Comments on: Is a new Obama mandate putting IT security at risk?

By: Chippy088

Chippy088 — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:00:40 +0000

I agree with those opinions already stated here.
Sometimes i think politicians are like new graduates. Intelligence without the practicalities. The difference being, new grads will listen to experienced advisers before taking major decisions, where as the politicians want to be seen as proactive, whatever the cost.

An idea like this simply causes all sorts of costly development and implementation problems. Civil rights, legal implications, and last but not least, where does the money for it come from. Who will watch the watchers?

The bigger the task, the more resources needed, and the bigger the blunders. Glad this is not my project.

By: Techbaron

Techbaron — Fri, 01 Oct 2010 09:04:49 +0000

I think there has been enough done and enough said in regards to security measures already in place with such as the presidential emergency powers. I agree with Halvard, how do we stop this? It is really now up to IT professionals to stop such a thing from being passed, I have heard there was something that was being attempted, which would allow for the closure of internet access completely for up to 4 months in emergencies, can anyone shed light on this? I mean, come on, if governments are that concerned about security then one has to ask, is the government working for the people anymore? It is starting to sound suspiciously like a paradigm shift… I hate sounding liked some freaked out conspiracy theorist but things have got to the point where you are forced to think in such a way.

By: TomLiotta

TomLiotta — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 01:50:48 +0000

[I]…for which the agency would need a court order to utilize.[/I]

Which court? Regardless, if true, it’s probably legal.

But…

[I]…the capability to intercept and decrypt messages.[/I]

It’ll be interesting to learn how “decryption” will be enforced. Will there be penalties for inability to decrypt? Who would be charged in instances that take a few months to decrypt??

Tom

By: Halvard

Halvard — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 16:15:54 +0000

This was coming regardless of administration, regardless of who won whichever election. Law enforcement and national security want it, other governments have demanded and received it and the Feds used to effectively have it when DES was the encryption standard.

That doesn’t mean I like it, far from it. I just recognize that governments everywhere have been pushing for and getting greater and greater police powers. Even before the the War on Terror, governments were pushing for these powers. Gore and Gingrich were both pushing for these sorts of powers 15-20 years ago.

The same career people are in place in intelligence, law enforcement and commerce. They push for the same things regardless of administration. Don’t like the appointee in charge? No problem, wait a year or two and they are gone.

So how do you think we should go about preventing and / or overturning these powers?