Slashdot Mirror
Government Shutdown: TLS Certificates Not Renewed, Many Websites Are Down (zdnet.com)
More than 80 TLS certificates used by US government websites have expired so far without being renewed, leaving some websites inaccessible to the public. From a report: NASA, the US Department of Justice, and the Court of Appeals are just some of the US government agencies currently impacted, according to Netcraft. The blame falls on the current US federal government shutdown caused by US President Donald Trump's refusal to sign any 2019 government budget bill that doesn't contain funding for a Mexico border wall he promised during his election campaign. This has resulted in hundreds of thousands of government workers being furloughed across all government agencies, including staff handling IT support and cybersecurity. As a result, government websites are dropping like flies, with no one being on hand to renew TLS certificates.
Bullshit. They were willing to discuss it without shutting the government down. Trump said he would be the one to blame in the shutdown. His had no plan on controlling the border, Plus it was to be paid for my Mexico. This shutdown is just a diversion tactic to get attention away from his really big problems.
This isn't a government shutdown. This is a minority party that gained a slight foothold in one part of the government and immediately used it to shut down the government and is now trying to blame everyone but themselves for the outcome.
The Senate and the President of the United States are ready to reopen the government immediately. It's solely one small part of the government that's refusing to open things. So call it what it is: the Democrat Shutdown.
Democrats took control of the house: Jan 3
Shutdown started: Dec 22
Trump, McConnell, and Senate Republicans own this. Everyone, including you, know this.
You're full of shit.
The Republican-controlled Senate passed the bill. Then the Republican-controlled House refused to vote on it. It expired.
The Democrat-controlled house passed the Senate bill. Mitch McConnell (R!) is refusing to let the senate vote on it.
If it went to a vote it would pass. Mitch is refusing to put Trump in a position where he'd have to veto it.
The Democrats are the only ones acting honestly here. They passed the Republican bill. The shutdown is entirely of Trump's making.
Only 6% of the Israeli "wall" is actually a wall. 94% is just lots (really lots!) of barbed wire fencing in multiple layers - with a dead zone between where people crossing can be observed, and with a trench to slow them down long enough to be observed, and smooth sand/gravel so that successful crossing attempts can at least be detected in hindsight. The tall concrete walls you see in the news are only in places where there isn't enough width to have a fence + dead zone, or where there's an issue with snipers - e.g. housing right up close to the border from where people can shoot or be shot at. Back in the US, most illegal migrants from the south arrive legally at border points then overstay. Really, a wall will have next to no effect on the number of illegal migrants entering the US. As for drugs - if drug lords are resourceful enough to build mini-submarines for example, then a wall isn't going to stop them.
There isn't a popular vote to win.
People will blame who they want.
Schumershutdown
1) Securing the perimeter of a McMansion's yard is EXACTLY THE SAME PROBLEM as walling off 2,000 miles worth of border.
2) Do you really think $5 billion worth of wall will stop that last Mexican boogeyman? Or give us anything close to $5 billion worth of border security? Do you really think the Lord of Grift will do anything other than pocket most of the money?
3) You want to stop those Mexican boogeymen? Slap a good stiff fine on those who hire them. You could even fund a few hundred feet of wall with the revenue...oh, wait, I just remembered. Taking money from rich people is socialism.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
As for drugs - if drug lords are resourceful enough to build mini-submarines for example, then a wall isn't going to stop them.
We already know that now, as according to the DEA's 2018 report, the most common way for drugs to enter the country in the south is via the points of entry already. After that is tunnels, light aircraft, and then marine vehicles. Additionally, most of the fentanyl that enters the country comes from China. Sure some of it comes from Mexico, but its easier to use the postal service to send small quantities directly to buyers. $1.7mil worth of fentanyl was seized at the port in Philadelphia just this June. It came from China.
Clinton, Obama, Schumer and Pelosi all voted for a wall before Trump made actually getting it done a major campaign promise. Millions of people entering illegally, and often getting injured, assaulted, or even killed during the trek, was a "crisis" that needed to be solved, until Trump decided to actually solve it. The funding was "urgently needed", these Democrats said on national TV, until Trump would "get credit" for having done it.
"Illegal Immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced we will stop future flows of illegal immigration, we will make no progress." Sen. Chuck Schumer
"We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented and unchecked." - Barak Obama
Less than a year later, Obama and 25 other Senate Democrats voted for the Secure Fence Act, the 2006 legislation that authorized the construction of 700 miles of barriers along the southern border.
"[we must] spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. ... I do think you have to control your borders." - Hillary Clinton
How about the Dems allow the government to do what they themselves have said is "urgently needed" rather than obstructing it because they don't want the orange idiot to get the credit for it?
He literally spelled it out on his website the HOW. I cannot believe that so many fucking people are going 1984 on this point. One of those points mentioned in that document, FROM HIS FUCKING WEBSITE, is them expecting Mexico to cut a fucking check for the wall, full stop.
Trump is arguing for a 100% wall, and is arguing that it will magically solve 100% of problems. The Dems think this is a waste of money, and that there are more cost effective ways to control the border, which is why they voted for an increase in funding for border security a few days ago. Just not for a wall.
Because budgets require 2/3 in the Senate. Having a simple majority in either chamber usually isn't enough to pass anything you want.
HINT: There isn't money to pay for 24% of what the Federal Government does. It brings in enough revenue to pay interest on the debt, pensions (Federal and SSI), healthcare, and welfare. No money for anything else - DOEs (both of them), EPA, FBI, OSHA, CBP, DOD, etc.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
C'mon, his entire twitter feed is a tantrum feed.
This shutdown is just a diversion tactic to get attention away from his really big problems.
I actually think it's not a diversion tactic. I think it's a miscalculation. A lot of what Trump does is done impulsively. His number one apologist, Scott Adams, says that in business you need to make decisions quickly because the quicker you act, the quicker you can fix it if you made a mistake. He gave out a big tax cut to the corporations when other changes he had made seemed to be making the economy stronger. That I blame on impulse - do everything now, not later. I think this whole wall thing is really just red meat for his supporters, most of whom are if anything even more deeply committed to him than ever before. My closest friends are, unfortunately, pretty conservative and deeply committed to Trump. One of them seems to believe that at least 60% of Americans, maybe more, are head over heels in love with Trump like he is. So what the shutdown is, for Trump supporters it's a sign that he's still in charge despite the November loss of the House. I think it's probably a little early for this kind of tactic as the 2020 presidential election is almost 2 years away, but he's just solidifying his base with this. I cal it a miscalculation because by the time of the 2020 election, nobody who isn't already behind Trump is going to be very enthused about this and if he had done it next year it might have had some effect on moving some voters his way if he wins the fight. By Nov. 2020, however it ends up won't be an issue any more. I think he needs to solidify his base next year, not this year, but he does everything impulsively, so here we are.
PS: Wasn't Mexico going to pay for this?
If that was ever funny, it stopped being so long ago.
The only thing that's funny is the revisionist history I've seen people like you engaging in, given that he did say that Mexico would pay for the wall, he did so numerous times, and he even explicitly said that Mexico would pay for it in a "one-time payment". To his credit, he was walking the rhetoric back even before his inauguration, and I think it's a good thing when people (politicians or otherwise) change their minds after realizing that they were wrong, but that doesn't absolve them of responsibility for the things they said. As such, what I'm not okay with is a politician attempting to gaslight an entire nation by lying about what was said when it's inconvenient for him to be held accountable for those words later. There's no denying—at least among honest people—that he made the claim that Mexico would pay for the wall and that they'd do so via a lump payment, rather than the tariffs, taxes, or whatever other reimbursements he's now trying to claim he meant all along.
As an aside, I don't have any "favored politicians". The party I'm registered with stopped representing my interests a long time ago, and none of the others do any better by me.
Maybe they saw what a failure the fence was an decided that something different was needed.
The fencing that is there is a success. CBP (Customs and Border Patrol) confirms 90% of their apprehension are in areas that are not covered by fencing as it stands. From their findings following the initial 2006 Secure Fencing Act :
https://www.cbp.gov/frontline/...
For example, Vitiello stated that in 2005 Yuma Sector was âoeinundated with illegal cross-border incursions.â There were 138,549 illegal alien apprehensions, according to a CBP case study.
From 2006â"2007, after adding 29 miles of primary pedestrian wall, 9.1 miles of lighting, 9 miles of all-weather roads, a bridge along the border, and 603 agents, Yuma Sector experienced an 82 percent decrease in illegal entries. In addition, Yuma saw a 95 percent decrease in agent assaults from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2015, the study reports.
The 700 miles built of fencing simply isn't enough. Walls are effective, every country who has implemented a type of border barrier has seen dramatic drops in border crossings. To deny that is to deny reality.
But no, tell us how this is not simply democrats not wanting Trump to get credit for something they themselves have failed to fully implement. They don't want the "Trump Wall", but let's be clear : Democrats are for a wall, because it WORKS. They just want it to be a DEMOCRAT Wall.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Nice 97% you pulled out of somewhere. I work with border patrol agents and their managers daily - I work for a company that builds and fields camera systems along the border, and we presently have hundreds of them. Border patrol agents want a mix of solutions highly dependent on the terrain. Talk to the guys in CA, and they have all the fence they need. Some could use repair. They want more agents. Talk to the folks in Nogales, and they want more cameras. Talk to the guys near Las Cruces, and they want helicopters. The guys in El Paso want a fence, but the people who own the land won't allow it, so you're in for a long eminent domain fight. We design a camera system into a freight box that can be set up in 30 minutes, and presently border patrol rents land from the landowner on a temporary basis to site the cameras near El Paso. Southwest Texas has land that is continually being remodeled by the Rio Grande - good luck constructing a wall there.
If your certs are about to expire(30-60 days out) and you are not planning for it, especially when they will be failing around the end of the year with Christmas and new years, that is just an example of you being a poor system administrator.
I think your expectations for employee patriotism are a bit out of whack.
So a test for you. We have a cert, it will expire Jan 10th every year (2+ year isn't permitted)
Ensure that cert is paid for and renewed, except we won't be paying the bill until Jan 4th.
Are you seriously going to pay for that out of pocket? You are expecting some govt IT person to do that it seems, as you are labeling them a poor system admin for nothing more than not paying for it themselves out of pocket.
If you need something on the 10th but won't give me the money for it until the 4th, fuck it, it just isn't getting bought until the 4th then.
It is the governments fault for not providing the money earlier, not my fault for not paying a bill in your name that you won't pay ahead of time. It certainly isn't my fault we got kicked out of the noc Dec 22nd either.
The House passed the EXACT SAME BILL to reopen the government that the GOP-controlled Senate passed a few weeks ago, but now McConnell say that is a non-starter for GOP Senators.
The GOP owns this. Full stop.
Oh, and while we're at it, if the damn wall was so important how come they didn't get it funded during the 2 years that the GOP controlled both houses?
The fence was a failure. People simply went around it or went over it. It was also breached 9,287 times in 5 years, resulting in repair costs.
People would climb it, tunnel under it, throw drugs over it... It even started a drug war that resulted in 2000 deaths.
It also had some pretty bad effects on the environment where it was built.
Okay, you say, Trump's wall will be better. Higher, stronger, cover the entire border. Here's a video of a couple of guys climbing the existing very similar existing wall, in broad daylight, with drugs strapped to their backs, using only ropes. Takes them less than a minute.
The problem needs to be tackled at source, not at the border.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yes. The economy in the past w years has been fabulous compared to the previous 8 or almost any other time ever. Maybe any other time.
â5 billion is a rounding error for the Federal gvt. If your only argument against building a wall which the entire leadership of the DNC is on record as supporting pre-Trump is finding the money then there is no reason left not to build it.
It's not $5B, why do people keep perpetuating that myth -- the full wall is projected to cost anywhere from $25B to $75B. And since it's a large public works project, I would expect it to go much higher before it's done. The $5B is just a down payment.
At some point even a paltry $100B stops being a rounding error and becomes "real money"
There is no "two sides" to this. This problem falls squarely in the laps of the Republicans.
Trump had an entire year to get this pushed through when the Reps had all three branches of gov't. He didn't.
It only suddenly became a burning priority when the democrats took the house. There is only one side being childish right now, and that's been the case for a while now.
(Yes, the democrats have their issues, but those issues are not what caused this current mess.)
Spending bills still require 60 senators to pass, not 51, so the Republicans could not get it passed by themselves. Trump actually said explicitly the last time they passed a CR with lots of added spending, but none for the wall, that he would never sign a bill like that again.
You could have argued that McConnell could have changed the rules to allow those bills to pass with a simple majority, but if the Senate was flipped, which was not unlikely, the Dems would have used those rules as well.
So the OP is right, the blame lies on both sides. But Trump actually has a better hand. As pointed out, the amount he's asking for really is a tiny fraction of the budget. People's opinion of Trump is not going to change much over this, people that hate him will continue to do so. Pelosi and Schumer, though, are a different story.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
You Acosta'd your own argument.
"The wall is a failure because people go to where there is no wall!".
Also, the parts that were "busted" are NOT the Steel slats part, they are simple wire fences. CBP's current proposal would change those simple wire fences to the type of fencing you see on McAllen TX, namely, the very thick and solid steel slats. Good luck griding one of those down in a timely fashion.
Okay, you say, Trump's wall will be better.
No, Trump's Wall is exactly what is already installed in many parts of Texas and other bordering states. Large, thick Steel Slats, as that is what CBP's current proposal is. Replace wire fencing with Steel Slats and close the open portions of the current Steel Slat wall.
Because nothing of this has to do with Trump, and it's been a bi-partisan goal that has seen implementation already in many areas. Trump just wants to speed it up and finish it along the length of the border where no natural barrier exists in the course of his presidency. Previous administrations contributed to this barrier already, Democrats voted for it, they just have done it on a slower time table.
This is entirely about not giving Trump credit for a Bi-partisan initiative. That you don't understand and simply quote "democrat talking points post 2016" is not surprising, but it sure is dishonest.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
Some of the Founding Fathers were religious, none were overtly so, and believed pretty profoundly in religious liberty. Of course, there are the likes of Jefferson, whose views on organized religion were hardly complimentary. Benjamin Franklin was a proper Enlightenment Deist who found the notion of a Personal God that went around intervening in worldly affairs ridiculous.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
As pointed out, the amount he's asking for really is a tiny fraction of the budget
That is completely and utterly irrelevant. A budget bill was written that could have passed both houses of congress. Trump even said he would sign it. Then all of a sudden he decided that he would not sign anything that did not have wall funding in it. He sunk the whole process on his own. It doesn't matter whether he was asking for $5, $5,000, $5M, $5B, or $5T. If there is such great support for the wall he could have asked for the next bill from congress to address it directly so it could have any up or down vote and it could be abundantly clear which way each member of congress voted on it. Instead we have a giant spending bill that has tons of other moving parts, and ultimately obfuscates where people stand on this issue.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Besides, even if it's not perfect, a one-time $5 billion is peanuts compared to the cost of hosting illegal immigrants. Even the liberal politifact says the costs is between $43 to $279 billion per year
Those numbers aren't referring to illegal immigrants, they are referring to ALL immigrants. Illegal immigrants are a small subset of the total and are not eligible for most of the government assistance that is available for legal immigrants.
Enigma
Am I the only person that finds it oddly predictable that, in response to a story about TLS, almost every single comment is a biased (one way or the other) comment about "the Wall" or the Donald or the Problem with America Today.
Cert expiration is a problem mostly because certificates cannot be renewed. They must be replaced, and as close to expiration as possible. If only there were a way to push the expiration out.. maybe by having a replacement cert, or a see-next-instance logic.
This way, certs could be renewed before they expire, just as Domain names are. And yes, I understand the technical limitations making this a necessary evil today. But it is a problem for government users now, and is a problem in many other like cases. For instance, when a cert expires over a weekend. Who hasn't got the call at 5 am when this happened?
As for the wall... I'll comment when its relevent.
Pro-tip 1: The budget bill that passed the Senate before Christmas passed 93-6. 93 is a little bit more than 60.
Pro-tip 2: Budget bills can pass the Senate with a simple majority via Reconciliation.
The REPUBLICAN house actually passed a 5.7 Billion Wall bill before christmas
The House passed a bill without a wall. The Senate amended that bill, and passed it 93-6. Trump said he would sign this bill. It needed to go back to the House because of the amendments.
Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and others started attacking Trump for agreeing to sign the bill. Trump suddenly decided the wall must be in the bill.
Pelosi passed the same bill that passed the Senate 93-6. She has also passed bills for individual parts of the government, taken verbatim from that 93-6 bill.
Also, in 2017, Pelosi and Shumer offered to pay for the entire wall ($27B). In return, they wanted visas and a path to citizenship for the DACA kids. If Republicans really wanted that wall, wouldn't that have been a very good deal to take? Especially since Trump was forbidden by the courts from deporting the DACA kids anyway.
This is entirely on the Republicans and their utter inability to govern. And Trump's fear of Ann Coulter.
$18.5 billion in Medicaid for illegal immigrants. That's just healthcare - and it's nearly 4X this ask for the wall. ILLEGAL immigrants, not legal.
Medicaid is not what the figure you quoted represents. I read the Forbes article from which your source drew its data and the majority of the cited costs are not Medicaid. You're misrepresenting the data. The article includes all kinds of indirect costs like forgone tax revenue and tax advantaged bond financing from non-profit hospitals, tax breaks for insurance provided as employee benefits or unpaid emergency room visits causing higher costs for all patients. It even includes $1.5 billion in charity care voluntarily given by physicians as a "cost". It doesn't show any evidence that illegal immigrants are using that healthcare, it just takes the total costs from a number of areas then assumes illegals use the same amount as legal residents and ascribes that cost to them. Even the author recognizes the shakiness of his figures:
Whatever the case, your assertion of "18.5 billion in Medicaid" is wrong and not even supported by your own source.
Enigma
I'm very much in favor of cripplingly high fines for employers of illegal immigrants. The way I see it, they are the cause of the biggest problems with said illegal immigration. If employers are hiring illegals instead of Americans, they're doing so because they can hire them for less than minimum wage while not paying for required benefits and employment taxes.
That may be the case in some places, but not all. I'm in the upper-midwest, farm country. The rural towns around here are dying. Fast. There's plenty of farmland, but there isn't a labor force to sustain the farms.
For the locals, "home" is a shitty little town in the middle of nowhere, with no way to ever pay for more than a run-down old house or a double-wide trailer. There's no real advancement, no way to strike it rich. So there's no reason to be invested in working and living there, other than because it's been home to the family for a few generations. There's a lot of migration out of the rural towns, and they are dying.
This has driven up the going rate for farm labor, which is now pushing $12/hr, sometimes going as high as $15/hr. The demand for labor and decent pay has brought in an influx of Mexican workers, and definitely not all of it them are legal. However, with this mix of legal and illegal, it seems the pay is largely the same across the board. Why? If you are absolutely desperate for workers, the last thing you want to do is piss them off, because they don't live here, and will happily drive 50 miles down the road to work for someone who's not a racist asshole. After all, they already have traveled a thousand plus miles for work.
But what's really, really surprised me is the attitude of the farmers hiring these Mexicans. A couple were interviewed in the papers in the last year or two and both said that they'd rather hire Mexicans than the locals. Why? Because they're hard working, they stay out of trouble, and they don't leave for greener pastures as soon as they see a potentially better option. If you treat them right, they settle down and get shit done. Why? They're sending most of their money back to their family, which is using it to build a better life. When they have their dream home, the kids are well educated, they've got some new cars, and a nice nest egg tucked away, they're planning to go back and live the good life. And the harder they work now, the faster they get there.
Immigration, legal and illegal, is benefiting both our countries in this regard. It's keeping these farms alive, that's making more money for the local area, the state, and potentially the US if any of those agriculture products get exported, and it's improving the lives of the families back home in Mexico. Yes, we'd rather have americans doing these jobs, but when they're not, even for what's regionally OK pay, what's the alternative? Active farms make money, fallow lands don't. And no other industry is going to replace tens of thousands of acres of farmland out in the middle of nowhere with minimal infrastructure around for miles.
Sure, you can take the free market approach of "if they're not profitable, let them die", but that's the same as saying, "I hate Mexicans so much I want to see both our countries poorer." We'd all like to see a functional immigration system, but I don't see that happening in the near future. If we go nuclear on illegal immigration, we're shooting ourselves in the foot. We'd like to think we're not, but that's just wishful thinking. What's more likely than a political solution is that automation will steadily reduce these jobs, until they're more trouble to find than they're worth.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
The fence works, where it exists. Why do you close and lock your doors when you leave your home?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!