Feeling value in exposing the more sour and cynical part of me I add the first of these "quite" "realistic" views of the world I tend to write down in my personal log I have used for language research in a big case study. I did not care to read it for errors in spelling and such so take it as it is or read some thing else. Internet is big. Wtf do I care.
The first regarding:
I did not even read it but the short summary in the email from the Google News service would be enough. The world so seldom change. So here we go...
Yeah. Well it do have value to start with the kids regarding basic knowledge since they teach their parents.
Or possibly the parents do not want another boring thing to do bad quality IT-companies force them to do and when waste even more money on IT-workshops, conferenses and shit to discuss why they why they do not like solve their bad quality.
Of course it is not even possible to do. You can only come so far with personal firewalls and shit. Really one need at least two nodes so traffic can be watch unreachable. That is just taking in traffic going to the other without being possible to manipulate.
I could add now - having read - that perhaps it could hold some merit to share the material used. Internet can give a bigger spread and hence add more value. Yeah well sounds good in theory but really I doubt it would make any difference at all.
I mean we have been talking about client security since at least 2000 on an heighten level. Have it solved much? Not so. Perhaps it is time to evaluate another solution? Now I am no expert on decision system and management strategies on Big Country level but maybe shipping the clients with heighten security from start could be good. You plug them in not secured I doubt it matter much if some school kids comes installing a firewall and antivirus two years later cause they get a badge from the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. [Also see 1.]
I do hope they get a badge or they want do much. Not as many anyway. Gotta give kids badges. Adults is obvious to experienced to fall for such if it is not like called a certificate or given as clear putting you on top of lesser for example scientist. Or some specialist paper quoting you as an expert.
Well you have short term and long term solutions. In this area we have had short term solutions for like 10 years. So hi perhaps it is time for a long term solution? I for sure think so.
Yeah well I remember Clark talking 2005 at Microsoft thing in San Fransisco. He is of course very able and so on. But I felt when it perhaps was not going to be an efficient solution actually working or even being in a part that was as important as other parts was such as for example government networks. I can without any satisfaction see that I have been 100% right. If not 110%. Thats me I am always right.
The basic problem it seems so easy to let the solution be the users. And you can even argue that no one else could solve it. It is not true. Unprotected from start it is hence a given they never can if not lucky. Also the solutions doable for users are not on a level making it possible to handle targeted attacks their one computer is a motivated goal.
Now I would guess the new IT-security coordinator - Howard Schmidt - is all into securing the government networks and see that coordination between DOD and DHS function. But that really should been done long before. That is of course a gigantic work to do and not something one entity or person is responsible for regarding if it works or not (that is I doubt it is not a collective view of security level and priority being the problem) but that is done now do not mean that one do not start with the other solutions needed given you are behind time table so to speak. At least if it is not what you can not do parallel.
For one thing to compare to the problem of the citizen client the development of systems would be the thing causing the possibility of security problems. Hence one would look over the process of such to make sure you do not add a bigger problem solving issues. That I have of course talked about here before regarding some such which holds any and all warning signs of single point of failure.
Being a possible single point of failure you must understand if it is hard to use and get in you want get any indication of such way being found. Cause that filter out must and the once remaining want use it until the value of doing that is very high. Get it? Like a conflict.
Well I am pretty cynical and trust little. I feel it is a quality.
I sure like U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security semantic and linguistic. A long name with several powerful words in it. Given my interest in language:
- U.S.. Big powerful brand due to lot of movies, littérateur and large corporations. Also big. Good music production. Even got these conceptual ideas such as going west, road trip and so. Solid value in the word.
- State Department’s. Sets context to government. You understand it is very formal, perhaps a bit slow but a correct description. Very good common relation with U.S. of course hence increase power to each other.
- Bureau. Thanks to Hoover, FBI and Twin Peaks a strong word with lot of power. Association to competence and ability to "time to market".
- Diplomatic. Very powerful word. A bit stuck up perhaps but it suits the context. One also understand diplomatic relations are sensitive and hence it is discreet competent agents working. A bit like Sean Connery in Rising Sun.
- Security. Security is security. As people measure it indirect is very very complex. Because it is associated with the goal of it as society express it as well corruption. To deliver without big costs and scandals hence are extremly important. I for sure would not know if that been so or not but I could point to the association to FBI due to plenty "FBI-good" movies - even such as The Silence of the Lambs - give a bit of default value.
Hence I for sure do not mind U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security nor ever have. A professional brand name. Is it on Twitter? All good brands should be. One wonder who constructed it? Some famous PR agency perhaps? :-) Well it can be good without such and often the best are not having greated their own value over an long time. One could argue that the value FBI got in their name due to movies is because they often done a very good job. It for sure is my impression but of course here in Sweden we have a natural filter if not following it in american news very targeted.
With relevance and one would have read the text between this and the reference regarding the linguistic comment about security it do have some value to think about how one express the need of security.
Hence a correct expression being a projection of actual danger or need is very important. Or you tire down people. And it really do not function just to increase it. It is the normal learning curve of such so you got perhaps five to eight good chances to increase power of expression before you can stand and scream on national TV without anyone listening.
Hence I also feel if it is very important and nothing here for sure suggest over-expression but more connecting to Clark's view one got to ask if it is such big problem say relative the attacks on energy infrastructure in California and else. Their is the big catastrophe? Is the internet going slow yet?
Well some times given DoS. But that can be solved in infrastructure if not very easy at least easy (and for sure very easy compared to the concept people doing more personal and firewall as solution). Anyone suggesting it is not easy well read your research on correlation, pattern recognition and scaling of infrastructure in networks. Add a cost.
Well plenty fun expressing my cynical view of the world. GG.
Foto:
Kommentera