Microsoft exec pitches Internet usage tax to pay for cybersecurity programs - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>
> Date: March 4, 2010 9:08:36 AM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>
> Subject: Re: [IP] Microsoft exec pitches Internet usage tax to pay  
> for cybersecurity programs - The Hill's Hillicon Valley

> Cyberpolicing: Protecting its citizens and businesses from two  
> classes of threats - small-scale criminal activity/organized crime  
> and offensive cyberwar carried out by state-scale entities with  
> state-scale goals - is a function of government.  So it must be paid  
> for.  I think that's obvious.
>
> I am afraid that the conceptual framework most "security" folks in  
> the CS community live in is the fantasy around the idea that if you  
> can "prove software correct" there will be no threats that are  
> carried out against the public and private interests.
>
> This is like claiming that the right of a citizen to bear a  
> Winchester carbine rifle or a concealed pistol is the only solution  
> needed to deal with, say, a repeat of the Germany of the 1930's.
>
> We need to think about this far more carefully than the usual knee- 
> jerk reactions we hear in the blogosphere.
>
> But it's not just a *military* thing.   Most nations are incented to  
> keep the peace.  That's why we formed the United Nations, imperfect  
> as it is, and it's why we cooperate as nations, and for that matter  
> as corporations, to keep conflicts from escalating to the kind of  
> scale that full-blown offensive cyberwar techniques make possible.   
> Defense is not just a matter of deterrence or barriers.
>
> And yes, this may involve a *tax*.   After creating so much value,  
> the open Internet can afford to pay some of its costs to support  
> policing and threat management.
>
> I do worry that the American public has been so stirred up by the  
> anti-taxers, the anti-thinkers, ... that they make themselves  
> sitting ducks for criminal action and offensive war carried out  
> inside their fibers, routers, laptops, and servers.
>
> This is not just a problem of irresponsible behavior by vendors in  
> not thinking about system vulnerabilities.  It is equally a problem  
> of spending ALL of the effort on trivial issues like buffer  
> overflows and the coolness-factor-hacks that Defcon hackers do.
>
> But I'm afraid a toxic mix of paranoid thought processes will turn  
> policing and defense into nothing more than funding a bunch of what  
> corresponds to the cyber equivalent of Soldier of Fortune magazine  
> readers.
>
>
>
> On 03/03/2010 09:33 PM, David Farber wrote:
> > http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/84717-microsoft-exec-pitches-internet-usage-tax-to-pay-for-cybersecurity-programs
> >
> > Archives        



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com