nanog mailing list archives
Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work
From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 21:08:37 -0400 (EDT)
---- Original Message -----
From: "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com>
Not really anything all that new from a conceptual perspective: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hZo5k0V9M0
Maybe, but bio is a bigger spread hazard than nuke, and harder to test for -- which is probably why, by policy, DOD/NCA treats it as a WMD. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Current thread:
- WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Jay Ashworth (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Miles Fidelman (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Owen DeLong (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Jay Ashworth (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Eugen Leitl (Mar 15)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 15)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Miles Fidelman (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Suresh Ramasubramanian (Mar 14)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Patrick (Mar 15)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Owen DeLong (Mar 15)
- Re: WW: Bruce Schneier on why security can't work Reply-To: Patrick (Mar 15)