security Strategy Amid Threats (reuters.com)
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday unveiled a new national strategy for addressing the growing number of cyber security risks as it works to assess them and reduce vulnerabilities. From a report: "The cyber threat landscape is shifting in real-time, and we have reached a historic turning point," DHS chief Kirstjen Nielsen said in a statement. "It is clear that our cyber adversaries can now threaten the very fabric of our republic itself." The announcement comes amid concerns about the security of the 2018 U.S. midterm congressional elections and numerous high-profile hacking of U.S. companies.
Hottie-in-chief! Aside from Kellyanne Conway, there's nobody cuter in the Trump admin.
Wow you must have a low bar for cuteness if you think Mrs. Skeletor is cute.
you need to get out of your mom's basement more bro
Nielsen said the government “must think beyond the defense of specific assets — and confront systemic risks that affect everyone from tech giants to homeowners.”
So....people themselves.
(((dB)))
Kellyanne looks road hard and put away wet.
Will you all still be excited about giving Trump a Nobel Peace prize when some terrorist settles the Jerusalem problem once and for all by detonating a dirty bomb outside the new embassy, rendering all of Jerusalem uninhabitable for the next 10,000 years?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
The report underscores the fact that not every little thing needs to be connected. Paper Ballots are just fine - outside of Florida, where apparently, they can't figure them out.
Just because the Democrats in the House and Senate and the Democrat President previously approved this doesn't mean it is right for Trump to do. Trump has caused a serious cyber security problem for the US.
Wow, that's the first time I've heard *that* one.
Mathematically speaking, from the "game theory" part of mathematics, what is the are the costs of the "serious cyber security problem" that Trump has caused, and which didn't exist prior to moving the embassy, compared with the costs of *not* moving the embassy?
(Hint: Take the current amount of cyber threat, subtract the amount from before moving the embassy, and discount the cost due to economies of scale. IOW, battling 12 threats isn't that much expensive if you're already battling 10.)
Extra credit: How does enacting something that was made law by Congress and a prior president (in 1995, by Democrats) somehow make us weaker, damage our credibility, or reflect poorly on Trump? Include in your discussion the ramifications of Trump's campaign promise to do this.
Would the cyber threats not have existed if Trump hadn't moved the embassy? Didn't those guys already hate us?
Is this one of those "If the shooter realizes his victims are unarmed, he will put down his gun and surrender - it's just human nature" things that Liberals keep talking about?
> The whole act was a charade,
If true, then why did the vast majority of both parties vote on moving it to Jerusalem?
That would be a GREAT start.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
This new strategy must be why the con artist eliminated the top cyber adviser post.
After all, what better way to counter cybersecurity threats than eliminating the person in charge of overall cybersecurity.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The whole act was a charade, Trump was just the only President dumb enough to do something that only manages to achieve a useless outcome.
So you're saying that a Democratically controlled congress and a Democratic president got together and *agreed* to pass a law but not enforce it?
And that subsequent presidents were "in" on it, and agreed to abide by the decision?
In that scenario, how many people would have had to get together and agree to this secret pact?
Or is there a simpler explanation?
(I'm curious to hear your views on the moon landing, the assassination of Kennedy, and what actually took down the 9/11 towers. Care to enlighten us?)
Will you all still be excited about giving Trump a Nobel Peace prize when some terrorist settles the Jerusalem problem once and for all by detonating a dirty bomb outside the new embassy, rendering all of Jerusalem uninhabitable for the next 10,000 years?
Probably not, but they said the same thing about North Korea.
I'm willing to let the situation play out and see what the outcome is.
Just because the Democrats in the House and Senate and the Democrat President previously approved this doesn't mean it is right for Trump to do. Trump has caused a serious cyber security problem for the US.
But we voted against this knowing it wouldn't happen. We never expected a President like Trump to ever be elected that would actually do what the passed bill required.
Your comment reminds me of this old meme:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals...
Anyway, anyone have anything to say about cybersecurity policy?
Yeah, right
I’m sure Michelle Obama is real worried about what an alt-right incel thinks about her.
First, force the TLAs to reveal every goddamn hole they know about so the vendors can fix them and we'll all be safer.
Second, if a site gets hacked via a known vulnerability the entire CXX suite goes to jail and, when released, are barred from an executive position for 10 years. If people are killed (power plant "accidents", etc) they go to jail for life. This will change the "it's too expensive to fix" calculus.
Too bad neither of these will ever happen.
I'm curious why you think bad people doing bad things is somehow Trump's fault? Would it not also, then, be the Senate Minority Leader's fault? Quit projecting the actions of murderous despicable vermin onto your political opponents.
Do you not realize what a retarded proposition that is?
Maybe this cyber minefield is an attempt to make a better capitalist democracy. Or maybe it's a sign of a government so broken, their problems so complicated and so convoluted, that security, freedom and democracy have been circumvented.
Then again, freedom from privacy doth 1984 make, and cyber weaponry makes for one macabre dystopia.
As long as the state emphasizes its ability to make cyber war at the expense of real security, we're boned.