Re: [ga] Net security's a losing battle

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Roeland and all assembly members,

Roeland Meyer wrote:

> |> From: Joanna Lane [mailto:jo-uk@rcn.com]
> |> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 2:26 PM
> |>
> |> on 9/28/01 2:14 PM, Patrick Greenwell at
> |> patrick@stealthgeeks.net wrote:
> |>
> |> > On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Joanna Lane wrote:
> |> >> what caught my attention was Scheier's [...] his
> |> viewpoint that companies are
> |> reluctant to report cyberattacks because of the stigma,
> |> making things worse.
> |> >
> |> > It's not just stigma, it's a potential liability issue as well.
> |>
> |> A company that sets out to hide from legal responsibilities
> |> is not one the
> |> industry should be defending. Reluctance to share reports
> |> amongst colleagues
> |> for any reason would hamper the industry's overall ability
> |> to exercise
> |> damage limitation. I'm not sure that's an acceptable position for an
> |> organization that is accountable to the public for
> |> regulating the security
> |> of the industry's critical infrastructure.
>
> - snip -
>
> We are not talking about ICANN here, rather a corporation that provides
> Internet services (ICANN arguably doesn't, being political and all).
> Security standards were NEVER a part of the ICANN charter, BTW.

  No security was never specifically a requirement.  But stability IS.
In that Stability IS part of the ICANN Charter, security is an very
entragal part of that Stability!!!

>
>
> |> > I do believe that the idea that Internet security is a
> |> losing battle is
> |> > alarmist hogwash.
> |> >
> |> > Hit something with a stick for long enough and eventually
> |> the object of
> |> > attention is going to take steps to avoid getting hit.
> |>
> |> Hit hard enough, the object is going to suffer catastrophic
> |> failure from a
> |> single event.
>
> Be that as it may, they become some of my better customers. Afterwards,
> those are the ones that actually listen. Complacency is one of the larger
> problems here.

  Yes Complacency is the biggest problem.  Ignorance is one that
feeds that complacency.  Ignoring these concerns that have been
expressed to the ICANN BoD many times, and ignored, seems
not excusable to me.  On the other hand, to change the MdR meeting
to focus ONLY on security concerns is inappropriate and feeds the
very reaction the terrorists wish to have.  I would not be one to
advocate giving them that!!  It seems however that the ICANN
BoD and staff a willing to...

>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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