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.
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?
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?)
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.
I’m sure Michelle Obama is real worried about what an alt-right incel thinks about her.