Re: Lost in cyberspace

[InfoSec News <isn () c4i org>]

Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:23:30 -0600 (CST)
From: huggins () airmail net
Subject: Re: [ISN] Lost in cyberspace

Again another slam against the government and how it does its
business. Where was this individual when they were writing the
document.  Sitting on the sidelines drinking latte's and protesting
our war more than likely.

Here's my thoughts, the government had two choices

1.  Legislate compliance with federal statutes (what dod and the rest
of the government must comply with) for businesses which would have
drawn the ire of epic and people like this author or

2.  Attempt to utilize value input from real security experts than
publish what leaders from IBM MS and others tell them.

A true snapshot of what can happen is going to happen this year and
when it does I will be laughing all the way to the bank, and people
like this author will be eating crow.


-=-


Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 11:24:36 EST
From: JohnE37179 () aol com
Subject: Re: [ISN] Lost in cyberspace

In a message dated 3/5/03 10:17:37 AM, isn () c4i org writes:

> Yet here we are in 2003, and the cyberterrorism casualty list is
> still barren.

I guess this is true if you live with your head in a very dark place.  
Let's see if we can give the writer a clue. Tens of millions of
identities compromised on credit bureau and credit card sites. Let's
connect the dots. 15 out of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were
using multiple identities.

This writer tells the same head in the sand story that everything is
OK, because I am ignoring the problems. Sounds like the NASA approach
to shuttle flight safety.



John Ellingson
CEO Edentification, Inc.
608-833-6261


-=-


Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 12:17:47 -0600
From: Vince Reed <vreed () mitre org>
Subject: Re: [ISN] Lost in cyberspace

It is hard to imagine that someone with the credentials to get this
article published could be so wrong on so many points he makes about
the administration's National Strategy To Secure Cyberspace!
Hopefully, it is because Mr. Koerner is just misinformed and doesn't
understand the differences between threats and vulnerabilities.
Brendan fits in with the same people who said that an airliner would
not be used as a weapon because it hadn't been done in the past. He
would  probably also fit in well with those who thought that Japan's
naval air power wasn't a threat to America prior to W.W.II because of
the logistic problems in extending such a force across the Pacific.
The only correct conclusion Mr. Koerner draws is towards the end of
his article where he says "Most [of the reports solutions] are
meaningless jargon..." The Government has definitely failed to step up
and taken the actions necessary to secure our critical information
resources.

Vince Reed




-
ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org

To unsubscribe email majordomo () attrition org with 'unsubscribe isn'
in the BODY of the mail.