Separately, or together?
ok, I know
"If you steal from one author it's plagiarism; if you steal from many it's research."
As someone mentioned, it's not shocking the prosecution was politically motivated but shocking that they admitted it. I'll add that it's also not shocking that they think they didn't do anything wrong!
So why do they continue to invoke this stuff? To scare people into putting their organization on the US DoD gravy train.
Or maybe because the professianls who do this for a living know something you don't. Imagine for a second that someone shuts down our power grid, something that is easy to do and has been demonstrated in Project Aurora. Without power, the internet is down. Without the internet, the economy grinds to a halt. No ships coming into port, no planes flying, no gasoline being delivered, no power in hospitals, no 911 calls, no critical infratructure working at all. This is the cyber 9/11 people like us (I work in the intelligence community) are worrying about.
Or maybe the professionals (security "consultants", sales, and everyone else in line to make a friggin buck) just wants to hammer home that the sky is falling to keep the good times rolling. And yes, that means you too, Mr I work in the intelligence community. Is the state of "cyber" security in the various critical infrastructures weak? Absolutely and they need to be improved upon. I too work "in the field" and am very familiar with the state of security for several organizations in a specific critical infrastructure. It's bad. Really bad. The risks are primarily sensitive data (commercial). The weaknesses in controls systems are organizational. That's right, organizational. When the resources are taxed to just maintain the status quo, things slip when you have to engage in new projects. Security improvements fall under new projects and completion/success is declared at some arbitrary implementation level so everyone can get their check mark and move on to the next issue. The core reason? Profits and specifically O&M numbers. Don't fool yourself, it's a business. And security doesn't show up on profit side, only the cost.
Harris wasn’t interested in the job at Google, but he decided to crack the key and send an e-mail to Google founders Brin and Page, as each other, just to show them that he was onto their game."
Link to Original Source
401k contributions while maxing out the company matching program
Actively managing (ie paying attention to and not actively/daily trading) an old IRA and 403b account
End of the day, losing the pension would be a significant hit to my retirement plans, but I've got my contingency plan of the other retirement funds which will provide a modest retirement. Just not going to be able to have month long trips overseas every year.
A couple months ago, I popped my head up and took a look around the local job market based on my experience (Indianapolis, IN cyber security, security architect, and cyber security compliance). Talked to a few companies, dusted off the suit to sit down w/ one, and it got tanked at the end of the interview. The SVP was asking about my current compensation (I freely give that out to perspective employers) and he mentioned how great the bennies were. I responded w/ how my current bennies would have hit the proposed Cadillac Tax on health care plans as well as being 10 years into a pension plan. Needless to say, the company was unable to come close to my overall compensation.
Prior to all this, I looked at what leaving my current employer would cost me on just the pension. Assuming an expected live span of 85 yrs (had to pick a number) and retirement if I left at age the same time I qualified for the full pension, I would need to increase my salary by nearly 45% to make up for the loss of the pension. The equation changes a bit if I were leave and to retire at age 65 vs 58 if I stayed and got the pension.
The short of it is that the pension is truely golden handcuffs, and while I may sound like I'm complaining, it is a good problem to have!