Re: Presidential Internet Kill Switch

[Dan Kaminsky <dan () doxpara com>]

I'm rather less concerned about 'presidential kill switch' and much  
more concerned about 'security consulting illegal in undefined  
contexts unless undefined certifications are maintained'.  What if it  
was illegal to hire anyone who could actually find a problem?



On Sep 22, 2009, at 11:04 PM, chris () blask org wrote:

> On Tue, 9/22/09, Adriel T. Desautels <ad_lists () netragard com> wrote:
>
> > Right,
> >     So what happens when someone pwns the switch?
>
> There is no switch.
>
> There never will be a switch.
>
> "Switches", in this context, are as likely as monkeys flying out of  
> Gadi's posterior.  Precisely for the reason stated by Adriel above  
> (as well as being completely idiotic and logistically impossible).
>
> What is more likely is that some sort of system of coordination will  
> develop wherein the federal government will be to some extent  
> capable of contacting private network owners (which includes most  
> 'traditional' critical infrastructure as well) and directing as much  
> as reasonably possible response to widespread cybersecurity issues.
>
> Look out.  The gummit is coming to give us all vasectomies...
>
> -chris
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
_______________________________________________
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.