Here is the problem. What is the going rate for an identity? $5? Probably less now. Perpetrating small time identity theft is a low risk crime, but to make it profitable you have to use those identities. Using them in the US is a lot higher risk. If you want to get rich, you either need to sell those identities, and/or be in a country where there is little chance of prosecution and no chance of extradition. This means that the real threat is online theft of a lot more identities.
This is all risk vs. reward. For business, it is a decision. You have to measure the risk, which means weighing a number of factors, such as the likelihood of the incident happening, and what the damage would be. The chances are higher of a theft of your customer database, and the damages would also be a lot more severe. The cost of training everyone to a significant level about low volume identity theft is not going to be returned to you. Therefore you don't consider it a high priority. Setting up security for your customer database is definitely going to be returned to you, so you do it. It is all Return on Investment.
There is a huge difference between being an "Open Source Friendly" company and an "Open Source" company. MS is making sounds about moving towards a friendly stance towards Open Source, however no one, and I mean NO ONE, should expect them to become an Open Source company in and of itself. This company has had a very long history of being very ANTI open source. Gates himself started his business attacking the Open Source community (or what would eventually become the community).
Microsoft DOES need to change. They know now they can not destroy Open Source, so they are starting to work with it. This would be a blessing. MS needs to start embracing Open Source simply because they are the current standard in business. To remain on top (and yes, they aren't going to always be the defacto top dog) they will need to be able to work with all the other systems that are making ground. If they fail at that, more and more companies are going to go with systems that can operate with the majority of other systems out there. Our way or the highway will not work in the future. Open Source is gaining, and will continue to make inroads as it gains popularity.
I ride a motorcycle. It is MY LIFE these idiots are playing with out there. It is bad enough I have almost been killed numerous times by people on their cell phones, but TEXTING??? I see anyone texting near me they are gonna get a fender kicked in!
This is NOT critical thinking. This is creationism and the forcing upon our students of Religion posed as education. Should students look at what they are taught with a critical eye? ABSOLUTELY? Should they be told that believing that the world and man just popped into existence through intelligent design as an alternative to Evolution is actually "critical thinking?" ABSOLUTELY NOT! Critical thinking, in science, means coming up with credible theories and alternatives, then testing those theories through Scientific method.
It makes me sick when the radical Christian right co-opts words, then twists their meanings. Are we THIS stupid in this country, that we are willing to abandon 200+ years of Scientific progress, and bring it all to a screeching halt, because it doesn't happen to agree with the literal meanings of a book that was written as stories for moral guidance. A Book written hundreds of years after the death of Christ, and has been translated with a political agenda in the Middle Ages?
Knowledge is power, and that is why they want to keep the American population stupid.
While I must agree that jail time is perhaps a bit inappropriate, I also take issue with those that think there was no real crime committed, that this is a have vs. have not issue, or that this is about "imaginary property."
There IS something being stolen here. If you built a new computer, with a new design, started to sell it, and someone simply started stealing your supply and gave them away, I imagine you would be quite upset! If you create something, be it physical, or a creative work, and you want to get paid for it, you have that right. Those who steal that product and give it away are not "noble" or "altruistic." They are thieves, and they deserve to be punished. If the original owners wanted it given away, they would have open sourced it, wouldn't they?
So, to the poster who stated that we should start stealing and redistributing everything and asked "What would happen?" I will tell you this: What would happen is people would STOP making these products, and you would be left without a major part of our culture and entertainment industries. All you would have left is the ability to watch skaters taking railings in the crotch for your amusement.
Going after the uploaders is right, and much better than trying to go after the downloaders, who often are completely unaware that they are committing a crime. Uploading of copyrighted material is the problem. 10 years of jail time though? Makes no sense. How is society bettered by THAT action? Maybe they are trying to make an example of this person, but they are also setting a bad precedent in a country that already throws way too many people in jail for really poor reasons.
Correct me if I am wrong, but as stated the current FISA bill only provides immunity from Civil litigation, meaning that they can still be held criminally responsible. However, since most of the progress on this has come from civil litigants, it may just shrivel up and die. The only hope is that the Civil litigation has raised enough attention that something may actually still happen.
I know many people are still looking at this and are skeptical of Microsoft. However this is a great victory for Open Source. Especially good is to hear that MS will be providing native support for odf in their products. While I was teaching I saw many professors grumble and complain when their students handed in their papers in ODF format. They failed to understand what it was, and what Open Office was. I even heard of one professor wanting to "take action" against a student, because he had clearly gotten a stolen copy of MS Office. It took a while to explain that OpenOffice was NOT stolen MS Office, and that students often use it because it is free, and they do not understand paying hundreds of dollars for a product they can get for free.
I also spent many hours teaching students how to save OpenOffice documents in.doc format. It was much easier than teaching the teachers about OpenOffice. Now, hopefully, the battle is over in the classroom, and the teachers will be able to read their student's papers!
It always got me that teachers would complain about students resorting to OpenOffice, when the students had to pay for MSOffice, while the professor's got it free.
One obvious effect is the low cost PC market surge. People no longer all want the biggest, baddest PCs (well, my parents still get the latest PC to play solitaire on). The low-end PC market is booming, and will continue to do so. In turn Linux also gets a boost, as people not only buy these PCs, but start to see a lot more value in free Operating Systems and software.
I read an article once that surmised the Tunguska asteroid/comet was likely also responsible for the flu epidemic that swept the world around the same time, due to the rapid outbreak of the disease that couldn't be explained by travel patterns of the human species. Now they want to drill a core of the object! Here we go pandemic! Stock up on TheraFlu now!
Doing my part to spread panic and conspiracy theory.
The open source video card is such a wonderful idea. Bringing video cards into the open source movement would be a huge leap forward into making open source a viable option for all users.
Why sully the whole thing by making it look like it is some sort of hacking tool? Time to grow up and join society. Open source can be the salvation of the computing society, which should NOT include hackers. By the way, I hate that term. A REAL hacker is not someone who commits crimes with computers, and it is a shame that term has been co-opted by people who want to break the law, or who are just unwilling to join us in the civilized world.
Hardening is just one step. Alone it will do a little to increase your security stance. However it will not protect you from everything, especially the untrained user downloading bots onto your system.
So yes, hardening can help secure your system against some attacks, but you are better off by far not stopping there. Use Defense in Depth, also known as a layered approach. Harden your system, use a firewall, use anti-virus/malware, intrusion detection, and educate all users about safe browsing habits.
Any scientist caught using illegal performance enhancing substances should be banned from the next four experiments, research projects, or scientific seminars. Second offense ban for one year!
Interesting read, and very informative. I am 40, and will be graduating from the Norwich University MSIA program in June (4.0 GPA). I am glad to see that the DoD is at least looking at reducing the physical qualifications for entrance. I for one would never pass (Asthma and a disc problem), however I would be very interested in helping the IA program for the US government.
The recent attacks on a nation (Estonia I believe) by cyber terrorists brings about some key warning signs for those interested in cyber-warfare and cyber-terrorism. The ability to bring to a halt communications, transportation, and economic infrastructures of a country, essentially crippling it are interesting aspects for a new front in warfare. Where in the past the first overt attacks on a nation have been to cripple communications and command and control structures through the use of air power, now we can investigate cyber attacks as a feasible first strike technology. The ability to bring down these systems makes an effective platform, with significantly reduced risk to personnel.
Also defending against such attacks is of paramount importance. While the threat to the US is a bit different in that such attacks would likely not be followed by traditional military force, the results of a successful attack against this country could prove devastating to the economy and our infrastructure.
Since these attacks appear to be the work of bot-nets, defense against these attacks means defending against many civilian and corporate "zombie" machines that have been taken over without the owners knowledge and/or permission. To this end it may be worth investigating whether a public awareness campaign might be effective in limiting the attacks. Also replacing the current internet infrastructure with routers designed to identify and limit such attacks may be an effective deterrent. The latter option also allow the infrastructure under US control to be monitored and used for attacks against the US while allowing information warfare tactics originating from the US against our enemies, thereby allowing us greater control over such matters.
Also, considering that bot net attacks have been determined to be so successful, I am wondering what the official policy is on using civilian and foreign machines to launch an attack against enemies in a time of war?
I was a big time gamer. Even while going through grad school and teaching I gamed pretty heavily, leading a guild in WoW for much of it. I also started using Linux again after many years of being away. Once I did I couldn't go back to Windows, not now I had started using a REAL Operating System.
Oh I still game on occasion, when I can get things working through Wine or Cedega. On a rare occasion I even use the Windows boot and play a game. For the most part my gaming days are over. It came down to a choice between Linux and gaming, and Linux won, no contest.
If the gaming developers start paying attention to Linux, I will buy, and I will play. I am still a gamer, just one who is waitiong for a game.
They really should educate the members of our government on what the internet really is, and how it works. P2P is not the problem, it is people using it for illegal purposes that is the problem. I would not issue the same praise. Not allowing University students to use P2P severely hampers Academic Freedom. Some large files are best downloaded with P2P programs. This goes for many Open Source operating systems. I am an adjunct professor at a Community College, and I often use these programs to get the latest Linux OS so that my students and I can use them.
Limiting the use of programs that CAN be used for illegal purposes is not going to solve the problem. Should we also ban the use of security tools because hackers can use them for illegal purposes? Should we ban the use of web cams because THEY can be used to tape people illegally? Perhaps we should just ban the use of personal computers on college campuses, because they may contain illegal software, or may be being used to break laws.
Do they deserve it? YES. They committed a crime, and a fairly serious one. Maybe their aim was not to do harm (besides falsifying their grades) but they violated a number of laws in doing so, and they should be punished.
Say the school didn't have a computerized system, and they broke into the administration offices to do the same thing? Would they be punished based on all the crimes they committed? YES. This is no different. By trying them and making them serve time this will be on their permanent records. Any company hiring will want to know that they are perfectly willing to commit crimes against the company to falsify records.
Why don't we teach computing ethics in school? We need to. The computer isn't just a toy. Breaking into systems isn't just a "fun thing to do." It is a serious offense, and those who do it need to be prosecuted whenever they are caught.
Slashdot Mirror
Here is the problem. What is the going rate for an identity? $5? Probably less now. Perpetrating small time identity theft is a low risk crime, but to make it profitable you have to use those identities. Using them in the US is a lot higher risk. If you want to get rich, you either need to sell those identities, and/or be in a country where there is little chance of prosecution and no chance of extradition. This means that the real threat is online theft of a lot more identities. This is all risk vs. reward. For business, it is a decision. You have to measure the risk, which means weighing a number of factors, such as the likelihood of the incident happening, and what the damage would be. The chances are higher of a theft of your customer database, and the damages would also be a lot more severe. The cost of training everyone to a significant level about low volume identity theft is not going to be returned to you. Therefore you don't consider it a high priority. Setting up security for your customer database is definitely going to be returned to you, so you do it. It is all Return on Investment.
There is a huge difference between being an "Open Source Friendly" company and an "Open Source" company. MS is making sounds about moving towards a friendly stance towards Open Source, however no one, and I mean NO ONE, should expect them to become an Open Source company in and of itself. This company has had a very long history of being very ANTI open source. Gates himself started his business attacking the Open Source community (or what would eventually become the community). Microsoft DOES need to change. They know now they can not destroy Open Source, so they are starting to work with it. This would be a blessing. MS needs to start embracing Open Source simply because they are the current standard in business. To remain on top (and yes, they aren't going to always be the defacto top dog) they will need to be able to work with all the other systems that are making ground. If they fail at that, more and more companies are going to go with systems that can operate with the majority of other systems out there. Our way or the highway will not work in the future. Open Source is gaining, and will continue to make inroads as it gains popularity.
I ride a motorcycle. It is MY LIFE these idiots are playing with out there. It is bad enough I have almost been killed numerous times by people on their cell phones, but TEXTING??? I see anyone texting near me they are gonna get a fender kicked in!
This is NOT critical thinking. This is creationism and the forcing upon our students of Religion posed as education. Should students look at what they are taught with a critical eye? ABSOLUTELY? Should they be told that believing that the world and man just popped into existence through intelligent design as an alternative to Evolution is actually "critical thinking?" ABSOLUTELY NOT! Critical thinking, in science, means coming up with credible theories and alternatives, then testing those theories through Scientific method. It makes me sick when the radical Christian right co-opts words, then twists their meanings. Are we THIS stupid in this country, that we are willing to abandon 200+ years of Scientific progress, and bring it all to a screeching halt, because it doesn't happen to agree with the literal meanings of a book that was written as stories for moral guidance. A Book written hundreds of years after the death of Christ, and has been translated with a political agenda in the Middle Ages? Knowledge is power, and that is why they want to keep the American population stupid.
While I must agree that jail time is perhaps a bit inappropriate, I also take issue with those that think there was no real crime committed, that this is a have vs. have not issue, or that this is about "imaginary property." There IS something being stolen here. If you built a new computer, with a new design, started to sell it, and someone simply started stealing your supply and gave them away, I imagine you would be quite upset! If you create something, be it physical, or a creative work, and you want to get paid for it, you have that right. Those who steal that product and give it away are not "noble" or "altruistic." They are thieves, and they deserve to be punished. If the original owners wanted it given away, they would have open sourced it, wouldn't they? So, to the poster who stated that we should start stealing and redistributing everything and asked "What would happen?" I will tell you this: What would happen is people would STOP making these products, and you would be left without a major part of our culture and entertainment industries. All you would have left is the ability to watch skaters taking railings in the crotch for your amusement. Going after the uploaders is right, and much better than trying to go after the downloaders, who often are completely unaware that they are committing a crime. Uploading of copyrighted material is the problem. 10 years of jail time though? Makes no sense. How is society bettered by THAT action? Maybe they are trying to make an example of this person, but they are also setting a bad precedent in a country that already throws way too many people in jail for really poor reasons.
Correct me if I am wrong, but as stated the current FISA bill only provides immunity from Civil litigation, meaning that they can still be held criminally responsible. However, since most of the progress on this has come from civil litigants, it may just shrivel up and die. The only hope is that the Civil litigation has raised enough attention that something may actually still happen.
I know many people are still looking at this and are skeptical of Microsoft. However this is a great victory for Open Source. Especially good is to hear that MS will be providing native support for odf in their products. While I was teaching I saw many professors grumble and complain when their students handed in their papers in ODF format. They failed to understand what it was, and what Open Office was. I even heard of one professor wanting to "take action" against a student, because he had clearly gotten a stolen copy of MS Office. It took a while to explain that OpenOffice was NOT stolen MS Office, and that students often use it because it is free, and they do not understand paying hundreds of dollars for a product they can get for free. I also spent many hours teaching students how to save OpenOffice documents in .doc format. It was much easier than teaching the teachers about OpenOffice. Now, hopefully, the battle is over in the classroom, and the teachers will be able to read their student's papers!
It always got me that teachers would complain about students resorting to OpenOffice, when the students had to pay for MSOffice, while the professor's got it free.
One obvious effect is the low cost PC market surge. People no longer all want the biggest, baddest PCs (well, my parents still get the latest PC to play solitaire on). The low-end PC market is booming, and will continue to do so. In turn Linux also gets a boost, as people not only buy these PCs, but start to see a lot more value in free Operating Systems and software.
I read an article once that surmised the Tunguska asteroid/comet was likely also responsible for the flu epidemic that swept the world around the same time, due to the rapid outbreak of the disease that couldn't be explained by travel patterns of the human species. Now they want to drill a core of the object! Here we go pandemic! Stock up on TheraFlu now! Doing my part to spread panic and conspiracy theory.
The open source video card is such a wonderful idea. Bringing video cards into the open source movement would be a huge leap forward into making open source a viable option for all users. Why sully the whole thing by making it look like it is some sort of hacking tool? Time to grow up and join society. Open source can be the salvation of the computing society, which should NOT include hackers. By the way, I hate that term. A REAL hacker is not someone who commits crimes with computers, and it is a shame that term has been co-opted by people who want to break the law, or who are just unwilling to join us in the civilized world.
Hardening is just one step. Alone it will do a little to increase your security stance. However it will not protect you from everything, especially the untrained user downloading bots onto your system. So yes, hardening can help secure your system against some attacks, but you are better off by far not stopping there. Use Defense in Depth, also known as a layered approach. Harden your system, use a firewall, use anti-virus/malware, intrusion detection, and educate all users about safe browsing habits.
Any scientist caught using illegal performance enhancing substances should be banned from the next four experiments, research projects, or scientific seminars. Second offense ban for one year!
Interesting read, and very informative. I am 40, and will be graduating from the Norwich University MSIA program in June (4.0 GPA). I am glad to see that the DoD is at least looking at reducing the physical qualifications for entrance. I for one would never pass (Asthma and a disc problem), however I would be very interested in helping the IA program for the US government. The recent attacks on a nation (Estonia I believe) by cyber terrorists brings about some key warning signs for those interested in cyber-warfare and cyber-terrorism. The ability to bring to a halt communications, transportation, and economic infrastructures of a country, essentially crippling it are interesting aspects for a new front in warfare. Where in the past the first overt attacks on a nation have been to cripple communications and command and control structures through the use of air power, now we can investigate cyber attacks as a feasible first strike technology. The ability to bring down these systems makes an effective platform, with significantly reduced risk to personnel. Also defending against such attacks is of paramount importance. While the threat to the US is a bit different in that such attacks would likely not be followed by traditional military force, the results of a successful attack against this country could prove devastating to the economy and our infrastructure. Since these attacks appear to be the work of bot-nets, defense against these attacks means defending against many civilian and corporate "zombie" machines that have been taken over without the owners knowledge and/or permission. To this end it may be worth investigating whether a public awareness campaign might be effective in limiting the attacks. Also replacing the current internet infrastructure with routers designed to identify and limit such attacks may be an effective deterrent. The latter option also allow the infrastructure under US control to be monitored and used for attacks against the US while allowing information warfare tactics originating from the US against our enemies, thereby allowing us greater control over such matters. Also, considering that bot net attacks have been determined to be so successful, I am wondering what the official policy is on using civilian and foreign machines to launch an attack against enemies in a time of war?
I was a big time gamer. Even while going through grad school and teaching I gamed pretty heavily, leading a guild in WoW for much of it. I also started using Linux again after many years of being away. Once I did I couldn't go back to Windows, not now I had started using a REAL Operating System. Oh I still game on occasion, when I can get things working through Wine or Cedega. On a rare occasion I even use the Windows boot and play a game. For the most part my gaming days are over. It came down to a choice between Linux and gaming, and Linux won, no contest. If the gaming developers start paying attention to Linux, I will buy, and I will play. I am still a gamer, just one who is waitiong for a game.
They really should educate the members of our government on what the internet really is, and how it works. P2P is not the problem, it is people using it for illegal purposes that is the problem. I would not issue the same praise. Not allowing University students to use P2P severely hampers Academic Freedom. Some large files are best downloaded with P2P programs. This goes for many Open Source operating systems. I am an adjunct professor at a Community College, and I often use these programs to get the latest Linux OS so that my students and I can use them. Limiting the use of programs that CAN be used for illegal purposes is not going to solve the problem. Should we also ban the use of security tools because hackers can use them for illegal purposes? Should we ban the use of web cams because THEY can be used to tape people illegally? Perhaps we should just ban the use of personal computers on college campuses, because they may contain illegal software, or may be being used to break laws.
Do they deserve it? YES. They committed a crime, and a fairly serious one. Maybe their aim was not to do harm (besides falsifying their grades) but they violated a number of laws in doing so, and they should be punished. Say the school didn't have a computerized system, and they broke into the administration offices to do the same thing? Would they be punished based on all the crimes they committed? YES. This is no different. By trying them and making them serve time this will be on their permanent records. Any company hiring will want to know that they are perfectly willing to commit crimes against the company to falsify records. Why don't we teach computing ethics in school? We need to. The computer isn't just a toy. Breaking into systems isn't just a "fun thing to do." It is a serious offense, and those who do it need to be prosecuted whenever they are caught.