Re: [PLUG] Article on 'cyberwarfare'

[Rich Freeman <r-plug@thefreemanclan.net>]

On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Joe Rosato <rosatoj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The concept of state defined enemies on the internet has always confused me. The "web" works because it is a web, not a small number of connections that are state governed. The groupings aren't the USAs internet and nation state X. There are too many interconnects and the whole system is a bust if we walk away from the open model. The great firewall is an absurdity. Between what points in the web would the state sanctioned firewall be put?

You wouldn't firewall the "internet" - you'd simply make it illegal to
run a telecom line across a national border without permission, and
deny permission to run one to any country who wasn't a signatory to
some treaty and in compliance.

This isn't about state-defined enemies - it is just about law
enforcement.  A resident of South Korea can't rob somebody in New York
without crossing the US border, so why would they be able to steal
their identity online without consequence?  That is a bit of a
contrived example,since I'm sure South Korea would agree to prosecute
online crime and thus wouldn't be cut off.

How is it that we manage to survive with 95% of the stuff we buy going
over national borders that are state governed?  Simple, the state
isn't out to prevent commerce - they just want to make sure that the
shipping containers are full of iPhones and not munitions.

But, as I've said before, we'll never see it happen this way.

--
Rich
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug