nanog mailing list archives

Re: Wow, just when you though big government was someone else's problem


From: John Schnizlein <schnizlein () isoc org>
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 20:20:22 -0400

I suggest that we wait until the actual text of S.778 actually shows up at http://thomas.loc.gov before reacting to hyperbolic analysis of drafts not actually assigned to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Although I am concerned with what has been attributed to this bill, not all drafts seem to contain the worst text. Once the Committee takes up the bill, the most effective way to fix or kill it is for the constituents of the members of that Committee to call or write them:
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=About.Membership

John

On 2009Apr4, at 6:46 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Jeff Young <young () jsyoung net> wrote:
This comes from Lauren Weinstein's list and it's worth a read.
It's a bill introduced into legislation, who knows where and when
and if it will become law but, wow.

http://lauren.vortex.com/Cyber-S-2009.pdf

Relying on Lauren to hear about cybersecurity related news is like
relying on Fox News for an accurate picture of what Obama is doing.
Ignore.

I'll just give you a teaser:

SEC. 9. SECURE DOMAIN NAME ADDRESSING SYSTEM.

There's more than enough government supported work going on that
promotes DNSSEC, in case you're not aware?

Other pearls of wisdom: the government will license all "cyber" security
folks and you don't work on government or "any network deemed by
the president to be critical infrastructure" without one.

Do you by any chance get to go work on sensitive government networks
without, say, a security clearance?

--srs




Current thread: