Print 10 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Apr 19 at 7:18 PM














Comments     Threshold


By Raiders12 on 4/19/2011 9:49:06 AM , Rating: 2
Wait, the same businesses our politicians get nice gentle back rubs and generous contributions aren't being protected by the same govt? So who is really looking out for who? The politicians don't care about the constiuents, business, or national security? Surprise, the jokes always on us.

RE: Hypocrits?
By amanojaku on 4/19/11, Rating: 0
RE: Hypocrits?
By Raiders12 on 4/19/2011 10:14:44 AM , Rating: 3
It kind of goes into the grey area of too much govt and free business. When it affects national security and the sovereignty of our nation, then it is the Govt's job, free market or not.

RE: Hypocrits?
By knutjb on 4/19/2011 11:00:37 AM , Rating: 2
But we have no trouble enacting energy efficiency policy on the power grid. They are doing some improvements, woefully too little.

The political interest is on where the power comes from and how "green" it is. That is forcing far greater expense than security controls.

RE: Hypocrits?
By spread on 4/19/2011 11:29:31 AM , Rating: 2

Pretty sure they used that excuse for the bank bailouts and look how that turned out.

RE: Hypocrits?
By WoWCow on 4/19/2011 4:28:06 PM , Rating: 2
Mixed result; all the government did was pretty much stuff the bloated bureaucracy and market with cash and stemming the tide of a massive market crash that would have forced more people out of homes.

The problem is the banks with the bundled wads of cash isn't lending them out to people who needs them.

No, I don't agree with the bailout still to this day but this is a different issue.

Money/economics support the development & maintenance of critical structures such as electricity and water.

You take away electricity and I'm pretty sure we'll be back to the 19th century at best. Take away water and we'll be back to an era without consistent clean water supply --- That is from the dark ages to pre-industrial revolution. The lack of clean water is really a big worrisome issue last I heard.

RE: Hypocrits?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/19/11, Rating: 0
RE: Hypocrits?
By stirfry213 on 4/19/2011 12:18:04 PM , Rating: 2
I think you comment is incredibly slighted and short sighted. If all we used electricity for was to power our Nissan LEAF and our iPods, then I would agree. However, this is truely a matter of local, state, and national security.

With government ran, owned, and/or overseen utilities, I think it is very prudent for all levels of government to not only be worried, but be directly involved with the security of these entities.

We are talking about systems that are at the very heart of how this country survives. If you were to take out many hundreds of square miles of electricity, gas, etc, it would cripple government capabilities on all levels. This issue makes us weak and vulnerable.

Unfortunately, our government is much better at being reactive, than proactive. We will wait until some critical failure happens. Then the politicians will get a blank check because of public outcry. Then and only then will anything happen.

RE: Hypocrits?
By WoWCow on 4/19/2011 5:05:10 PM , Rating: 3
I don't know what the intent of your comment is, but I'll bite and give it my answer(s).

Why would politicians protect businesses from technical assaults? It's up to the businesses to supply their own protections. I'm not thrilled with the government, which has its own security problems, offering "technical assistance" to companies that should have had these protections in place already. If anything, the politicians "protected" them by looking the other way, when any fool could have told you cyber threats would be problematic.

1. Government exists to protect the people and the property of the people they are responsible for (AKA Tax payers/Donors).

2. You may not be thrilled about the government rendering their service to companies, but would you be thrilled if the said companies didn't render their services to the people and the government? It is a complicated exchange of services.

3. I suppose the 'looking the other way' you meant government sanction of monopoly and oligarchy. Yes, this is despicable as it deprives the people (the government is responsible for) their personal and economic freedom to choose.

But here's one solution: get off the damn Internet. These companies make enough money that they can use private lines to exchange information between sites and companies, like the banks do. We're talking small amounts of data here; it's not like you need optical fiber with 10Gbit interfaces everywhere. And use encryption, firewalls, IDS/IPS, etc... These are standard items for any network.

1. I apologize, but I do not understand who you would want to get off the internet - where exchange of information takes place freely and quickly. Companies rely on the internet now to reduce cost and maximize profit.

2. Certainly, those companies can develop private lines - but who to develop and how to build it is another issue. Even the banks adhere to the government(s) and their laws last I recall. And in certain cases, governments ignore/sanction attacks on banks.

3. Evidently, critical structures responsible for millions of lives is a small amount of data to you. If you need to be reminded, some of the power structures in the US dates back to the early to mid 20th century - completely upgrading them is prohibitively expensive to local government and utility companies. A critical issue here is how and where can you get the money and transition procedure in place without bureaucracy and money.

A rose by any other name
By drycrust3 on 4/19/2011 2:24:28 PM , Rating: 2

What I find interesting about this is I think this is the first time I've read that the Stuxnet virus has had much more serious impact around the world than was previously thought.
My understanding is the Stuxnet virus NEEDS the Windows operating system, famed for its insecurity, so it can attack the Seimens PLCs used in the plant. Maybe I'm wrong, but wouldn't using an operating system other than Windows, e.g. a Linux distribution (which is free to download and doesn't require licence fees), thwart the Stuxnet virus?
I was speaking to an American some months ago and he said he believed the Stuxnet virus had affected the machines in the company he worked for. If what he said is correct, then maybe the Stuxnet virus is even more widespread than is stated here.
Not wanting to be unnecessarily alarmist, but what happens if the Stuxnet virus finds no PLCs? Does it delete itself or just hide away until the computer is shifted to a different network where there might be PLCs?
In a 2009 survey ... half of utilities reported their networks were being targeted by hackers.

It seems to me there are two issues here: 1) the Stuxnet virus is much more widespread and doing more damage than supposedly the writers expected; and 2) Hackers are attempting to access the networks of American companies.
The only saving grace in all this would seem to be that those hackers that are being detected haven't got hold of what makes the Stuxnet virus tick, because if they had then they wouldn't have been detected.

