Chris:
I am skeptical but let's say that there is truth to the  article; the 
sources cited
are credible, that much isn't in doubt.
 
However,  there are serious problems that go  unstated:
 
(1) What about the truth value of the contents of the purloined  e-mails?
However the e-mails were obtained the stuff in them is damning to
the Clintons and their associates. Indeed, Hillary never once
disputed the contents, her standard response was to charge
that they were stolen by the Russians and therefore this was
all about evil Putin & co. This was classic evasion.
 
And, BTW, Fox news made this a continuing issue. The big networks
and CNN and MSNBC, as far as I know, never made this an issue.
 
 
(2) Hillary and apparently Podesta used "not secure" servers.
This did not give the Russians permission to do anything but the  fact is
that this was carelessness like nothing else and gross  irresponsibility.
Sure, if Hillary was a low rank civil servant in Connecticut who earned  
$30,000
and was not especially computer savvy, that would be par for the  course.
But she had millions and all the geek help she could want, and still
she acted as if high order computer security was unnecessary.
 
(3)  What about BHO in all of this?  The Russians, or some  Russians,
may well have hacked the system. If so, that would be very bad,  indeed,
and this may have happened. However, why hasn't the WH made enough
evidence available so that we are sure and not reduced to  guesswork?
 
 
I'm nor making any case for Trump. Why should I?  But Hillary  slit her own 
throat.
She is out of touch with the high tech world, for which, in the case of  a
multi-millionaire, there is absolutely no excuse. Hell, if it would  have
cost her a million $$ to have a secure server that would have been
a bargain, wouldn't it? Not taking the time to learn about high tech 
or making that expenditure did a heck of a lot toward 
costing her the presidency itself.
 
 
I guess she always has a lot on her mind, after all, you know how  she
was on the tarmac in Bosnia or somewhere, dodging bullets once upon a  time,
after her plane touched down. Although that episode was kind
of strange since her description sounded like something that
was no worse than dodging raindrops in a Summer shower.
 
I've never been under enemy fire, but the time I was on board the
Enterprise we were overflown by  a Russian bomber; that was
serious business and made me very concerned, indeed, since
one missile and the whole ship could have been blown up.
I'd think that bullets flying in profusion would be frightening
like nothing else,  and nothing anyone who actually had
that experience would ever joke about. Hence from that day
onward she lost all of what little credibility she still had with me.
 
 
For sure, my view of Trump is, uhhh, rather negative. But Hillary
is such a phoney, so out of touch with reality, that I'm not
sorry for her current plight in any way. 
 
Trump did not get what he deserved, he should never have been  nominated
by the GOP. This is not an issue. But if anyone deserved to lose
on November 8 it was Hillary.
 
 
Billy
 
 
 
============================================
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
11/27/2016 11:02:56 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]  writes:
 
 
Addendum to my  paragraph below: 
Americans keep looking  away from the election’s most alarming story 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americans-keep-looking-away-from-the
-elections-most-alarming-story/2016/11/25/83533d3e-b0e2-11e6-8616-52b15787ad
d0_story.html?utm_term=.39a5283c4fb5&wpisrc=nl_az_most   
>  Sometime in the next five years we will probably have our Three-mile 
Island of  Internet security. 
I  think we may have already had the Internet-related meltdown and we don’t 
even  know it.  The recent election was impacted by internet security  
issues.  The obvious example that we all know was Russian-supported  WikiLeaks 
stream of leaks.  Also, I fear that the lack of adequate  security with 
voting systems/equipment (the internet of things), in some  states and 
jurisdictions, may have had a significant impact on the outcome of  the 
election. 
Chris 
 
 
From: [email protected]  [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:31  PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected];  [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: SOLUTION 'The  internet era of fun and games is over'

 
Ernie:
 
Once upon a time I made the  comment that it was a mistake to
 
switch from store-bought discs  to downloads via the Internet.
 

 
Not that discs are a perfect  solution to the problems of connectivity
 
and security but they would be a  help. That is, keep computers in 
 
your appliances and car, but  update every few months via physical disc
 
and not via the Web.  Sure,  less timely, but so what?
 
Who cares if your stuff is a few  weeks out of date,
 
the practical effect is  zero.
 

 
OK, make exceptions for crews in  Antarctica and the International 
 
Space Station, but otherwise  simply remove the danger by 
 
switching back to the disc  system. The advantage of discs
 
is precisely the fact that you  always have them for fresh
 
downloads when you change  operating systems
 
or what not. No need to spend  all kinds of time
 
on the Web hunting down a  download site,
 
all you need is in a  dresser drawer which
 
you can access  effortlessly.
 

 

 
Reversals of trends are always  possible and can be irresistible.
 
Remember flight from the  cities?  New we have gentrification
 
and the renewal of cities and  reverse flight. For a time it seemed
 
that there would be no more  sailboats anywhere on Earth,
 
Now there are more sailboats  than  at any time in history.
 

 
Do not misunderstand. Computers  are extremely valuable, my life
 
has been changed forever by  computers. I  love my XP.
 

 
However, as time progresses the  less and less enchanted I get with
 
the computer industry. Why in  hell does anyone need a computerized
 
toaster? A computerized golf  cart? A computerized guitar?
 

 
Ever watch those TV car  shows?  One of my ambitions, another
 
"when my ship comes in" idea, is  to purchase a 59 Chevy like
 
the one I owned in the early  1960s. Great car. For other people
 
it is a restored vintage Ford or  1930s Marmon. There are
 
restored car clubs all over the  USA now, it is a multi-billion $$
 
business.  
 

 
Retro is good. Long live retro.  Hail retro!!!
 

 

 
Bring back discs  -before  it is too late.
 

 

 
sincerely
 
Billy
 

 
charter  member
 
Oregon Luddite  Society
 

 

 
----------------------------------------------------
 

 

 
11/25/2016 3:29:35 P.M. Pacific  Standard Time, _drernie@
radicalcentrism.org_ (mailto:[email protected])   writes:
 
 
Sometime  in the next five years we will probably have our Three-mile 
Island of  Internet security. Whoever can come up with a plausible way forward 
can  build a ton of political capital… 
Bruce  Schneier: 'The internet era of fun and games is over'
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/bruce-schneier-internet-of-things/
(via  _Instapaper_ (http://www.instapaper.com/) ) 
  
____________________________________
 
 
Internet  pioneer _Bruce Schneier_ 
(http://www.dailydot.com/tags/bruce-schneier/)   issued _a  dire proclamation_ 
(http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/internet-of-things-committee-security/)  in 
front of the House of Representatives’
 Energy &  Commerce Committee Wednesday: “It might be that the internet era 
of fun and  games is over, because the internet is now dangerous.” 
The  _meeting_ 
(http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/internet-of-things-committee-security/) ,  
which focused on the security vulnerabilities created by 
smart devices, came  in the wake of the Oct. 21 cyberattack on Dyn that knocked 
_Amazon_ (http://dailydot.com/tags/amazon/) , _Netflix_ 
(http://dailydot.com/tags/netflix/) , _Spotify_ 
(http://dailydot.com/tags/spotify/) , and other 
major web  services offline. 
Schneier’s  opening statement provided one of the clearest distillations of 
the dangers  posed by connected devices I’ve seen. It should be required 
viewing. He  starts around the 1:10:30 mark in the livestream below, but we’ve 
also  transcribed most of his remarks. 
Here’s  how he framed the Internet of Things, or what he later called the “
world of  dangerous things”: 
As  the chairman pointed out, there are now computers in everything. But I  
want to suggest another way of thinking about it in that everything is now  
a computer: This is not a phone. It’s a computer that makes phone calls. A  
refrigerator is a computer that keeps things cold. ATM machine is a  
computer with money inside. Your car is not a mechanical device with a  
computer. 
It’s a computer with four wheels and an engine… And this is the  Internet 
of Things, and this is what caused the DDoS attack we’re talking  about.
He  then outlined four truths he’s learned from the world of computer 
security,  which he said is “now everything security.” 
1) ‘Attack  is easier than defense’

Complexity  is the worst enemy of security. Complex systems are hard to 
secure for an  hours’ worth of reasons, and this is especially true for 
computers and the  internet. The internet is the most complex machine man has 
ever 
built by a  lot, and it’s hard to secure. Attackers have the  advantage.
2) ‘There  are new vulnerabilities in the interconnections’

The  more we connect things to each other, the more vulnerabilities in one  
thing affect other things. We’re talking about vulnerabilities in digital  
video recorders and webcams that allowed hackers to take websites. … There  
was one story of a vulnerability in an Amazon account [that] allowed  
hackers to get to an Apple account, which allowed them to get to a Gmail  
account, 
which allowed them to get to a Twitter account. Target  corporation, 
remember that attack? That was a vulnerability in their HVAC  contractor that 
allowed the attackers to get into Target. And  vulnerabilities like this are 
hard to fix. No one system might be at  fault. There might be two secure 
systems that come together to create  insecurity.
3) ‘The  internet empowers attackers’

Attacks  scale. The internet is a massive tool for making things more 
efficient.  That’s also true for attacking. The internet allows attacks to 
scale 
to a  degree that’s impossible otherwise. We’re talking about millions of  
devices harnessed to attack Dyn, and that code, which somebody smart  wrote, 
has been made public. Now anybody can use it. It’s in a couple  dozen 
botnets right now. Any of you can rent time on one dark web to  attack somebody 
else. (I don’t recommend it, but it can be  done.)

And this is more dangerous as our systems get more critical.  The Dyn 
attack was benign. A couple of websites went down. The Internet of  Things 
affects the world in a direct and physical manner: cars,  appliances, 
thermostats, 
airplanes. There’s real risk to life and  property. There’s real 
catastrophic risk.
4) ‘The  economics don’t trickle down’

Our  computers are secure for a bunch of reasons. The engineers at Google,  
Apple, Microsoft spent a lot of time on this. But that doesn’t happen for  
these cheaper devices. … These devices are a lower price margin, they’re  
offshore, there’s no teams. And a lot of them cannot be patched. Those  DVRs 
are going to be vulnerable until someone throws them away. And that  takes a 
while. We get security [for phones] because I get a new one every  18 
months. Your DVR lasts for five years, your car for 10, your  refrigerator for 
25. I’m going to replace my thermostat approximately  never. So the market 
really can’t fix  this.
Schneier  then laid out his argument for why the government should be a 
part of the  solution, and the danger of prioritizing surveillance over 
security.   
It  was OK when it was fun and games. But already there’s stuff on this 
device  that monitors my medical condition, controls my thermostat, talks to my 
 car: I just crossed four regulatory agencies, and it’s not even 11  o’
clock. This is something that we’re going to need to do something new  about. 
And like many new agencies in the 20th century, many new agencies  were 
created: trains, cars, airplanes, radio, nuclear power. My guess is  that [the 
internet] is going to be one of them. And that’s because this is  different. 
This is all coming. Whether we like that the technology is  coming, it’s 
coming faster than we think. I think government involvement  is coming, and I’d 
like to get ahead of it. I’d like to start thinking  about what this would 
look like.

We’re now at the point where we  need to start making more ethical and 
political decisions about how these  things work. When it didn’t matter—when it 
was Facebook, when it was  Twitter, when it was email—it was OK to let 
programmers, to give them the  special right to code the world as they saw fit. 
We were able to do that.  But now that it’s the world of dangerous things—
and it’s cars and planes  and medical devices and everything else—maybe we 
can’t do that  anymore.
That’s  not necessarily what Schneier wants, but he recognizes its  
necessity. 
“I  don’t like this,” he concluded. “I like the world where the internet 
can do  whatever it wants, whenever it wants, at all times. It’s fun. This 
is a fun  device. But I’m not sure we can do that anymore.” 
You  can watch the full committee meeting above or _here_ 
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvId5-0295U) .  
  
____________________________________
 

 


Sent  from my iPhone
=



-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • [RC] Re... BILROJ via Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community

Reply via email to