Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday December 28 2016, @05:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the blatantly-obvious-is-hard-to-comprehend dept.

John Arquilla at ACM writes:

What a pity that senior leaders in the American government and intelligence community have decided to play political football with the alleged Russian hacks of John Podesta's and other Democrats' emails. By using these intrusions to gin up fears about the "integrity" of the electoral process—which is already befouled by the focus on finding and spreading dirt on the opposition—the real story is being neglected. And what is that real story? It is that, despite more than two decades of consistent public warnings that have reached the highest levels of government, cybersecurity throughout much of the world is in a shameful state of unpreparedness.

Take the United States, for example. Since the mid-1990s, there have been approximately 200 cybersecurity bills brought before Congress. Only one has passed, quite recently at that, and it only calls for voluntary information-sharing about cyber incidents. Legislation aside, there have also been several government-sponsored commissions and top-level exercises focused on understanding and illuminating the cyber threat. Each of these has signaled that "the red light is flashing;" that is, American cybersecurity is in very poor shape. Indeed, former cyber czar Richard Clarke and Robert Knake, in their book, Cyber War, list the U.S. as having the poorest cyber defenses among the leading developed countries.

TL;DR: The lesson(s) are: we must improve defenses, better use of strong encryption, and don't wait for government policy to protect you.

Previously:
Obama Orders Sweeping Review of International Hacking Tied to U.S. Elections
How Hackers Broke into John Podesta and Colin Powell's Gmail Accounts


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by Snow on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:09PM

    by Snow (1601) on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:09PM (#446833) Journal

    If I had to hazard a guess, it's that she's spending a lot of time trying to shut up women who've been propositioned by Bill.

    This is one of the stupidest things I have ever seen posted to this site... and that's saying something.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=1, Funny=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:27PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:27PM (#446844)

    Why? Do you really think that over his entire political life, Bill's only gone after 5 women that worked for him (Broaddrick, Jones, Flowers, Willey, Lewinsky)? Guys like that usually don't just stop after the first few, and it would not be much of a stretch to think there are dozens more out there who we never heard of. Which means that there's a reason we've never heard of them, namely they've been convinced to keep their mouth shut. I wouldn't be all that surprised if Hillary Clinton was involved in doing some of that convincing.

    Whatever she was hiding, she was risking a criminal conviction to do so.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by Snow on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:56PM

      by Snow (1601) on Wednesday December 28 2016, @08:56PM (#446850) Journal

      I think that:

      1) It doesn't matter who Bill is or isn't fucking.
      2) The narrative that Bill is a pervy old man is exactly the narrative that Trump (the other pervy old man who makes Bill look like a gentleman) wants everyone to think.
      3) Even if she was 'covering up' for Bill fooling around, it doesn't take 10's of thousands of emails to do it. (And if she was, then that would have been a legitimate use of a private email server, since that is not state business).
      4) It doesn't matter who Bill is or isn't fucking.

      If I were to hazard a guess I'd guess that most of the emails were filled with communication to/from various donors. Some of them may or may not have been 'shady' we may never know, but that's not as exciting as your narrative.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:12AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:12AM (#446901)

        This goes back to Thexalon's comment of "Those 33,000 emails or so are her version of the good old 18:33 gap on the Nixon tapes. I'm sure we'll never know exactly what was in them, but I sure wish I did."

        Who knows what was in those 33,000 emails. They really could have been as innocent as "I love you." "No, I love you more." "No, I love *you* more." They could have been as guilty as, "I told you to launch the nuclear missiles at the white house at noon yesterday!" Who knows?

        Many people are doing what the Courts do all the time (and I think is actually codified in law). Specifically, they are seeing the erasure as trying to hide evidence, and assuming the evidence is as damning as possible.

        Regardless of official law and what is provable, I think you will admit that Thexalon has a point that this erasure *looks* incredibly guilty.

        • (Score: 2) by Snow on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:22AM

          by Snow (1601) on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:22AM (#446904) Journal

          I never said it didn't. Check my original comment.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by caffeine on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:27AM

        by caffeine (249) on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:27AM (#446906)

        I'd be a lot more interested in seeing any emails from/to donors that they felt needed deleting.

        I think the abuse of democracy by lobbyists and donors is treason.