Question: What happens when government workers at the National Archives, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Defense, and a Navy hospital all inadvertently make sensitive information available after installing a P2P client?
Answer: Congress holds hearings on the dangers that P2P might pose to US security
Mary Engle, the associate director for advertising practices at the FTC, didn’t sound quite as ready to blame P2P software for the problem of sharing sensitive information. “The FTC staff concluded that P2P file-sharing, like many other consumer technologies, is a ‘neutral’ technology,” she told the Committee. “That is, its risks result largely from how individuals use the technology rather than being inherent in the technology itself.”
She elaborated on this point by reminding the Committee of the risks from web browsing, downloading software, and using e-mail and instant messaging software; P2P may have risks, but so do plenty of other technologies that are in no danger of government regulation.
John brought this up on on Cranky Geeks, yesterday. I wonder what our cranky geek readers think about Congress investigating software?
Heres an idea – maybe they shouldn’t be putting unauthorized software on a machine with sensitive information.
When they can tell me for sure where all their laptops are located, then they can start worrying about P2P.
That argument is like saying. What happens if they accidentally mail sensitive information to someone. Then the postal service is a threat to US security.
I agree with tcc3 they should just lock down the machines and prevent unauthorized software.
And if these are classified computers it doesn’t make a difference anyway, since those networks are highly encrypted and walled off from the lower security networks.
3.
Or so they say……
#3, See Lawyer,
Ya, riiiight !!!
If they would ban P2P, why not ban spam, spoofing, viruses, trojan horses, zombies, and whatever else at the same time.
Yes, BAN SPAM!!
#6: Why not ban spam, spoofing, viruses, trojans, zombies, etc? Because those don’t enable downloading anything useful like P2P software does!
you are all correct…so far…
Think they have good protection? NOPE…
1 person was invited to a Gov. forum on security…
He opened his laptop, and found a Wifi signal…
He entered the DEFAULT name and password…
Administrator, Password…..(thats what he entered, I think)
And got into a secure server.(LMAO)
As #1 said, UNTIL they can find the ?1000+ LOST laptops the FBI/CIA have lost in the last 10 years?? FUBAR…..
Laptops are easy, and there has been a great prog in the last 5 years…That is NOT erasable, that CHECKS the Net connection, and upon finding a NEW connection sends an automated Letter detailing its location and connection, to its HOME LOCATION.
On the subject of banning software that makes it easy to send and receive – the government should clearly include email clients, web-based email, FTP, online storage sites, TOR, anonymous networks, server software, friend networks and of course, the web itself (as the article stated).
They should work on making firewalls, anti-virus apps and secure-Operating Systems mandatory for ALL government offices instead of applauding new spyware systems embedded on OSes (MS recent patent) or allowing the whitelisting of police spyware from anti-viral/spyware apps (which a good viral hacker could emulate).
I’d like to see government and military recommendations for secure operating systems that consumers can review before purchasing without having to rely on the dribble and FUD coming from “computer magazines” and suppliers.
In case nobody has noticed, the marriage between big business and government is complete. Any piece of software that effects big biz is in danger and it has nothing to do with National Security but everything to do with music and video. The government no longer represents the interests of the people and the country they have been sworn to protect.
The real danger here are the people in government today, including those on the committee who should be called out and questioned in regard to their real motivations in pursuing such trivial matters. What they should be doing instead is creating publications informing people on the proper use of legal yet powerful software. That is their role!
Anyone working in sensitive areas of the government too stupid to understand the applications running on their systems (thus allowing sensitive information to leak), should be tried for treason – period! This includes all those agents who have “lost” their %$!5% laptops! Where does the committee stand on this?$?$?
#5, do we really need to start another discussion over what you know versus what you think you know?
Q:
What do Bored Lawyers do after they have created all the laws??
A:
Nothing GOOD.