An observation, ymmv.
The NYT op-ed is by Chris Finan. He was recently the Director for
Cybersecurity Legislation in Obama's White House:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/chris-finan/5/a35/19
http://www.netcaucus.org/biography/christopher-finan.shtml
For context, here, Finan analyzes problems with usage of the "cyber
Pearl Harbor" signifier...before going ahead and deploying it in support
of the Cybersecurity Act of 2012:
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/267945-five-reasons-why-congress-should-pass-cybersecurity-act-of-2012
In the op-ed, Finan suggests NSA Director General Keith B. Alexander's
Cyber Command could set up and operate the crisis zone wireless
infrastructure:
For example, through the military’s new Cyber Command, we could create
a digital “safe haven,” akin to physical safe havens for refugees, by
deploying long-distance Wi-Fi technologies along Syria’s borders and
in rebel-held areas in coordination with vetted opposition groups.
Platforms that enable [point-to-point] transmission of Wi-Fi signals
over distances of up to 60 miles are already in use in parts of South
Asia and other rural markets.
I would suggest, from a Signals Intelligence point of view, it would be
very helpful to own the infrastructure. Finan continues,
Subsequent actions could include measures to counter the Assad
regime’s capacity to monitor opposition communications within the
existing telecommunications infrastructure.
Question: is one of the potential unintended consequences of connecting
to a Cyber Command network from within Syria the effect of making one's
router a part of the battlefield?
Again, ymmv -
gf
On 5/27/13 8:37 PM, Andrew Lewis wrote:
I guess the better question is there anyone else out there that would like to
look further into this? I know that there are a bunch of tech folks have looked
into it and have a ton of ideas, and would be chomping at the bit to actually
work on this. The issues that have arisen are mainly of political, policy, or
resources not technical feasibility. I know that if I'd be willing to work on
it right away, along with many others, if these issues could be solved or
handled by people with that sort of expertise dealing with the non-technical
aspects. Maybe some existing support org would be interested in stepping
forward to coordinate, and work towards such a solution?
With that being said, I expect that there are some ongoing efforts toward such
efforts, who maybe acting under the radar for various reasons, and wouldn't
want to step on any toes.
-Andrew
On May 28, 2013, at 8:09 AM, Eleanor Saitta <[email protected]> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2013.05.27 10.57, Yosem Companys wrote:
From: *David Farber* <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Anyone believe this would actually work?
LETTER A Digital ?Safe Haven? for Syria
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/opinion/a-cyberattack-campaign-for-syria.html
Technically? Yes. I and other folks have done the logistical evals,
looking at a variety of sites, etc.
Politically? That's a fascinating and open question.
E.
- --
Ideas are my favorite toys.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlGjvYAACgkQQwkE2RkM0wrDkQD/XaurdhRKOpd+3Ulr2No9ryIZ
AryoBmdrEPPfu8K9waIA/0W2onOzsOJwmYZdWVgdCpNFlZUdOFO//5vky071Bq/y
=5vUr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Gregory Foster || [email protected]
@gregoryfoster <> http://entersection.com/
--
Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing
moderator at [email protected] or changing your settings at
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
