[email protected] wrote: > On Fri, 01 May 2009 20:42:10 EDT, Cory Smith said: >> back is a simple answer, but we are a bunch of smart nerds who can come >> up with a better solution. Why don't we open up the tables on here over >> the weekend to suggestions? > > Shh! The bad guys might be listening too. ;) > > Now what I'm wondering is whether the *rest* of the USAF cyber-command is > actually as clueless as the quoted colonel, or if the colonel was spouting > off nonsense preparing for a run for VP, or if the colonel is the resident > Quaker cannon. ;)
Deterrence makes a lot of sense as a concept to handle situations where you can't influence the enemy otherwise. The Internet simply doesn't work that way technically, when applied on the macro-level. -- Gadi Evron, [email protected]. Blog: http://gevron.livejournal.com/ Security blog: http://gadievron.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
