It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by thetruth777
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO ATS MEMBERS?????
This is the main focus. Are the gulags for us?
Originally posted by Maxmars
As many erudite and experienced people here, I would have expected a slightly different range of comments.
Many IT Pros know that 'cyber-attacks' are an irrelevancy in a system that is not exposed to the 'common trunk' of the internet. NSA has known this since before there even was an internet. They have never been 'hacked' because they have never been 'on-line' to get hacked. Yet somehow they function. Is it magic? No.
The Pentagon and other such government agencies are exposed because they prefer to foster 'business' by purchasing and installing the standard crap networking and networking 'services adminstration' as 'contracted' by the lowest bidder. Defense contractors are the REASON we are weak, they have no interest in installing a rock-solid system that wouldn't require constant babysitting. And the procurement types have no incentive to demand that the systems they purchase and the services they contract comply with the 'spirit' of the RFQ.
China's ability (or any other countries you can imagine) to 'hack' into our systems has nothing to do with some magical strategy or genius of hacking; it has to do with general incompetence at the level of the professionals managing the security of the network.
Anyone remotely familiar with the evolution of computer hardware and a fundamental knowledge of machine code can tell you, there is no such thing as a commercially available 'hack proof' system. Unless the systems hardware is custom designed and isolated from the data stream - it is possible to hack in and will probably fall prey to any motivated hacker who understands the concept of 'stack overflow' and error handling protocols.
This 'internet' bogeyman is one of those infuriating 'shadowy ill-defined' enemies created by those who have NO understanding of internet security. I can't believe that security experts can sit there with a straight face and operate on the principle that our most sensitive information and crucial computer support simply must be Windows/Cisco compliant! Even Novel would be a better choice (but not by much) if you want to hamstring the hackers that are out there.
This is NOT the rocket science that the talking heads want you to think it is (maybe it is to them, but then, they are just 'actors' following a script.)
I offer this analogy for those of you who will insist that this is a real threat. I have a cool looking car, she's beautiful, shiny and has lot's of desirable features. "It's gonna get stolen!" you say, better lock it up, put in an alarm, get guard dogs, hire some thugs to watch it..., maybe... but...
What if that car had a custom installed manual transmission with 9 forward and 4 reverse gears. How would you drive away with such a car if you can't make it go? What if it required a set of 3 keys to operate, each sequentially linked to a custom profile?
Get it? It's not our systems that are vulnerable, it's the platform they 'choose' to employ. Why the hell should the Pentagon's classified systems be linked to the internet? You think the Generals want to work from home? Isolate the system and you only have to worry about PHYSICAL security.
But then, what would you use as an excuse to repress internet communications?
"CONTROL THE NEW “INTERNATIONAL COMMONS” OF SPACE AND “CYBERSPACE..."