Steve Aquino at Mother Jones asks, “Should President Obama have the power to shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency? Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) think so.” I’ve highlighted what I think are the interesting passages in the article.
On Wednesday they introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. That broad power is rattling some civil libertarians. The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.
The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.
The Mother Jones article quotes a number of sources who argue that the proposed bill significantly undermines the Constitution and makes a mockery of existing privacy laws. But I think the main problem with the proposed legislation is that the operational justification for it has not been made. There are two parts to this proposal. The first is the ability to shut down the network in whole or in part due to a “cybersecurity emergency” and the second is the implied power to wiretap without a warrant in certain circumstances, where such circumstances are defined by the President.
I think it is perfectly reasonable to jam any bandwidth carrier (such a cell phone network) if it is being used to carry out an attack on the nation. But such measures always have an implied cost because they also shut down own communications. Communications fratricide. Thus any effective communications disruption strategy is normally selective. It disrupts the enemy bandwidth but leaves own bandwidth functioning. Under what circumstances is it justified to “shut down domestic Internet traffic during a state of emergency?” The answer to that question deserves consideration, because a great many things increasingly depend on the functioning of the Internet, and 99.9999% of them are legitimate, in the pursuit of public safety, the essential conduct of commerce and in the coordination of society. So while it makes sense to say, “black out a four square mile cell because a Mumbai style hit team is operating in it”, it makes far less sense to pull the plug on the domestic Internet. Most of the people who will be disrupted with be responders. It’s like firing a cannon at yourself to remove a wart. The same is true for the proposed authority to wiretap anybody in an emergency. It makes no sense to surveil the public in bulk. There simply isn’t the the capacity to analyze an intercept on that scale. Under what circumstances would you listen to a crowd? It’s absurd on the face of it — unless you’re a tyrant. What you want to do in the face of a threat is prosecute particular contacts across the nodes. More on this later.
Much of the justification for the Act cites the danger to national financial systems. This is also the reason why many of the cybersecurity functions will be based, of all places, in Commerce. But while it is vital that these systems are defended, their primary protections should be designed around the systems themselves and in their internal security. It makes little sense to defend a given network by shutting down the carriers of information to it. The defenses should be around the threatened networks itself. It may be argued that some kind of pervasive network monitoring is required to establish the Real Time Cybersecurity Dashboard described on page 10 of the PDF, but what is the use of such a Dashboard if doesn’t enable a selective shutdown of the parts of the system which are being used by the enemy. If you’re just going to pull the plug on the system, the Dashboard is superfluous unless it is one of those Dashboards which doesn’t granularly show the threats, but displays Red, Yellow and Green status like a traffic light. And I doubt this.
What does make sense is a doctrine of “hot pursuit”, where the Federal Authorities have the authority to chase enemy cyberforces across the network, shutting down such parts of it as is necessary, according to military necessity. You can imagine a situation where the Feds overhear a cell phone conversation from Party X to Party Y about a nuclear device about to go off in New York City. They should be able to wiretap Y immediately without waiting for the court order. And if Y were to speak to Z and Z1 and Z2 then those should be pushed into the stack also. But to say, “we’ve overheard X, now let’s wiretap the phonebook” makes no sense except as an exercise in power.
The last several months have seen a vast increase in Federal Power. Parts of the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 seem reasonable, even necessary. But extreme care should be exercised to ensure, that like the stimulus package, it doesn’t sail in with excess baggage. This has the potential for abuse written all over it. Democrats should ask themselves whether they want any future President to have this power. Because the political system may live to regret passing an act with such blanket authority. Maybe not today, or tomorrow, but as Rick Blaine once said, “soon and for the rest of your life.” It used to be the case that the quality of a gentleman was shown by his reluctance to ask a woman for favors while she was at a disadvantage. Any man who came on to a woman while she was destitute was considered a cad and a bounder. The dictum to “never let a good crisis go to waste” was never a tasteful one. In this context, with the lady being Columbia herself, it is shameful.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
117 Comments
1. Lifeofthemind:1) There is a real security threat, especially from China
2) After the ouster of the GM CEO and other extra-Constitutional acts Obama lacks the credibility to be trusted with such power. That is one reason why powerful people are careful to appear modest and downplay calls for panic. Actions have consequences and truly powerful people know that if they do not stoke panic they will build trust and the people will come to them when needed.
Big Dogs Don’t Bark.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:23 pm 2. Doug:Since the people involved are only concerned with policy, I am sure they would have had no problem giving the same powers to President Bush and his administration.
“The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.”
—
Yeah, sure, why not?
Reminds me of something I read recently about the Admin’s position on Satellite Technology, specifically, communication satellites.
The upshot was, in the name of commerce, we should sell these technologies Willy Nilly, assuming the Chi-Coms, for instance, would simply buy and launch the product without ever peeking inside.
What could be said, other than,
“Here we go again!“
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:31 pm 3. Alexis:I could imagine how the power to create selective internet blackouts could be used to steal elections. Or worse.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:35 pm 4. wretchard:There is definitely a threat from China and from other places too. But is this the way to handle the threat? By asking for carte blanche? I think some kind of showing that these measures are in the compelling public interest is necessary and assurances provided that they will be subject to limits and oversight.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:36 pm 5. Doug:Carte blanche has worked well for the Sec of Treasury wrt Bailouts!
As to oversight, a solemn vow of transparency from Harry, Barry, and Nancy should be sufficient.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:42 pm 6. Tony:Bravo Wretchard, this is an outstandingly valiant post among thousands of your posts I’ve read at my favorite bastion of Western liberalism (old meaning: freedom utmost).
On point, what happens in reaction to “shutdowns”? Just today, anyone hit by the new net-denying worm just slips over to their mobile device, phone, bberry. Annoying, but life goes on.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:42 pm 7. Lifeofthemind:When arguing with a Moonbat of the left or a Wingnut of the right (not something I recommend in either case) it helps to try and force a logical test on them. For example assuming your worst case fantasies what should and should not happen in the eight most pressing policy issues. Agree on the top four for domestic and the same for foreign policy. If fewer then half the events happening track with your conspiracy theory then stop hyperventilating about side issues, even if you do have a line on corruption or other routine government abuse, clean yourself up and start acting useful. On the other hand if seven or eight of the top issues agreed on are playing out in accordance with the basement dwellers model then “Houston, we may have a problem.”
So now we face another problem. How to we shove that unwashed Wingnut over to make room for us on the Shrink’s couch?
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:43 pm 8. wretchard:The operational cost to communications fratricide is that it slows down responders and own forces like the enemy. When you bomb roads and bridges in wartime, you don’t include your own LOCs in the target list. But aside from the operational cost, there is a huge political cost. This power potentially allows a President, not just this President, to shut down dissenting speech. He can switch off the bandwidth and determine what can be switched off. This is a vast power, and all vast powers, like giant sums of money, should be doled out very carefully. Not off handedly. I don’t think the case is made.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:51 pm 9. Habu:Great post . Thgis isn’t obamas first boot of the Constitution. He oays NO attention to it:
“| It is high time Americans heard an argument that might turn a vague national uneasiness into a vivid awareness of something going very wrong. The argument is that the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) is unconstitutional .
By enacting it, Congress did not in any meaningful sense make a law. Rather, it made executive branch officials into legislators. Congress said to the executive branch, in effect: “Here is $700 billion. You say you will use some of it to buy up banks’ ‘troubled assets.’ But if you prefer to do anything else with the money — even, say, subsidize automobile companies — well, whatever.”
FreedomWorks, a Washington-based libertarian advocacy organization, argues that EESA violates “the nondelegation doctrine.” Although the text does not spell it out, the Constitution’s logic and structure — particularly the separation of powers — imply limits on the size and kind of discretion that Congress may confer on the executive branch” (more)
George Will
http://tinyurl.com/cb4xt6
obama is pushing way to hard and the pushback will be intense.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:03 pm 10. Habu:nice proof read dude.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:04 pm 11. blert:NSA/ Echelon have ALWAYS been ‘faced out’ to the public as Commerce Department actions.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:16 pm 12. blert:It’s rather wonderful that Mother Jones, an IPS construct is even launching against the grifter in chief.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:18 pm 13. aloysiusmiller:I knew when Bush dipped his toe in this that sooner or later the Dems would be jumping in head first. It is time for new private networks.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:29 pm 14. 3Case:The dictum to “never let a good crisis go to waste” was never a tasteful one.
“never let a good crisis go to waste”
Consider the source.
The rats have overrun the granary and it’s party time in Ratville. Not a cat in sight.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:43 pm 15. Habu:It makes a good case for more people to get back to making HAM radios with tubes and schooling people in HAM radio operations.
The tubes would be impervious to an EMP attack allowing communications to continue.
If the threat is one perceived with good intelligence to be aimed at the internet or using the internet to coordinate attacks within the USA then there is an argument to be made for this act. I mention several threads ago and LOM mentioned it first off here that the Chinese are actively 24/7 attacking our internet systems. Perhaps the congress is already in possession of intel that shows we are way behind the curve in internet protection and this, a total shutdown, at this point in time is our best option. I don’t know.
Addressing the point: It makes no sense to surveil the public in bulk. There simply isn’t the the capacity to analyze an intercept on that scale
We have the capacity to sweep the ether of everything, run it through the supercomputers whose speed is not of this world and find nuggets. The challenge is that the computer has to have some word or phrase to key on to move forward in narrowing the search. Miss that you have collected lots of X’s and O’s to no avail.
The Chinese could today through our internet systems put this country in a TOTAL grid down situation. A total blackout of electricity. I could list everything from police radio that doesn’t work to sewage plants, water purification works…you name it and it requires electricity somewhere.
Enter mass panic and exit law and order. This is tough stuff but we have a representative government and even though we see Tyranny galloping coming our way we must either trust them until the mid terms or revolt right now. We’re not going to abandon our Republic so we’ll all have to vote a different way next go around and fight our way back to the Contitution (thank you Buddy for originating that phrase).
In the interim we can be proactive and move back a step in technology to the HAM system. It has many advantages and worked damn well for decades during emergencies. Tubes are the key though since they are impervious to EMP.
This is a tough one to call.Here at BC we can hammer out a proper answer. We have some very skilled folks here. Lets get busy and proactive. No T-shirts this time.
As I have cautioned many times before just never ever give up your rifle to qanyone under any order..it is your right and our freedom that depend on that concept and duty
Aside: When Viktor Belenko defected to freedom flying his MIG-25 to Japan the CIA was there immediately. It was a goldmine, but one of the surprises we discovered from this huge powerful machine built to get close enough to the SR-71 to launch a rocket, was that it was equipped with tubes everywhere. Why? To avoid EMP.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:54 pm 16. Habu:12. blert:
It’s rather wonderful that Mother Jones, an IPS construct is even launching against the grifter in chief
Beautiful comment.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:55 pm 17. buddy larsen:har –Mother Jones thought it was getting a socialist, didn’t count on 0 dropping right through that quaint little notion into something very different far below.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:56 pm 18. MarkJ:My sophisticated reply to Mother Jones:
You voted for “change.” Now deal with it.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:02 pm 19. buddy larsen:Tubes to avoid an EMP disable –that’s what’s known as “stealing a march”. Stonewall Jackson would be proud. Well, if he’d been a Russkie that is.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:04 pm 20. Triton'sPolarTiger:My next door neighbor is an uber ham geek – he’s got his entire ham room inside a faraday cage – he’s in the process of erecting a ??? foot tower that has a cantilevered base to allow for raising and lowering the thing as needed (and to quell a neighborhood rebellion). He even planted a line of leyland cypress trees along the street to hide his handiwork.
Rabid Obama supporter.
He needs to see this article.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:28 pm 21. JGreer:While I agree its a bit unnerving, I’m not convinced that effective alternatives exist today. The definition provided by the government is vague which leaves everyone guessing as to just what they have in mind. Regardless, a reasonable reaction to a threat would most likely not be a complete lights-out for all communications networks. While I think its too easy to miss the key differences of networks when comparing against other real-world structures there are some good examples of proportionality. For example, when 9/11 occurred the nation’s air travel was shutdown. You can agree or disagree with the degree of that response, but it was doubtlessly enormously expensive, yet the country was able to quickly adapt and recover. Likewise, if a bioweapon were unleashed, we can be sure that the area would be quarantined. The size and scope would certainly be a tough call and take plenty of criticism, yet it would be a necessary action to take. You can continue on with scenarios for highways, ports, rail, etc. The government will shut down all of those things to some extent if warranted. Networks are different since no part of them is owned by the public and they are mainly virtual. You can’t just setup a blockade on an undersea cable system to protect your coast.
Also, keep in mind that there are many private networks that exist, aside from the public networks we all know – internet, PSTN, cell, etc. Most major corporation run a private network and some industries will share semi-private networks – banking is a good example. Many public and non-public networks share common infrastructure (cables, sats, facilities, network devices, etc.). Depending on how good the enemy is (and we should assume govt orgs are VERY good) breaching a service with a carrier can have extreme consequences which the vast majority of US businesses simply could not mitigate. Imagine a popular service (IP, MPLS, etc.) from a major carrier (AT&T, Sprint, Level 3, etc.) being compromised. It would be like a modern day Troy, except there is no gate to be wheeled though, just an eight-lane superhighway dumping the enemy in the heart of your city at the speed of light.
One final point. Worrying about the President’s power and authority I think is missing the key issue. At least he will presumably act in good faith and be held accountable for his actions. On the other hand, none of us should doubt that many potential enemies already have this same capability that the President is seeking today. The Russians and the Chinese at a bare minimum. THAT is the real problem and it doesn’t even make the evening news…
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:45 pm 22. Harvey:Unless the fellow mentioned in Triton’sPolarTiger above who is building a ham shack inside a Faraday cage has EVERY line and opening going into/out of that cage appropriately filtered, it won’t help! “Every” includes a/c power, rf to and from his transmit and receive antennas, phone lines, cable tv lines, … everything. And if he has air ducts or plumbing – - guess what else? And he has rf gaskets/seals on doors and similar???
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:23 pm 23. Kirk Parker:Harvey,
I’d start by assuming that when a “uber ham geek” says “Faraday cage”, he means a real one. The real problem I see for the guy working alone like that is that he has no way to test it.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:37 pm 24. Doug:– For U.S. Satellite Makers, a Bid for a Bailout That Wouldn’t Cost Billions –
But this rescue could be virtually free — if Congressional Democrats succeed in lifting export controls that classify satellite technology as weapons and have handicapped American manufacturers since the last days of the Clinton administration.
House hearings on the controls are to begin Thursday.
Proponents of change are optimistic, pointing to a campaign pledge by President Obama and the support of respected figures like Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to Presidents Gerald R. Ford and George Bush.
—
But some lawmakers still have jitters about putting satellites into the hands of Washington’s adversaries, and in particular those of Beijing.
“In the political environment we operate in, China is the third rail,” Thomas C. Moore, a satellite export specialist for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told a Washington conference in November. “We have members who know China tests weapons in space, and they don’t want to be accused of giving them any assistance.”
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:38 pm 25. Doug:RPT-US Air Force committed to communications satellites
“If TSAT as an entity is not in the budget, we are not going to get out of the business of protected communications,” Payton said. He gave no details on the cost of TSAT.
Officials at Lockheed and Boeing said this week they were already exploring ways to transfer technologies developed under early work contracts on TSAT, which amount to $1.2 billion over the past years, to the earlier-generation satellites.
The work already done could help upgrade existing satellites, Payton said, adding, “The advancements could be bolted together to have a different kind of satellite.”
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:39 pm 26. buddy larsen:The long sobs of autumn’s violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor
Ham radios and –? name it & claim it –& no searching, Barack is watching you.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:42 pm 27. buddy larsen:Doug, look in the ‘April 2 notes’ thread, there’s some links in #49 about 0’s new spy satt adwisor.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:48 pm 28. Armeggedon Rex:For anyone who has given cyber security very much study, this authority doesn’t make much sense.
The World Wide Web is a strategic communications asset. It is now being used as part of the backbone for hand held communication devices that can be used for tactical communication.
If terrorists are using the Internet for strategic communication for voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) telephone calls or traditional email or FTP transfers, this provides a classic operational vulnerability to interception available to our NSA, FBI, DIA, etc.
It would be stupid to shut it down! We should encourage them to use it more by making other means of communication less attractive.
If terrorists are using the Internet in tactical operations to communicate with hand held devices, the solution is not to shut down the landline based Internet portion of the connection, but to shut down or jam the wireless portion of the connection. This would not interfere with commerce or other legitimate uses but will cut off the terrorist’s tactical communications.
The military and critical government agencies and departments already have embedded intranets and wide area networks, SIPRnet, NSAnet, JWICS, etc. with type 1 encryption, that are not bi-directionally connected to the world wide web, and thus cannot be effectively threatened by cyber attacks targeted at the public internet.
Implementation of such authority would be of limited effectiveness countering terrorist attacks, but very effective at repressing civilian populations!
The Obamassiah administration and the ridiculous clowns in this congress have set off more “totalitarian” trip wires in the last two months than ChimpyMcBushitler and the Eeeeevvvil Dick Cheney did in eight years!
Keep your powder dry, and like Habu said, get a short wave transceiver and learn how to use it!
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:09 pm 29. ledger:“Why?” –Wretchard
A power grab by Obama? It would be a handy way of stifling your political adversaries.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:24 pm 30. buddy larsen:Part of a “shock & awe”? but whut’s the other parts?
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:39 pm 31. Doug:I was just getting ready to post that, Buddy!
49. buddy larsen:
Unsk, another Obama move to create chaos –try this one –
check out this link
and this one
and this one
–for starters, “why?”
Are there such few Americans, that we have to hire someone caught spying AGAINST us, to come back and spy FOR us?
Wouldn’t it be better to leave the desk vacant, rather than take such a gamble with our spy sat program –the known first target in any Big War?
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:40 pm 32. Doug:And a converse hypothetical, if 0 was a plant, and setting up that war for USA to get hit with a first strike without a counterstrike on the enemy, why wouldn’t he have kept this hire ‘off-books’ ? Why rub it in ?
President] Obama Appointee in Classified Info Scandal (John Deutch)
Newsmax ^ | February 19, 2009 | Ronald Kessler
Posted on Friday, February 20, 2009 7:12:36 PM by 2ndDivisionVet
The appointment of John Deutch to an advisory panel on spy satellites violates President Obama’s pledge to hold everyone in his administration to the highest ethical standards.
Deutch, who headed the CIA from May 1995 to December 1996, agreed in writing in January 2001 to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents. Just after that, President Clinton pardoned him and 175 others as Clinton was leaving office. Deutch’s infraction was thus more serious than Tim Geithner’s or Tom Daschle’s failure to pay income taxes.
“Deutch essentially walked away from what is one of the most egregious cases of mishandling of classified information that I have ever seen, short of espionage,” Sen. Richard C. Shelby, R-Ala., chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said after the pardon was announced.
Deutch placed 17,000 CIA files, including files classified TOP SECRET/CODEWORD and those referring to highly sensitive covert operations, on his unclassified home computers. One such file was a memo to Clinton and then-Vice President Al Gore. It noted that the information was so sensitive that Deutch was sending it to only a few other people, including FBI Director Louis Freeh and Secretary of State Warren Christopher.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:41 pm 33. Doug:“ Worrying about the President’s power and authority I think is missing the key issue.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:46 pm 34. Doug:At least he will presumably act in good faith and be held accountable for his actions…”
—
huh?
Powers, Holbrook, Deutch:
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:48 pm 35. JMH:That’s quite an impressive threesome.
Why?
Why not? Who’s going to stop him?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:51 pm 36. buddy larsen:The Director of Clinton’s CIA, during the years of big CIA housekeeping projects establishing policy to safeguard among other things those 17,000 files, the certain attendee of conference after conference and plenary after plenary mapping the topic, the certain executive order generator on policy matters related to internet security,
*did*not*know*his*home*AOL*account*was*wide*open* ?
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:54 pm 37. Doug:Kid’s job is govt computer security.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:01 am 38. buddy larsen:Don’t know if I should show him this, which was before his time:
Might have a nervous breakdown, or simply throw in the towel!
doug/33; here’s another –clearly a connection to (cough) domestic equivalents of Deutch’s foreign (cough cough) colleagues.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:03 am 39. buddy larsen:Don’t know if I should show him this –i’m sensitive to that dilemma –suggest you tell him you hate having to, then show it to him, explaining that since his future may be in play, you have little choice.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:13 am 40. Habu:21. JGreer:
On the other hand, none of us should doubt that many potential enemies already have this same capability that the President is seeking today. The Russians and the Chinese at a bare minimum. THAT is the real problem and it doesn’t even make the evening new
BINGO.
The Chinese have adopted a new principle of warfare for the highly technical, post 9-11 world. They term it beyond limits combined war and have adopted eight components to define this concept. This forum does not lend itself to more than a listing of the eight
*Omnidirectioanlity
*Synchronicity
*Limited objectives
*Unlimited measures
*Asymmetry
*Minimal consumption
*Multidimentional coordination
* Adjustment and control of the entire process
This is way beyond the OODA Loop.
They are mapping our internets, simultaneously constructing the next chess move(s) we might take to thwart a total shutdown. This as I have said is going on 24/7/365 and with more than just marginal success.
In terms of beyond-limits warfare the Chinese make no distinction what is and what is not a battlefield, and we are playing catch up in a most frantic manner.
Given their technology of ten years ago, the equipment and technology they had then could provide in one minute data on 4,000 targets to some 1200 aircraft…I wonder what the past decade with all their new money has done to upgrade that capability? Surely it has not been degraded.
As far as landlines go there vulnerability is insanely high. An enemy distroys the major arteries within minutes.
The Chinese have published all this in “Unrestricted Warfare”.
We have no allies worthy of the name. Our resources are dimenishing with every dollar printed and our population that use to be at the mall is now hunkered down at home,getting fatter and having a pity party.
Many enemies are at our door right now yet you would think that only Iran and NoKo present really troubling areas. The Chinese will have bases in South America in five years, the Russians have them now.
We live in serious peril right this minute from a host of internal and external challenges the answers to which we haven’t even agreed on what questions to ask to define those challenges. It’s past time to giddy up. Unfortunately our Chief Resident is determined to remake the USA into Europe West, socialism and all. Wow.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:21 am 41. wretchard:As readers of this site know, the US has the naval capability to pull up the subterranean cables joining any country to the world network. It also controls space, or did, anyway. In a situation where the US was under a cyberattack which amounted to an act of war, the logical thing to do, if it wished to disrupt the physical network the enemy was employing, is simply to interdict the cables.
If the enemy had attack nodes outside their own national boundaries, the source of attack could be identified and pruned off the system. If particular systems, such as the financial system, were under attack, then they could raise their system walls to any arbitrary height. That would enable them to leave certain highly secured openings for use. But if you close down the system in toto, you not only inflict collateral damage or communications fratricide, you also make it harder to track down the sources of attack. And then when you turned it back on again, you’d be back in the same game. It is communications fratricide that really worries me, because a total shudown would not only literally bring most everything to a halt (which would be the enemy goal anyway) but it would create the impression of enemy omnipotence, when in fact, the shutdown was orchestrated by national authorities.
At any rate, if you use the concept of “hot pursuit” as a guide, then in the limiting case you might shut down everything, but that would be an end point, not a starting point. In most cases I can conceive of a total shutdown would be asymmetricaly worse for the West. Western economies are far more dependent on comms than Second or Third World ones. This is like shutting down GPS because someone might use it. Selective availability is a far better solution. The phrase “destroying the village in order to save it” comes to mind. While I would keep an open mind on the subject, personally I don’t think the case is made.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:45 am 42. buddy larsen:The Danger is Not Fully Appreciated
Re PRC’s 8 axioms, ‘unlimited means’ and ‘limited objectives’ means clearing USA out of the western and central pacific via launching simultaneous apology diplomatic and carrier battle group sinking adventures, resulting in the CiC making the “Our loss was limited, so this Day Doesn’t Necessarily Have to Live in Infamy” speech.
i’m sure the services are thinking heightened danger these days.
It’s hard to understand, in normal reasoning, why we can pass a trillion dollar stimulus bill “to create jobs”, when we’re simultaneously shedding really high tech mustard seed jobs by doing a serious build-down of our defenses.
Isn’t building a Raptor a job? And weapons system dollars are capitalized, too, not expensed. They add to GDP, dollar for dollar.
Four years, each freaking second a tiny little nervous breakdown.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:11 am 43. JMH:The phrase “destroying the village in order to save it” comes to mind
Closer still might be “Ensuring you have artillery in place to destroy the village if it turns against you.”
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:21 am 44. buddy larsen:That phrase was always misleading –control of the real estate is what the battle was about, not the structures on it. Presumably, the villagers wanted to keep their land, even if it took a battle. So, destroying a village in order to save it can make as much sense as anything else in a war. Still, the phrase was perfect for the perfect lefty sneer. i’m sure that Major wishes he hadn’t put it that way in his post-battle press interview.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:32 am 45. Doug:Financial Industry Paid Millions to Obama Aide
Apr 4, 2009 - 6:07 am 46. Barry 0351:Lawrence Summers, a top economic adviser, received payments last year from firms over which he now has influence, according to White House disclosures.
Should they turn our phones off too in said emergency? cars, radio’s, TV, newspapers and hell why not just forbid freedom of speech during the emergency too?
Apr 4, 2009 - 6:22 am 47. JGreer:*It makes no sense to surveil the public in bulk. There simply isn’t the the capacity to analyze an intercept on that scale.*
In fact networks require just this sort of approach. Consider one of the most useful tools on the Internet – Google. Google searches the public domain and outputs a ranked list. Each search boils the ocean to produce the nugget we seek. So to would any surveillance program except on an even greater scale to include any active network traffic, public or private.
Building a system to capture this data is a straight forward matter. Any junior network tech can grab the raw data off a network within his authority. Now just scale that to a govt sized operation, access to key nodes, and the resources to process the data. Anyone recall the AT&T (or was it SBC?) whistleblower who posted the design on the internet? It was very simple. They used off-the-shelf splitters to tap high capacity circuits (large STM/OC pipes) and then placed components from http://www.narus.com/ to process/analyze the data. I don’t doubt that there was some extra tech-magic courtesy of the NSA thrown in here on the analysis side, but the point is, wiretapping en-masse is in fact the method used today.
You may well disagree that grabbing every raw bit off the ‘tubes’ and then storing the data for search/analysis isn’t truly wiretapping or an invasion of privacy. Only an infinitesimal fraction of such data is ever reviewed by an actual human after all. And while you may disagree, rest assured there will be an army of lawyers well equipped to make the opposite case. And that’s what this is all about – the law.
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:14 am 48. Links For Today » The Ethereal Voice:[...] They want to give the President the power to shut down the internet. But the President already has the power to declare martial law if necessary. Why give him more power? [...]
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:25 am 49. buddy larsen:Forbidding freedom of speech could be the emergency that requires forbidding freedom of speech! Perfect!
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:34 am 50. Roy Lofquist:OK guys. Forgot to refill my prescription so I’m off my meds.
Treasury rules that any government “aid” to a business is equivalent to TARP. This includes tax advantages, subsidies, etc.
The people peaceably assemble to protest. President declares that this is a threat to the public order that is being promulgated via the intertubes. Down she goes.
Coup.
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:37 am 51. Tony:Remember the quiet skies in the days after 9/11, the psychological impact that sunk in, that the enemy had shut down air travel…. Imagine the impact of hundreds of millions of blind computer screens, impotent Blackberries, deaf mute cell phones. Whatever our government’s goals, the people will feel the immense power of what our enemies have accomplished. The feeling of seige and despair will lead to panic and hopelessness, first among the weak, and it will grow.
Why would we weaken ourselves so catastrophically? This Administration acts as if they were elected to RULE, not serve, and their audacity grows by the day.
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:42 am 52. buddy larsen:Roy/49; …and the thing is, he’d be right. That barrier goes (*phhht*). Make a crisis, then use it. Cloward-Piven, at the knee of Alinsky.
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:46 am 53. buddy larsen:Semiotics Watch: The president is speaking at the NATO meeting just now. Behind him, the NATO blue backdrop has eight huge (say 5′ tall) letters, in two lines of four letters each. All are the same size and style. The top four are NATO, and just below, aligned, are the bottom four, OTAN.
NATO spelled backwards. WTF ? Sophomore poster class ? What ?
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:55 am 54. Doug:Obama the Almighty
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:59 am 55. LYNNDH:oops, that’s only 3 letters.
This was introduced by two Republicans?? (Iknow Snowe isn’t really one). This is not a powere grab by BO but by Congress. Any President, Dem or Rep, could use the power.
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:10 am 56. Doug:Leveraging the Future for a Short-Term Fix. FHA and GSE New Subprime Loan Breeding Ground: The Resurrection of Bad Ideas. Mortgage Markets Recreating Lax Lending Environment with Same Employees from the Previous Boom.
The reason it is so important to be vigilant regarding the mortgage market is its sheer size: (chart)
The government is increasingly becoming the only game in town. Unlike some of the PPIP participants that’ll be able unload toxic waste to taxpayers, these government backed loans are already ours since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for all purposes are nationalized. What happens when these properties default as we are seeing? And the problem is these agencies are projecting Pollyanna scenarios:
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:17 am 57. Pat Withrow:Was not the internet – at least in large part – a result of a commission to Rand Corporation to preserve communications in a national emergency?
Sort of reminds me of the situation during the Algerian rebellion against France when French soldiers were issued transistor radios with only one frequency: that broadcast by the DeGaulle government.
Control the information, control the situation. The French government could then unplug the other transmitters – some of which were advising the military to mutiny.
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:22 am 58. RWE:HABU #15:
I am a ham radio operator.
And as part of that hobby I restore old WWII vintage tube type radios as well as a few later ones. I am not worried about EMP; I just think they are cool. But I did wonder on that TV show Jherico why no one dug up an old tube set so they could figure out what was going on.
Problem is, the only new tubes being made now are from Russia. Admittedly, there are so many surplus tubes available in this country that getting spares is not a big problem except in a few cases.
The other reason the Mig-25 used tube electronics is that the Soviets were not too good at building later stuff. Our military even kept using some tube electronics well into the 80’s because they had so much of it.
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:27 am 59. Doug:Hams were the heroes in Hawaii during Hurricane Iniki.
All other communication was down for a time.
At one time the they had a well co-ordinated interisland system.
—
1970
ALOHAnet, the first packet radio network, developed by Norman Abramson, Univ of Hawaii, becomes operational (July) (:sk2:)
connected to the ARPANET in 1972
1989
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:48 am 60. noprisoners:Number of hosts breaks 100,000
AARNET – Australian Academic Research Network – set up by AVCC and CSIRO; introduced into service the following year (:gmc:)
First link between Australia and NSFNET via Hawaii on 23 June
Countries connecting to NSFNET: Australia (AU), Germany (DE), Israel (IL), Italy (IT), Japan (JP), Mexico (MX), Netherlands (NL), New Zealand (NZ), Puerto Rico (PR), United Kingdom (UK)
Buddy:
The long sobs of autumn’s violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor
Ham radios and –? name it & claim it –& no searching, Barack is watching you.
I believe that this was one of the many phrases broadcast from England into France everyday. However, this one happened to be the phrase that signalled the French Resistance that the D-Day landings were imminent.
Is there a prize?
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:56 am 61. Doug:ALOHAnet
One of the early computer networking designs, the ALOHA network was created at the University of Hawaii in 1970 under the leadership of Norman Abramson and others (including N. Gaarder and N. Weldon). The idea was to use low-cost amateur radio-like systems to create a computer network linking the far-flung campuses of the University.
The original version of ALOHA used two distinct frequencies in a hub/star configuration, with the hub machine broadcasting packets to everyone on the “outbound” channel, and the various client machines sending data to the hub on the “inbound” channel. Data received was immediately re-sent, allowing clients to determine whether or not their data had been received properly. Any machine noticing corrupted data would wait a short time and then re-send the packet. This mechanism was also used to detect and correct for “collisions” created when two client machines both attempted to send a packet at the same time.
Like the ARPANET group, ALOHA was important because it used a shared medium for transmission. This revealed the need for more modern medium access control schemes such as CSMA/CD, used by Ethernet. Unlike the ARPANET where each node could only talk to a node on the other end of the wire, in ALOHA all nodes were communicating on the same frequency. This meant that some sort of system was needed to control who could talk at what time. ALOHA’s situation was similar to issues faced by Ethernet (non-switched) and Wi-Fi networks.
This shared transmission medium system generated interest by others. ALOHA’s scheme was very simple. Because data was sent via a teletype the data rate usually did not go beyond 80 characters per second. When two stations tried to talk at the same time, both transmissions were garbled. Then data had to be manually resent.
ALOHA proved that it was possible to have a useful network without solving this problem, and this sparked interest in others, most significantly Bob Metcalfe and other researchers working at Xerox PARC. This team went on to create the Ethernet protocol.
The ALOHA protocol…
Apr 4, 2009 - 8:58 am 62. Philip Sells:OTAN is simply the French acronymic form for what in English is ‘NATO’. Please stop panicking.
Apr 4, 2009 - 9:03 am 63. The Old Guy:Its cheap and easy to buy a $15 transistor radio and store it and a couple of sets of 5+ yr lifetime AA batteries in a plastic baggie inside a sealed metal box (farrady cage). Good for hurricanes and EMP both
. I put one in my 72-hour kit a few weeks ago.
Of course, in the actual event of an EMP attack, a lot of thilngs are likely to be broken – not least of all the electric power grid and the water supply. That would seem to require … more extensive preparations.
Apr 4, 2009 - 9:13 am 64. Roy Lofquist:There were two models of teletype machines at that time. Model 33 and Model 35. They were 10 and 15 cps respectively.
Apr 4, 2009 - 9:22 am 65. SpeakEasy:My concern is how electronic media is replacing print media. Would this be an infringement of the First Amendment? I believe it would be. Would that stop them from doing it? Not a chance.
Apr 4, 2009 - 9:42 am 66. buddy larsen:noprisoners/59; Wins the prize! Wretchard, when ya got a minute, send him $5 wouldja? I’ll pay you back as soon as hck#ejdi rv2p7h n*%6wu!
Apr 4, 2009 - 10:03 am 67. buddy larsen:philip/61; thanks (& i do feel rather silly).
Apr 4, 2009 - 10:06 am 68. Habu:45. Barry 0351:
Should they turn our phones off too in said emergency? cars, radio’s, TV, newspapers and hell why not just forbid freedom of speech during the emergency too?
Well, in a total grid down situation the telephone companies rely on huge banks of 2 volt deep cycle floating batteries . They’ll last a week, max. Thus hard wired phones, the internet, cell phones all go down.
No burglar alrams, no security lights or cameras, no way to contact police
People with chronis health problems die. No kidney dualysis,ventilators oxygen bottle refils,insulin gone bad etc etc..
Soon law and order break down as the criminals begin to steal and kill…this has been gamed by national security teams and they know it would be chaos.
Were talking about an attack here that takes down all electrical power nationwide so the items you mentioned aren’t going to work anyway.
Neither are the computers mentioned by Wretchard unless they are energizer bunny systems.
Apr 4, 2009 - 10:08 am 69. buddy larsen:Refrigeation, Habu –don’t forget refrigeration. After Katrina, the food stores were emptied within hours. What was that Lenin said about any society being three meals away from revolution?
Apr 4, 2009 - 10:37 am 70. RWE:We had a hurricane evacuation here back in 1995. The phones went out well before it hit, overloaded.
And you know, I hear that the Mormans are supposed to keep a year of food stored. I can’t figure out how to do that without buying a bunch of MREs or something smiliar.
A year of food that will keep and actually be useful in a non-emergency? The only thing I can come up with is about 400 cans of chili and beans and a large sack of flower and the other ingrediants with which to make bread with my breadmaker. Kinda boring, but it would beat eating tree bark.
I guess you could plant a garden but I don’t think you really could rely on it very much.
Best bet for a radio for comm and info would be one of the 1960’s Heathkits. They use tubes and are desigend to be repairable.
Apr 4, 2009 - 11:05 am 71. Habu:Yeah Buddy,
I just want the contributors and readers to focus their minds on what would be lost if we had no electricity for 10 days.
Supermarkets would be out of everything immediately and no chance of resupply.
The bad guys , as mentioned, would be all over the rich folks who are anti gun or perhaps have a shotgun and a half a box of shells..easy marks.
Others in cities would begin to migrat to other areas they think might be better off….but there isn’t any better off to get to.
And the Chinese could get this done tomorrow should they choose. Right now it is not in their interest, however they will continue to assualt us. Not one in a hundred citizens give this any thought at all. They’ll be out of food and drinking water within days…chaos ensues..think this is a fantasy, huh..it’s too real.
I mentioned refrigeration tangentially by pointing out insulin going bad. We are highly vulnerable and the only thing that will save us is the armed private citizen.
Apr 4, 2009 - 11:09 am 72. Habu:RWE:
MRE’s have come a long way, but let me reiterate that without a way to protect your stash the bad guys are going to end up with it.
Think about forming a neightborhood watch on steroids, for the individual even with a gun is a dead man.
My place in Montana has six retired US Marines within a 5 mile radius and we’ve got out action plan in place….of course when it goes down I’ll be in Florida..ugh.
Apr 4, 2009 - 11:19 am 73. Habu:41. wretchard
They will mimic our own systems, up to the point where they turn of the lights. This addresses your secind papagraph which assumes their is power to track them. Why would we do that, we know who is doing it right now.
The hard fact is there isn’t going to be any power up to do anything you can mention that requiers electricity..and that’s everything.
We will not have to shut down anything. It will already have been done for use compliments of our enemies….we’ll be an instant fourth world country.
Yes backup generators will work until their fuel source runs out but they’ll be no resupply. Roads will be clogged with refugees, the million prison population will be free since the guards will all leave to protect their families. The paroled folks will revert if thay haven’t already..it won’t take a week of nationwide electrical deprivation and we’re cooked.
Apr 4, 2009 - 11:39 am 74. whiskey:Why is this based in Commerce, while Obama disdains missile defense in the face of North Korean threats, and Iranian Threats, and Pakeee-stani threats (as he is wont to pronounce the name)?
Because Obama either does not see the threat out of a lifetime of reflexive anti-American race-based agitating, or agrees with them.
After all, this is the only President EVER to kow-tow to a Saudi Monarch. Not even Bush did that.
By small, unthinking acts, you know people.
Really, who HONESTLY thinks Obama cares about preventing mass terrorism attacks or massive cyber attacks on te US? I mean, REALLY? The man can’t stop bad-mouthing America when abroad, even as PRESIDENT. He’s signed on to limiting his OWN power by giving the EU and IMF massive influence in economic decisions at the G-20. He’s appointing Koh, who believes that all power, even that of the PRESIDENT and OBAMA HIMSELF, is subject first to foreign court decisions, THEN the Constitution. Obama would rather see his own EXECUTIVE POWER limited than have freedom of action to the maximum possible (since transnational interpretations severely limit US criminal, military, and punitive economic actions abroad, the chief levers of Obama’s power).
Heck if the man won’t even hang on to his OWN power as President, what makes anyone think he would care about preventing attacks on the US?
Obama seems to welcome such attacks, he’s certainly been provocatively weak, by canceling weapons systems and offering various groveling (in front of the Saudi King who’s spokesman dismissed him as “another Bush”) and various submissive “deals” for Russia, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, and Al Qaeda. That New Yorker cartoon was prophecy almost, not parody.
A lifetime of loathing the US does not fall off overnight.
So what is his plan? Why Commerce?
His plan of course is aimed at the one enemy he really hates: political opposition to him, particularly White middle and working class Americans. It’s aimed at pulling the plug on this site and any other, even at the point of disrupting national commerce, so there are no criticisms of him in the Internet in the case of a mass casualty attack and thus no ability for POPULISTS to organize for his removal.
The wiretapping is similarly, not aimed at another Mohammed Atta whom Obama would doubtless be overjoyed if another group of thousands of Americas were killed by such a jihadi. No, it is aimed at political opposition to him, particularly again of the White middle and working class who he hates, and hates, and hates. “No White Men allowed,” his economic advisor Robert Reich proclaims about the spendulus. When it costs nothing for Obama to offer them patronage, and could gain him a lot more.
Obama’s domestic plan is to impoverish as many White working and middle class people as he can, because he hates them. He’s always hated them — read his books. [I found particularly revealing his view that he could not "connect" to Europe and Europeans one summer trip, and instead preferred the "authentically African" Kenya. Or his dropping of his half-brother who identified with European culture and did not care to be a Kenyan Political Big Man, rather a Physicist. ] His foreign policy plan is to be weak enough for the US to get nuked, so he can then offer a fairly comprehensive military, economic, and cultural surrender.
And achieve his dream of turning the US into his father’s vision of Kenya: racialist, with Blacks ruling everything, socialist, and Big Man oriented in every nook and cranny of America, with Sharia as the law of the land from an “African perspective.”
Read his books, hell his “Dreams from My Father: A Story of RACE and INHERITANCE” pretty much screams this plan, this view.
He can’t accomplish either the shut-down of the internet for political purposes (preventing political opposition from organizing) or the wiretapping of domestic, White-middle and working class opponents if it’s run through the Pentagon, Defense Department, or even probably the politicized Justice Dept. He CAN through Commerce.
Because it’s filled with his lackeys, cronies, and others who see him as their Patron, their Big Man. Who lack any independent means (former military career, career lawyer with many options) to resist his orders. That’s his thinking anyway.
He’s likely to over-reach. Any order to shut down the internet in the wake of say NYC being nuked so only his worshippers in the whoring press can report things, is likely to done only sporadically, with much of the US still having internet access. The system is too robust. He also lacks enough goons, thugs, and other means to eavesdrop on the Palin campaign, or Huckabee, or other political “opponents” such as Rick Santelli, or Glen Beck, or Rush Limbaugh, and various bloggers.
He’s a man who would clearly YEARN to open up Bill Ayers concentration camps for Rush Limbaugh and his working/middle class, mostly male listeners. But he lacks the means and the will. He’s a play reactionary revolutionary, seeking to impose the dogma of 1968 and preserve that certainty in amber, forever. But he lacks the means, the men, the will, and the broad base.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:23 pm 75. wretchard:Verlaine’s poem snippet which was part of an alert to the French underground that D-Day was imminent. It is is from his Chanson d’Automne
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:31 pm 76. Doug:5 Gal bottles of drinking water.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:01 pm 77. blert:Rice, Beans, Tuna, Spam for Luck.
Inverter, batteries, PV Panels.
(Earthquake and Hurricane more likely than EMP)
Car or running shoes for lava flows!
Invisible Shield, if available.
Whiskey…
See my #11…
The Commerce Department is the public face of the NSA. The Internet is already run through the Commerce Department.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:02 pm 78. Richard Fernandez:#47
In fact networks require just this sort of approach. Consider one of the most useful tools on the Internet – Google. Google searches the public domain and outputs a ranked list.
Word matches are only the starting point for ranking. The reason Google is different from Altavista and other earlier search engines is because it captures human input. It stores the results of what people select as useful and incorporates in the rankings. This is how Google describes PageRank in its IP documents>
Without accumulated human input, Google would not have its edge. Thus, the idea that you can engage in completely automated analysis is a false one, for now. Maybe in the future. But right now, we just don’t have enough analysts to put their ear against the firehose contemplated and assign them ranks, let alone correlate them to other events or intercepts that have been detected. In fact, trying to listen too broadly is a waste of resources in this context, because most of the persons of interests will be passing through super-nodes. Analytical resources are best used against those nodes, not browsing through the public chatter, unless they were looking for the super-nodes.
I maintain: not proved.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:03 pm 79. Doug:“He’s a play reactionary revolutionary, seeking to impose the dogma of 1968 and preserve that certainty in amber, forever.”
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:05 pm 80. wretchard:—
Perfect!
#47
In fact networks require just this sort of approach. Consider one of the most useful tools on the Internet – Google. Google searches the public domain and outputs a ranked list.
Word matches are only the starting point for ranking. The reason Google is different from Altavista and other earlier search engines is because it captures human input. It stores the results of what people select as useful and incorporates in the rankings. This is how Google describes PageRank in its IP documents>
Without accumulated human input, Google would not have its edge. Thus, the idea that you can engage in completely automated analysis is a false one, for now. Maybe in the future. But right now, we just don’t have enough analysts to put their ear against the firehose contemplated and assign them ranks, let alone correlate them to other events or intercepts that have been detected. In fact, trying to listen too broadly is a waste of resources in this context, because most of the persons of interests will be passing through super-nodes. Analytical resources are best used against those nodes, not browsing through the public chatter, unless they were looking for the super-nodes.
I maintain: not proved.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:05 pm 81. Doug:Rolling Papers, seeds, tie dye, incense, tai chi sticks, yoga pads, olive oil…
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:07 pm 82. bob:Only thing I don’t have to worry about is water.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:09 pm 83. Doug:Blert,
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:10 pm 84. Doug:How did the Loral episode fit into that scenario?
Your yoga postures suck, al-Bob.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:12 pm 85. buddy larsen:When WE who transmitted Verlaine, are manning the recievers as were the French Underground, who will transmit the Verlaine?
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:26 pm 86. blert:Loral is one of the key Echelon support enterprises, as you no doubt know.
The best account I’ve seen on the web involved French corruption of the Brazilian satellite bid war some years back.
Ultimately the ‘Commerce Department’ forced corrupt Brazilian politicians to keep the French payoff while awarding the contract to Raytheon/ Hughes. (IIRC)
The French government was so furious that she deconstructed what America had done and posted the story to the Internet.
Every time I tried to download the story to my American location — I couldn’t. Subsequently I couldn’t even access the French website!
And so it is: the French are blabbing to everyone about the NSA while the American citizen is left in the blind!
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:29 pm 87. Doug:Yeah, but the Metric System Is Thriving In Nation’s Inner Cities
– ht, Ms T
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:34 pm 88. buddy larsen:you know, no matter how badly one has forgotten the notion of that third item pledged by the Founders, that is, “sacred honor”, no matter how long-gone and quaint, or even to some perverse, the meaning of the two words may (in our long fling with something new & ironic every day) have become, it can all be reclaimed in an instant, by a leap of faith (small f, large F, as you wish), by a decision to resolve, to simply not give up this place as long as breath remains.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:37 pm 89. buddy larsen:Oh, brother blert, did you ever miss the Story.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:41 pm 90. Doug:As you well know, Buddy, humor is a necessary part of the armamentarium for that Crusade.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:50 pm 91. Habu:Esp effective directed toward Narcissistic Revolutionaries such as Whiskey describes.
76. Doug:
Secret decoder ring dude, secret decoder ring.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:58 pm 92. buddy larsen:Doug/90; oh all right, i pledge my sacred honor to humor you. there –happy now?
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:05 pm 93. buddy larsen:haw haw –NOW i get it –the link –that’s cruel, doug –but funny –
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:10 pm 94. buddy larsen:the ONE thing that can be said in defense of Clinton/Loral (link in #89) is that it took place after the ‘end of history’ and before history ’started back up again’.
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:14 pm 95. Doug:“Did private jet, Chateau Lafitte and displays of obscene wealth turn nation against her?”
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:29 pm 96. Doug:—
Why doesn’t that work with Barry and Nancy?
If all else fails, there’s always Kool Aid
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:44 pm 97. Doug:“Revolutionary Suicide”
Revolutionary Suicide is smart, unrepentant, and thought-provoking in its portrayal of inspired radicalism.
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:45 pm 98. Doug:Jones’ Son on Narcissism, Socialism, Fear
Apr 4, 2009 - 3:06 pm 99. Dave E.:“This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.”
I think that Aquino has misinterpreted that section. It says “concerning such networks” and not “on such networks”. What the feds would have is the power to demand that any network deemed “critical infrastructure”, the definition of which is so broad as to be whatever the president says, must bare all of their network architecture to the government. There are many potential problems with that and while it could provide the backdoor to eavesdropping and shutdown, it is not in and of itself either of those. There are all sorts of real reasons to oppose that section, but I think Aquino starts from a false premise.
Apr 4, 2009 - 3:33 pm 100. sigintel:-.-. –.- During WWII the FCC shut down all amateur radio transmissions. They were worried about spys using “suitcase” transmitters to communicate with subs. Hams didn’t get back on the air until 1946.
I’m currently building a trailer based “repeater on wheels” for a major police department that will have VHF, UHF, satcom and IP voice, data and video. As Wretch says its fratricide for the first responders to shut down the internet as the point (and the beauty)of the whole network is that its so highly interconnected. The know nothings in congress and their “consultants” are worried about DNS attacks on the grid, DOD, financial services etc but all of the major players have highly secure and encrypted intranets…this bill is a pure power grab and would harm US telecommunications in a time of national emergency.
Apr 4, 2009 - 3:54 pm 101. sigintel:-.– .-.. ..-.
Apr 4, 2009 - 3:56 pm 102. sigintel:pajamas media doesn’t like Q’s –.-
Apr 4, 2009 - 3:57 pm 103. Doug:sigintel:
Apr 4, 2009 - 4:25 pm 104. sigintel:What’s the Defense Against Deutsch?
—
“Among Mr. Deutch’s most notable legacies was a long series of fawning media profiles, which, early in his tenure, made him a household face, landing him even on the cover of such well-known intelligence publications as Parade magazine. Remarkably, the media’s love affair with Mr. Deutch continues even after he himself has bodily … ”
—
If we only had a cure for Narcissism!
Is that trailer armored?
QLF….a Q signal that means “stop sending with your left foot”
Apr 4, 2009 - 4:37 pm 105. Doug:So unfiltered is like vinyl,
Apr 4, 2009 - 4:46 pm 106. Doug:and QLF has that artificial CD Quality?
(as if I could hear the difference,
Apr 4, 2009 - 4:47 pm 107. JGreer:…in either case)
The Mother Jones writer I believe (willfully?)misinterpreted Section 14.1 of the bill. Its clear when reading the section that the objective is to gather information specific to security measures taken by private, yet nationally critical, entities. There is no mention of access to the organizations’ private content. So the debate shouldn’t be about warrantless browsing of private sector data, but whether we trust the govt (Commerce specifically) to sensitive security and vulnerability info.
Section 18.6 does in fact grant the President the authority to disconnect networks at will (all networks as mentioned in my earlier comment, not just the Internet). While I’d definitely prefer to see more selective language here, the authority is only granted the President, not some Commerce minion. The bill authorizes the network equivalent of nukes, where we hope scalpels will be the more common instrument of choice if this authority is exercised. While the method of “disconnect” is not defined, one would hope he’d opt for the power switch method vs. sending the Navy to start chopping cables.
A couple final thoughts on this. Wretchard may disagree with the Google analogy and could easily be correct on whether scanning (wiretapping) all communications is efficient, useful, or appropriate. However, I was not trying to argue that angle (I disagree btw
) Instead I was simply trying to point out that it is exactly what is happening today, for better or worse. Unless that whole whistleblower deal was just a clever ruse…
Apr 4, 2009 - 6:04 pm 108. wretchard:There are many potential problems with that and while it could provide the backdoor to eavesdropping and shutdown, it is not in and of itself either of those.
I am not averse to necessary wiretapping and my reservations in the post have almost nothing to do with privacy, but with control over the networks. Exposing the network architecture to facilitate contingent wiretapping is fine by me, but again, it carries certain costs. For example, many cell phone systems now have wiretapping utilities built in so that they can be activated on the presentation of a proper warrant, and the comms routed to a “shadow phone”. But a recent case of illegal wiretapping in Greece, I believe, revealed that unauthorized persons had written software to call those wiretapping utilities surreptitiously. That’s to say, they used utilities supposedly reserved for legal wiretapping for illegal wiretapping. What are the odds that the requirement to expose network interfaces are aimed at creating standards which are for the purpose of authorized surveillance?
But those things are like a set of keys. They provide security provided only the right persons have access to the keys. If the wrong people get the keys, they open all doors.
Apr 4, 2009 - 6:15 pm 109. Doug:re: Privacy,
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:02 pm 110. markb:I am reminded of the Chicago ABC News Crew that got the Ryan’s Sealed Divorce Records opened.
One of many instances of eliminating The One’s opposition.
Re:76. Doug:
Invisible Shield, if available.
I have several extras available, in hermetically sealed bags. I can put them on ebay for your convenience. I accept paypal.
73
Apr 4, 2009 - 9:20 pm 111. Robohobo:“…is now hunkered down at home,getting fatter and having a pity party…”
Most of us are also spending what time we can at the range sharpening our skills.
Shutting down the innertubes:
The “loyal opposition” and plain folks depend on this to communicate mostly. More things travel TCP/IP networks than most would imagine these days or via the same media (FO cable). Now that there is an ‘0bamanation’ and they are in power, they have other means of communication. They don’t need no stinkin’ internet. ‘The Won’ IS the MAN now.
Be afraid.
Now, as far as the Chicoms and 5GW. They have lots and lots of people. Not much infrastructure. But they have built out their networks. So, because they are poor and lagging in high tech and know it, they have found ways to leverage the battlespace. Fight differently as it were. Makes the others you may have to fight adapt or really, really struggle in the battlespace. Lots of hackers can map lots of ‘other’ network just by knocking on doors and seeing who answers as it were.
Everyone is scared of the nasty old EMP nuke. That science is settled. Really. Your computer may die but your car will run. The good old gov’t will continue as will weapons systems. I can talk more via private conversations if wretchard pings me but do not want to say too much. Some things may still be dark.
The more interesting thing is that I am either becoming more and more paranoid OR the guys I used to call ‘nutters’ were right. You know, those conspiracy theorists like infowars (Alex Jones). The ‘0bamanation’ keeps checking off the things that really scare me. Not building camps in Kansas but things like this. Sheesh.
Apr 4, 2009 - 10:18 pm 112. Doug:mark,
Apr 4, 2009 - 11:53 pm 113. Crocker:Haven’t been on ebay in quite a while.
Do they still have an auction with buy now option?
If so, I’d appreciate the minimum bid, time left, and buy now price.
I figure I’m due a discount for buying it sight unseen.
In looking at the draft bill, what’s more interesting to me are sections 6 and 7.
Section 6 directs NIST to develop and implement standards for configuration architecture and specifications for any ’software’ that may be ‘widely used’ by the feds or ‘in private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks’. What constitutes a ‘critical infrastructure information system or network’ is undefined and is presumably in the eye of the presidential beholder.
The draft goes so far as to specify a standard config language and settings for ALL software that may be used in the same ‘critical’ systems, with the requirement that such software must run without changing any of the standard config settings. ‘Software’ is undefined. In the engineering world, there’s configuration at every level of the system – network, OS, application and everything in between. The feds are now apparently going to be writing software specs for the entire industry, because configuration is at core of every system, at every level.
Section 7 creates a mandatory licensing regime for anyone who provides ‘cybersecurity’ services either to the feds or (that definition again) private ‘critical infrastructure information systems or networks’. You won’t be able to do work involving ‘cybersecurity’ without certification and licensing (which, on contemporary systems is just about everything).
So, in one move, the feds regulate – and indeed create – the keys to the software design kingdom (namely, config) and arguably license anyone who comes near it.
It’s quite total.
Apr 5, 2009 - 3:51 am 114. markb:112. Doug:
I figure I’m due a discount for buying it sight unseen.
————————
Apr 5, 2009 - 6:41 am 115. Will the Feds Control Software Design? | Behind Blue Lines:I’m hoping to convince Ms. T to model it. If so, it will cost you a pretty penny.
[...] over the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, S 773, sponsored by Jay Rockefeller, et als. Ed Morrissey, Wretchard, Jules Crittenden and others have discussed one aspect of the Act, namely, the president’s [...]
Apr 5, 2009 - 6:54 am 116. Ari Tai:How’s what they are asking for different then the AT&T “single national carrier” era when the government could indeed send a request (and did in times of natural emergency) that denied entire areas phone access (including people calling in)? (to insure government “priority” calls could get thru – and yet even back then hams saved far more than government agencies). And they supported the ability of an investigator not just to trace and perhaps watch who was talking to whom after some event but to go back in time and look at whatever AT&T had in their records (could go back years if people were willing to wait for the tapes to be mounted). Arguably historical data is much more important to stopping an event and focusing scarce resources than attempting to figure out late in the game how to stop it.
Perhaps we are in better shape now – with more privacy because (we think) the data is just not available – as it always was with AT&T and other (free-world, first world no less) government run PTTs. I don’t think so, I think the key to privacy is laws and the charging the courts to protect us by denying “conversation” as more than hear-say, if at all, in court (and giving us redress if our protected information is used without our permission). Free speech is just as important as privacy and courts must see that we can not be harmed by what we say, only by what we do. And irrespective of how widely a citizen’s secrets are published, their privacy violated, they must still be protected as if it had never happened.
Apr 5, 2009 - 4:20 pm 117. Mad Fiddler:It seems worth noting that FDR’s administration made the ownership of gold by U.S. private citizens illegal, except for cases in which the gold could be proven to be a family heirloom. (Look up his executive order 6102 of 1933, based on a 1917 law restricting trade with enemies of the U.S.)
As has been pointed out by writers far better than I, many governments have made ownership of firearms by law-abiding citizens a crime, then proceeded to murder those citizens. In the 20th century, about as many people were murdered by their own governments – because they were unable to resist – as were killed by aggression from outside their own countries.
Again, it is worth studying the history of Germany and the Soviet Union to note the patterns of behavior of a repressive government toward its subjects, so as to be able to recognize them unfolding around you.
Anyone remember Sadegh Gobtzadeh, the primary spokesman for the new Islamic Revolutionary Government of Iran during the imprisonment of American Hostages in 1979? For years he’d been an admiring assistant of Ayutollah Ruhollah Khomeini during his exile in Paris, and served as acting Foreign Minister for the new revolutionary government. At some point, he realized that the Ayutollah he’d worshipped was helping impose a regime on Iran that was vastly more brutal to Iranians than the Shah and his secret police had ever been. He was executed by a firing squad after he became disillusioned, and was tortured into confessions of conspiracy by the government he’d helped to install. (Of course the whole story is complicated…)
Apr 5, 2009 - 10:28 pmSorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.