<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [ga] Net security's a losing battle
see http://www.mhsc.com/news.htm
thank you.
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:ga_list@hotmail.com]
|> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 9:29 AM
|> To: sandy@storm.ca; ga@dnso.org
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Net security's a losing battle
|>
|>
|> Hi.
|>
|> I concur with Sandy's post, but would also add a comment.
|>
|> The most spectacular effect that the terrorist attack has
|> created is the
|> collapse of the Twin Towers, and the most sad effect are the
|> thousands of
|> casualties, but there is another effect that has not to be
|> underestimated:
|> the critical situation in which the western economy has been
|> put. I speak
|> about the impact on airline industry, the burden on
|> insurance companies, the
|> drop in the stock market, and other things that will impact
|> us for the years
|> to come (higher insurance premia, higher cost of travel,
|> longer boarding
|> times, etc.).
|>
|> The terrorists of the new millennium might well concentrate
|> on these kind of
|> damages, that are less likely to create horror for their
|> acts, and therefore
|> less likely to create a consensus front against them.
|> Our Net has been built and is being operated in a way that
|> will survive well
|> nuclear attacks, but less well electronic sabotage.
|> Somebody has asked in this forum what would have happened if
|> a root server
|> would have been located in lower Manhattan (or, for this
|> purpose, even in
|> the Twin Towers). The answer is, IMHO, "Nothing, the other
|> 12 would have
|> been more than sufficient". In fact, the Net would have
|> suffered under
|> (physical) attack to half a dozen of roots at the same time
|> much less than
|> what it suffered under Kashpureff's electronic attack few years ago.
|>
|> I do believe that it is a responsible answer from ICANN to
|> address these
|> issues before the terrorists find out how they can attack
|> the DNS and
|> jeopardize its functioning, creating billions of damage to
|> the western
|> economy. The big problem is, IMHO, that a lot of people see
|> the DNS as a
|> milk cow, and are very little motivated to deploy secure
|> procedures (more
|> costly and requiring higher expertise) if they see this as a
|> risk for their
|> profits. Therefore the only way to progress on this is to
|> include security
|> requirements in the contracts ICANN has with the different parties
|> (Registries and accredited Registrars).
|>
|> I am saddened by the delay that this may have on other
|> issues, on which I am
|> contributing and I would see progressing (like the AtLarge),
|> but I am also
|> looking forward to see an open debate on security, as a
|> vital subject for
|> the survival of the Net as we know it today.
|>
|> Regards
|> Roberto
|> (Sandy's excellent post cut for bandwidth)
|>
|>
|>
|> _________________________________________________________________
|> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|