So you're talking out of both sides of your mouth again. Pick a side - it is either a serious incident and both the security forces and intruders should be punished, or it was a silly screw up and slaps on the hand for all around. You want to have to both ways.
Your use of scare quotes is completely inappropriate when applied to accomplices. That is exactly what they were, although I suppose co-conspirators would do just as well. I'm sure you'll object for some reason.
I'm reasonably certain that both the government and I will survive being ridiculed by you despite your self-perceived moral authority. I expect you'll get in a few good hits though, you do seem quite skilled at flinging mud at the opportune time. And the mud you throw does seem to often please the crowd. What greater thing is there in life?
There is a reason for the disparity. During the Cold War, the US had achieved what the Soviet's promised. The book Mig Pilot: The Final Escape of Lt. Belenko tells the story of a famous incident during the Cold War in which a Soviet fighter pilot, a privileged person in Soviet society, defected with his MIG-25. It is fascinating to see the US at the time (mid 1970s) through the eyes of this Soviet pilot. Below is a link to an excerpt from the book.
That tells me you probably understand neither the USA nor fascist police states.
It would also seem to imply that you consider the security of nuclear materials to be something to play at. Do you take the same stand with them in your land?
You aren't very clear on your objection. The trio in the referenced link did break in, so that isn't a question. It could have been far worse than it was if there had been more people behind them. Who is to say there won't be next time? Security of nuclear weapons and components isn't something to play at.
I think it's reasonable to keep an eye on everyone planning to break into nuclear weapons facilities. If you disagree I'd be interested to hear why.
Suppose granny and her two friends were only the first wave, just to check if the way was clear? It is entirely possible that granny and friends wouldn't know they were being used. Or perhaps they are being used as "human shields," a tactic that is increasingly popular with various groups these days. Lots of nasty possibilities.
The Algerian government says it had to take action because the terrorists were going to blow up the facility and execute the hostages, many of whom were strapped to explosives. Others were taken as human shields by terrorists who were either fleeing or re-locating within the facility (depending on whose account you believe) when they came under fire from Algerian helicopters.
You should probably use more salt when you swallow commentary on Slashdot. There are some questions that the two parties will largely agree on based on broad social consensus*, but contrary to many reports on Slashdot, they tend to pursue different goals in many policy areas.
You may find some insights by reading here from time to time.
* Allowing the country to be invaded is bad. Social welfare programs should continue to exist.
So. Am I to conclude from this observation that China has enacted the same essential policy as the United States of America?
No, not quite. In the US you can organize, march, and otherwise engage in activism, but you still have to do it within the law. China, on the other hand, clamps down on people that attempt to organize, march, or otherwise engage in activism. And as noted in the story, they are instituting a 3-year sentence for people posting "online rumors." That makes for quite a difference.
Who do you think is turning Mother Jones and various other leftist periodicals into members of a "Free Press?" Would that be their "corporate overlords?"
Followed and read your link. What I found was not people standing by the side of the road with a sign. They violated the security of a nuclear weapons facility by cutting through three fences and engaging in vandalism which resulted in a shutdown of the facility.
In the early morning hours of Saturday, July 28, 2012, long-time peace activists Sr. Megan Rice, 82, Greg Boertje-Obed, 57, and Michael Walli, 63, cut through the chain link fence surrounding the Oak Ridge Y-12 nuclear weapons production facility and trespassed onto the property. Y-12, called the Fort Knox of the nuclear weapons industry, stores hundreds of metric tons of highly enriched uranium and works on every single one of the thousands of nuclear weapons maintained by the U.S....
In the dark, the three activists cut through a boundary fence which had signs stating “No Trespassing.” The signs indicate that unauthorized entry, a misdemeanor, is punishable by up to 1 year in prison and a $100,000 fine....
On Wednesday August 1, all nuclear operations at Y-12 were ordered to be put on hold in order for the plant to focus on security.
That's great as a conspiracy theory, but I don't think you have any proof that this was linked in any way to US corporations. Trying to claim that, "everyone lost their privacy and the trust on internet" as a result of this allegation is a bit of an exaggeration I think.
There were privacy and security problems on the internet long before any of this, little of it involving the NSA or CIA.
Ahh, so Clapper says they only collect the data [1] but do not actually inhale it.
No, what he is saying is that they don't collect certain types of data. For example, if the mythical European country, and NATO ally, of Sylvania was going to sell its hot new anti-ship missile, the "Flying Fish," to Malaysia, it would be of interest in several respects. The US intelligence agencies would be interested that the sale was taking place since Malaysia in a region where US naval vessels operate, the country has problems with insurgents, and there is at least some potential the weapons could be used against the US. The US would also be interested in how the missiles were going to be used. Also, if a US company was competing for the anti-ship missile business, there would be an interest in see there were no bribes going on, that the competition was fair. That is part of what Woolsey addresses in the link I gave. The US wouldn't be trying to get the technical design data for manufacturing the missile. I believe that is the what the Director's statement means.
The examples you give in your last paragraph appear to be consistent with that.
Your excerpt stops before it gets to the good bit. I will add a bit more, and suggest that anyone that is interested read the whole thing. The link below that is from a former head of the CIA that discusses aspects of the same topic.
What we do not do, as we have said many times, is use our foreign intelligence capabilities to steal the trade secrets of foreign companies on behalf of - or give intelligence we collect to - US companies to enhance their international competitiveness or increase their bottom line.
Why We Spy on Our Allies - By R. James Woolsey, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
As a party platform, no, but individual Republicans have been open to those policies in varying degrees. There is a streak of Libertarian influence in the Republican party.
Sorry, but no. There was a question about the 2000 election, but Bush still won when the media conducted their own recounts*. What "controversy" are you referring to in 2004? Or are you just disagreeing with the outcome, again?
I think that depends on what keeps you up at night.
In one of the earlier stories today there was a post making all sorts of claims about compromised software, bad actors, and pointing to this paper: A Cryptographic Evaluation of IPsec. I wonder if anyone bothered to read it?
IPsec was a great disappointment to us. Given the quality of the people that worked on it and the time that was spent on it, we expected a much better result. We are not alone in this opinion; from various discussions with the people involved, we learned that virtually nobody is satised with the process or the result. The development of IPsec seems to have been burdened by the committee process that it was forced to use, and it shows in the results. Even with all the serious critisisms that we have on IPsec, it is probably the best IP security protocol available at the moment. We have looked at other, functionally similar, protocols in the past (including PPTP [SM98, SM99]) in much the same manner as we have looked at IPsec. None of these protocols come anywhere near their target, but the others manage to miss the mark by a wider margin than IPsec.
I even saw calls for the equivalent of mole hunts in the opens source software world. What could possibly go wrong?
Criminals, vandals, and spies have been targeting computers for a very long time. Various types of security problems have been known for 40 years or more, yet they either persist or are reimplemented in interesting new ways with new systems. People make a lot of mistakes in writing software, and managing their systems and sites, and yet the internet overall works reasonably well. Of course it still has boatloads of problems, including both security and privacy issues.
Frankly I think you have much more to worry about from unpatched buggy software, poor configuration, unmonitored logs, lack of firewalls, crackers or vandals, and the usual problems sites have than from a US national intelligence agency. That is assuming you and 10 of your closes friends from Afghanistan aren't planning to plant bombs in shopping malls, or try to steal the blueprints for the new antitank missiles. Something to keep in mind is that their resources are limited, and they have more important things to do unless you make yourself important for them to look at. If you make yourself important for them to look, a "secure" computer won't stop them. You should probably worry more about ordinary criminal hackers, vandals, and automated probe / hack attacks.
The last time that the NSA weakened an algorithm they recommended was by shortening the key for DES.
Minor correction: They strengthened the DES algorithm by substituting a new set of S-boxes which protected against an attack that wasn't publicly known at the time. They shortened the key space which made it more susceptible to brute forcing the key. Full strength DES has held up very well against attacks overall until its key length became a problem. It lasted much longer in use than intended.
I seem to recall that DES was never approved for protecting classified data, but that AES does have that approval.
It is tough to decide. On one hand you have the clever argument of name calling, and on the other is a long list of arrests, convictions, and interrupted plots. Which to believe.... which to believe?
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ The U.N. Security Council demanded Wednesday that Afghanistan's Taliban militia stop sheltering international terrorists and bring those indicted to justice _ a clear reference to Osama bin Laden.
The Saudi millionaire who lives in exile in Afghanistan has been indicted by a U.S. court in connection with the August bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 people, including 12 Americans.
Taliban officials have refused to hand over bin Laden, saying he is an honored guest who fought alongside Islamic insurgents against Soviet troops in the 1980s.
U.S. diplomats had pushed for the 15-member council to take a strong stand against terrorists in the statement issued Wednesday.
The statement, read by Brazil's U.N. Ambassador Celso Amorim, current council president, demanded ``that the Taliban stop providing sanctuary and training for international terrorists and their organizations.''
It also demanded that ``all Afghan factions cooperate with efforts to bring indicted terrorists to justice.''
The Taliban was were not acting in good faith. They backed al Qaida's goals as al Qaida backed theirs.
If it makes you feel better, there are hundreds of Hezbollah agents running loose in the US. Iran is looking to recruit new agents to infiltrate the US from the Southern border to prepare for terrorist attacks. There are countless thousands for foreign spies in the US. Many people in foreign countries use Hotmail, Gmail, and other services.
About the "ex-wives" thing - it is only 1 person per year, on average, that breaks the rules to check out a love interest and gets disciplined / canned.
Slashdot Mirror
So you're talking out of both sides of your mouth again. Pick a side - it is either a serious incident and both the security forces and intruders should be punished, or it was a silly screw up and slaps on the hand for all around. You want to have to both ways.
Your use of scare quotes is completely inappropriate when applied to accomplices. That is exactly what they were, although I suppose co-conspirators would do just as well. I'm sure you'll object for some reason.
I'm reasonably certain that both the government and I will survive being ridiculed by you despite your self-perceived moral authority. I expect you'll get in a few good hits though, you do seem quite skilled at flinging mud at the opportune time. And the mud you throw does seem to often please the crowd. What greater thing is there in life?
There is a reason for the disparity. During the Cold War, the US had achieved what the Soviet's promised. The book Mig Pilot: The Final Escape of Lt. Belenko tells the story of a famous incident during the Cold War in which a Soviet fighter pilot, a privileged person in Soviet society, defected with his MIG-25. It is fascinating to see the US at the time (mid 1970s) through the eyes of this Soviet pilot. Below is a link to an excerpt from the book.
VIKTOR BELENKO'S VISIT TO THE SHOPPING CENTER --
I think you missed something:
Chinese protest at planned chemical plant over pollution fears
A similar protest earlier this month in Chengdu, the capital of adjacent Sichuan province, was suppressed by police.
Sometimes the party is willing, but the police are weak.
On the other hand, the Chinese government has been liberalizing in various aspects. I think this incident was quite remarkable:
Chinese Villagers Under Siege Mourn Man Who Died
Of course, then there are these two items:
China's Leader Embraces Mao as He Tightens Grip on Country
China Takes Aim at Western Ideas
I think I now have enough hands to be an economist.
Some people never learn until you throw a laser disc at them. It smarts enough that they normally don't want a repeat.
That tells me you probably understand neither the USA nor fascist police states.
It would also seem to imply that you consider the security of nuclear materials to be something to play at. Do you take the same stand with them in your land?
Woah.... tough room.
You aren't very clear on your objection. The trio in the referenced link did break in, so that isn't a question. It could have been far worse than it was if there had been more people behind them. Who is to say there won't be next time? Security of nuclear weapons and components isn't something to play at.
I think it's reasonable to keep an eye on everyone planning to break into nuclear weapons facilities. If you disagree I'd be interested to hear why.
Suppose granny and her two friends were only the first wave, just to check if the way was clear? It is entirely possible that granny and friends wouldn't know they were being used. Or perhaps they are being used as "human shields," a tactic that is increasingly popular with various groups these days. Lots of nasty possibilities.
Algerian bloodbath: 23 hostages killed, death toll continues to rise
The Algerian government says it had to take action because the terrorists were going to blow up the facility and execute the hostages, many of whom were strapped to explosives. Others were taken as human shields by terrorists who were either fleeing or re-locating within the facility (depending on whose account you believe) when they came under fire from Algerian helicopters.
David Headley Said to Have Helped Terrorists Target Nuclear Plant
You should probably use more salt when you swallow commentary on Slashdot. There are some questions that the two parties will largely agree on based on broad social consensus*, but contrary to many reports on Slashdot, they tend to pursue different goals in many policy areas.
You may find some insights by reading here from time to time.
* Allowing the country to be invaded is bad. Social welfare programs should continue to exist.
So. Am I to conclude from this observation that China has enacted the same essential policy as the United States of America?
No, not quite. In the US you can organize, march, and otherwise engage in activism, but you still have to do it within the law. China, on the other hand, clamps down on people that attempt to organize, march, or otherwise engage in activism. And as noted in the story, they are instituting a 3-year sentence for people posting "online rumors." That makes for quite a difference.
Who do you think is turning Mother Jones and various other leftist periodicals into members of a "Free Press?" Would that be their "corporate overlords?"
Barret Browns Body? Thanks, but I'll stick with John Brown's Body* now largely supplanted by the Battle Hymn of The Republic.
*Sung by singer and activist Pete Seeger.
Followed and read your link. What I found was not people standing by the side of the road with a sign. They violated the security of a nuclear weapons facility by cutting through three fences and engaging in vandalism which resulted in a shutdown of the facility.
In the early morning hours of Saturday, July 28, 2012, long-time peace activists Sr. Megan Rice, 82, Greg Boertje-Obed, 57, and Michael Walli, 63, cut through the chain link fence surrounding the Oak Ridge Y-12 nuclear weapons production facility and trespassed onto the property. Y-12, called the Fort Knox of the nuclear weapons industry, stores hundreds of metric tons of highly enriched uranium and works on every single one of the thousands of nuclear weapons maintained by the U.S....
In the dark, the three activists cut through a boundary fence which had signs stating “No Trespassing.” The signs indicate that unauthorized entry, a misdemeanor, is punishable by up to 1 year in prison and a $100,000 fine. ...
On Wednesday August 1, all nuclear operations at Y-12 were ordered to be put on hold in order for the plant to focus on security.
I think you are treating the Chinese government unfairly. They worked hard to be distinct, and you're making fake claims about there being a knockoff.
Let the Chinese government have it's moment in the sun.
That's great as a conspiracy theory, but I don't think you have any proof that this was linked in any way to US corporations. Trying to claim that, "everyone lost their privacy and the trust on internet" as a result of this allegation is a bit of an exaggeration I think.
There were privacy and security problems on the internet long before any of this, little of it involving the NSA or CIA.
Ahh, so Clapper says they only collect the data [1] but do not actually inhale it.
No, what he is saying is that they don't collect certain types of data. For example, if the mythical European country, and NATO ally, of Sylvania was going to sell its hot new anti-ship missile, the "Flying Fish," to Malaysia, it would be of interest in several respects. The US intelligence agencies would be interested that the sale was taking place since Malaysia in a region where US naval vessels operate, the country has problems with insurgents, and there is at least some potential the weapons could be used against the US. The US would also be interested in how the missiles were going to be used. Also, if a US company was competing for the anti-ship missile business, there would be an interest in see there were no bribes going on, that the competition was fair. That is part of what Woolsey addresses in the link I gave. The US wouldn't be trying to get the technical design data for manufacturing the missile. I believe that is the what the Director's statement means.
The examples you give in your last paragraph appear to be consistent with that.
Your excerpt stops before it gets to the good bit. I will add a bit more, and suggest that anyone that is interested read the whole thing. The link below that is from a former head of the CIA that discusses aspects of the same topic.
Statement by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper on Allegations of Economic Espionage
What we do not do, as we have said many times, is use our foreign intelligence capabilities to steal the trade secrets of foreign companies on behalf of - or give intelligence we collect to - US companies to enhance their international competitiveness or increase their bottom line.
Why We Spy on Our Allies - By R. James Woolsey, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
As a party platform, no, but individual Republicans have been open to those policies in varying degrees. There is a streak of Libertarian influence in the Republican party.
Sorry, but no. There was a question about the 2000 election, but Bush still won when the media conducted their own recounts*. What "controversy" are you referring to in 2004? Or are you just disagreeing with the outcome, again?
Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
* It's worth pointing out that the hotspot for that controversy about the "chads" took place in a county controlled by Democrats.
I think that depends on what keeps you up at night.
In one of the earlier stories today there was a post making all sorts of claims about compromised software, bad actors, and pointing to this paper: A Cryptographic Evaluation of IPsec. I wonder if anyone bothered to read it?
IPsec was a great disappointment to us. Given the quality of the people that worked on it and the time that was spent on it, we expected a much better result. We are not alone in this opinion; from various discussions with the people involved, we learned that virtually nobody is satised with the process or the result. The development of IPsec seems to have been burdened by the committee process that it was forced to use, and it shows in the results. Even with all the serious critisisms that we have on IPsec, it is probably the best IP security protocol available at the moment. We have looked at other, functionally similar, protocols in the past (including PPTP [SM98, SM99]) in much the same manner as we have looked at IPsec. None of these protocols come anywhere near their target, but the others manage to miss the mark by a wider margin than IPsec.
I even saw calls for the equivalent of mole hunts in the opens source software world. What could possibly go wrong?
Criminals, vandals, and spies have been targeting computers for a very long time. Various types of security problems have been known for 40 years or more, yet they either persist or are reimplemented in interesting new ways with new systems. People make a lot of mistakes in writing software, and managing their systems and sites, and yet the internet overall works reasonably well. Of course it still has boatloads of problems, including both security and privacy issues.
Frankly I think you have much more to worry about from unpatched buggy software, poor configuration, unmonitored logs, lack of firewalls, crackers or vandals, and the usual problems sites have than from a US national intelligence agency. That is assuming you and 10 of your closes friends from Afghanistan aren't planning to plant bombs in shopping malls, or try to steal the blueprints for the new antitank missiles. Something to keep in mind is that their resources are limited, and they have more important things to do unless you make yourself important for them to look at. If you make yourself important for them to look, a "secure" computer won't stop them. You should probably worry more about ordinary criminal hackers, vandals, and automated probe / hack attacks.
The last time that the NSA weakened an algorithm they recommended was by shortening the key for DES.
Minor correction: They strengthened the DES algorithm by substituting a new set of S-boxes which protected against an attack that wasn't publicly known at the time. They shortened the key space which made it more susceptible to brute forcing the key. Full strength DES has held up very well against attacks overall until its key length became a problem. It lasted much longer in use than intended.
I seem to recall that DES was never approved for protecting classified data, but that AES does have that approval.
It is tough to decide. On one hand you have the clever argument of name calling, and on the other is a long list of arrests, convictions, and interrupted plots. Which to believe.... which to believe?
Secret oversight can't be trusted, and anyone who thought it could be trusted was a moron.
Public votes and open hearings on specific "secret" intelligence programs means they aren't secret anymore, which means they aren't likely to work.
Try holding a public referendum on pay increases for organized crime informants by name to see how that works.
The US and UN had contracted the Afghan government (the Taliban) prior to 9/11. It did no good.
UN Wants Taliban 'Sanctuary' Ended
Jan. 20, 1999 6:11 PM ET
UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ The U.N. Security Council demanded Wednesday that Afghanistan's Taliban militia stop sheltering international terrorists and bring those indicted to justice _ a clear reference to Osama bin Laden.
The Saudi millionaire who lives in exile in Afghanistan has been indicted by a U.S. court in connection with the August bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 people, including 12 Americans.
Taliban officials have refused to hand over bin Laden, saying he is an honored guest who fought alongside Islamic insurgents against Soviet troops in the 1980s.
U.S. diplomats had pushed for the 15-member council to take a strong stand against terrorists in the statement issued Wednesday.
The statement, read by Brazil's U.N. Ambassador Celso Amorim, current council president, demanded ``that the Taliban stop providing sanctuary and training for international terrorists and their organizations.''
It also demanded that ``all Afghan factions cooperate with efforts to bring indicted terrorists to justice.''
The Taliban was were not acting in good faith. They backed al Qaida's goals as al Qaida backed theirs.
Hans is in the slammer (slammer)
Hans' lucky he didn't fry (didn't fry)
He was convicted, be in jail, stick around (stick around)
Almost dangling with his feet off the ground
He gets to live, a noose didn't go around
I suggest following the first link. There are plenty of communist groups marching under their self-identifying banners.
If it makes you feel better, there are hundreds of Hezbollah agents running loose in the US. Iran is looking to recruit new agents to infiltrate the US from the Southern border to prepare for terrorist attacks. There are countless thousands for foreign spies in the US. Many people in foreign countries use Hotmail, Gmail, and other services.
Tobacco and Terror: How Cigarette Smuggling is Funding our Enemies Abroad
About the "ex-wives" thing - it is only 1 person per year, on average, that breaks the rules to check out a love interest and gets disciplined / canned.