Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:I doubt it (Score 1) 228

Why would you think it would take the national guard, or any sort of serious force, or messing with routing tables?

All it would take two agents and a national security letter.

Most datacenters don't have that many people working in them at any given time. Well, there might be people, but staff is usually a half dozen or less security, 2 or 3 NOC techs, and some sales people if they even bothered to work from the office that day. Two agents say "cut power to all the gear in the meet-me room", and confirm everything went dark. Done. People argue less when confronted by people with guns, and put up less resistance when handcuffed and locked in a room. If they're feeling particularly ambitious (and horribly annoying IMHO), they could hit the main breakers on the equipment side of the battery room. No power to the routers, no data going over them.

Do a few major peerings, and the Internet is dead. A perfectly capable kill switch.

Something like this wouldn't be used for a SCADA problem. It's more of to isolate Internet resources.

In a war scenario, one of the first things an attacker would do is neutralize infrastructure. Power, communications, water, etc. Power is done at power plants. Only isolated pieces remain, like places with their own generators.

Communications is the point we're talking about here. Internet, land lines, cell phones, and sat phones down with the "kill switch". You'll still have some working, like PBXs within an organization, and some (but not all) sat phones. At very best, you'll have some sat phones talking to each other, but they aren't calling land lines or now disconnected cell phones.

Water is mostly killed with the power, or can be addressed later.

The only communications you'll end up with are HAM radios, and those with illegal transmitters switching to commercial AM/FM frequencies. Of those, it will only be the ones who have their own generators. They'll be a lot easier to triangulate without all the normal RF noise present.

Then you isolate consumable transportation. Civilians will starve without food supplies being brought in. Major roads, railroads, and sea ports with be blocked or severed.

The sad thing is, everything I described is in all of the war plans. It can also be accomplished by a small group of civilians with a good plan. It's simply proof that there has been no real threat to the United States. .. and to whoever may be reading this that says "Oh shit, he's a bad guy", I'm not. But if your bosses insist you interview me, feel free to stop by and say "hi". Bring soda and smokes, and we'll have a nice long chat. Don't mess up the front door, we'll open it for you.

Comment Re:I doubt it (Score 2) 228

Yup, it's always been there.

Plenty of people know where all the international fiber endpoints are. I can think of a dozen buildings that if they were isolated, it would cripple Internet service in the US. They don't even have to shut down entire datacenters, only the power in the meet-me rooms. I think DHS can find 2 dozen agents in the US who would go to those buildings, shut down the rooms, and the Internet is gone.

As we've seen before, a problem with just one tier 1 provider can make Internet service crawl. Dropping a few major peering points would effectively shut the whole thing down. It's not even hard to find them, if you've been doing business with them. I've been to a few.

They could probably have it ready to shut down simultaneously with a 30 minute lead time to give enough time for the agents to drive to them. Internet and phones would be dead everywhere in the US, and severely interrupt international use. Any remaining links and private peerings would be saturated beyond use.

There are maps and lists readily available.

http://www.submarinecablemap.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_exchange_points#North_America
http://www.bgp4.as/internet-exchanges
http://www.datacentermap.com/ixps.html

Comment Business model (Score 1) 231

The Zoe is an electric only car that is marketed at European "company lease" users. Actual drivers don't "own" the cars, nor do their employers. To keep costs nice and predictable, Renault had to do this. Even the few private "owners" of these cars got scared of battery replacement costs of several hybrids we've had for the last ten years or so in Europe, but lease companies have started demanding warranties for the full duration from manufacturers to even consider the cars in their programs.

The fact that a manufacturer can remotely shut down your car using GPRS/3G is scary and not something you'd want. However, given the financial model and the amount of things that can go wrong in such an "experimental vehicle" it may be for the best. Failing throttles and brakes and no way to shut down the car is not what you want. Maybe Renaults *will* catch on fire spontaneously, who knows?

Submission + - Google Books case dismissed on Fair Use Grounds

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: In a case of major importance, the long simmering battle between the Authors Guild and Google has reached its climax, with the court granting Google's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case, on fair use grounds. In his 30-page decision (PDF), Judge Denny Chin — who has been a District Court Judge throughout most of the life of the case but is now a Circuit Court Judge — reasoned that, although Google's own motive for its "Library Project" (which scans books from libraries without the copyright owners' permission and makes the material publicly available for search), is commercial profit, the project itself serves significant educational purposes, and actually enhances, rather than detracts from, the value of the works, since it helps promote sales of the works. Judge Chin also felt that it was impossible to use Google's scanned material, either for making full copies, or for reading the books, so that it did not compete with the books themselves.

Comment Re:When will they realize (Score 1) 303

My understanding is that the false positive rate is so high that it's essentially useless at determining if someone is lying. As others have alluded to, it is the subject's belief that the interrogator with his machine that can somehow determine lies from truth that counts. Since even innocent people accused of a crime and interrogated in this fashion will have high stress levels, the machine itself has absolutely no technical capacity to determine truth or lie. The secret to beating a polygraph boils down to knowing that it's all smoke and mirrors and pseudoscientific BS.

Comment Defamation and loss of reputation (Score 1) 188

Try those in the UK legal system. They are absolutely horrible laws, since you can even sue someone and win if they have only stated facts. Just because you actively did something to make them look less good, not by slander or falsely claiming they did something illegal, you're committing a crime.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would like it to keep in touch." -- Robert Orben

Working...