IP: Resilience!

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: "Bob Frankston" <rmf2g2 () bobf Frankston com>
> To: <farber () cis upenn edu>
>
>
> I want to emphasize that Matt Blaze's point about the end to end
> argument is about more than networking. As tragic as the events are, our
> ability to rebound depends on our resilience. Imagine our much worse it
> would be if the customers of the companies directly affected lost their
> assets.
>
> I am concerned, but unfortunately not surprised, by the clamor for
> increasing the perimeter security of airports. Here at Logan, a
> spokesperson called for banning plastic knives at restaurants. As Lauren
> noted, it is not obvious that any of these measures would have made a
> difference here and they will only serve the terrorist's goal of
> weakening our infrastructure. I have seen no comments about addressing
> the real problems -- the ones that occur after the inevitable failures
> of the perimeter. And what is the value of keeping cars away from
> airports buildings while allowing them on bridges? How could LaGuardia
> function with such a rule? On Tuesday evening I drove my rented car from
> LGA to BOS where my own cars were parked and arrived just as they
> started to put the new rules into effect. My wife flew BOS=>LGA that
> morning, my son arrived night before and I flew down on Sunday -- maybe
> that's why I care so much about aviation.
>
> This is reminiscent of the Y2K mania -- many people seem to have a
> simplistic model of the infrastructure and assume that it is a brittle
> tightly interlocked system. Aviation seems particularly susceptible to
> pandering to fears of flying. The rationale for the "Personal Electronic
> Device" rules are more superstition than science. The price of pandering
> to fears is to reduce security by emphasizing ineffective approaches and
> taking the focus from the opportunity to significant improvements in
> safety. By increasingly restricting what one may carry and use in
> airplanes, not only does it make flying unpleasant, it makes the less
> productive at a time when we are concerned about the economy.
>
> You may want to read James Fallows' book "Free Flight" and Steven
> Cushing's "Fatal Words" for more on these issues. All this said, I
> sympathize with the need to make gestures in light of peoples' fear of
> flying but we must understand the cost and limits of these gestures.
>
> I don't want to overemphasize aviation. As we take stock, we can see how
> our infrastructure systems have fared. Most companies seem to have
> offsite backup procedures. According to television reports, however, the
> SEC maintained critical records handwritten on paper. The very
> distributed Internet seemed unaffected though some sites were overloaded
> and other sites weren't sufficiently dynamic but this is understanding
> at the early stage of the technology. And the Pentagon building itself
> ...
>
> An open society (and the end to end argument) does indeed threaten those
> who want to enforce their narrow views on others. Our open society is
> not just an ideal, it is our strength.



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/