Two comments: One - interconnected systems are unlikely to ever be hacker-proof until they use well established capabilities-based architectures.
Two - having a Govnet means the gov can switch off the Internet anytime with little immediate and direct consequence to itself. At 09:41 PM 2/21/2002 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/24164.html >Clarke also defended his proposal for the creation of a private network >exclusively for sensitive government computers. The administration >received 167 comments on the proposal to create a "Govnet" that would be >isolated from the public Internet, Clarke said. Those proposals are being >reviewed by sixteen federal agencies. > >The cyber security czar professed surprise at learning from the comments >that other segregated wide area networks already exist, within federal >agencies and private companies. "What we discovered is that the idea of >having a separate air-gapped network... is in fact an old idea," said >Clarke. "There are already such networks out there." > >Some security experts had criticized the Govnet proposal, arguing that >such a network would itself be vulnerable to attack, and would represent a >government abandonment of the Internet. Clarke countered Tuesday that he >didn't expect Govnet to provide perfect security, but that it makes sense >to remove critical government functions from the public network. "I don't >know where it was ever written that everything has to be connected to >everything else," said Clarke.
