![[رينف] نسيج يستضيف](http://rinf.com/alt-news/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/hosting1.gif)
مذكرة إلى الرئيس
هو أساسيّا ماذا أنت أراد توقّعت: عيّنت وطنيّة [سبر] أمن مستشارة, استثمرت في رياضيات وعلم تربية, أسّست معايير لبنية أساسيّة حرجة, أنفقت مال على إنفاذ, أسّست معايير وطنيّة ل يؤمّن معطيات شخصيّة و [دت-برش] كشف, وعمل مع صناعة والحياة الأكاديميّة أن يطوّر حزمة من تكنولوجيا لازمة.
أنا استطاع علقت على الخطة, غير أنّ مع أمن الشيطانة دائما في التفاصيل - و, [أف كورس], [أت ثيس بوينت] هناك قليل من تفاصيل. But since he brought up the topic — McCain supposedly is “يعمل على الإصدارات" أيضا - يتلقّى أنا ثلاثة قطعات من سياسة إشعار للرئيس تالية, من هو يكون. هم أيضا مفصّلة ل [كمبين سبيش] [أر فن] موقعة أوراق, غير أنّ هم أساسيّة ل يحسن معلومة أمن في مجتمعتنا. واقعيّا, يطبّق هم إلى أمن وطنيّ في جنرال. وهم أشياء فقط حكومة يستطيع أتمّت.
يستعمل واحدة, [بوينغ بوور] ك ضخمة أن يحسن الأمن من [كمّرسل برودوكت] وخدمات. واحدة خاصية من منتوجات تكنولوجيّة أنّ أكثر من التكلفة في التطوير من المنتوج [رثر ثن] الإنتاج. فكّرت برمجيّة: يكلّف النسخة أولى ملايين, غير أنّ الثاني نسخة حرّة.
أنت يضطرّ أمّنت ك خاصّة حكومة شبك, جيش ومدنية. أنت يضطرّ اشتريت حاسوبات لكلّك [غفرنمنت مبلو]. يعزّز أنّ عقود, ويبدأ يضع بيّنة أمن متطلبات داخل [رفبس]. أنت تتلقّى ال [بوينغ بوور] أن يحصل بائعاتك أن يجعل جدّيّة أمن تحسينات في المنتوجات وخدمات هم يبيعون إلى الحكومة, وبعد ذلك نحن كلّ فائدة لأنّ هم سيتضمّنون أنّ تحسينات في ال نفسه منتوجات وخدمات هم يبيعون إلى الإستراحة من نا. نحن كلّ آمنة إن معلومة تكنولوجيا يكون أكثر يؤمّن, [إفن ثوو] ال [بد غي] يستطيعون استعملت هو, أيضا.
اثنان, يشرّعون نتيجات ولا منهجيّة. هناك [ا لوت] المناطق في أمن حيث أنت تحتاج أن يمرّ قانون, حيث ال أمن خارجية مثل هذا أنّ يفشل السوق أن يزوّد أمن كافية. مثلا, برمجيّة يستغلّ شركات الذي يبيع منتوجات غير آمن خارجية فقط مثل كثير بما أنّ معامل كيميائيّة أنّ تخليص نفاية داخل النهر. غير أنّ قانون سيّئة مريضة من ما من قانون. قانون يتطلّب شركات أن يؤمّن معطيات شخصيّة جيّدة; a law specifying what technologies they should use to do so is not. Mandating software liabilities for software failures is good, detailing how is not. Legislate for the results you want and implement the appropriate penalties; let the market figure out how — that’s what markets are good at.
Three, broadly invest in research. Basic research is risky; it doesn’t always pay off. That’s why companies have stopped funding it. Bell Labs is gone because nobody could afford it after the AT&T breakup, but the root cause was a desire for higher efficiency and short-term profitability — not unreasonable in an unregulated business. Government research can be used to balance that by funding long-term research.
Spread those research dollars wide. Lately, most research money has been redirected through DARPA to near-term military-related projects; that’s not good. Keep the earmark-happy Congress from dictating how the money is spent. Let the NSF, NIH and other funding agencies decide how to spend the money and don’t try to micromanage. Give the national laboratories lots of freedom, too. Yes, some research will sound silly to a layman. But you can’t predict what will be useful for what, and if funding is really peer-reviewed, the average results will be much better. Compared to corporate tax breaks and other subsidies, this is chump change.
If our research capability is to remain vibrant, we need more science and math students with decent elementary and high school preparation. The declining interest is partly from the perception that scientists don’t get rich like lawyers and dentists and stockbrokers, but also because science isn’t valued in a country full of creationists. One way the president can help is by trusting scientific advisers and not overruling them for political reasons.
Oh, and get rid of those post-9/11 restrictions on student visas that are causing so many top students to do their graduate work in Canada, Europe and Asia instead of in the United States. Those restrictions will hurt us immensely in the long run.
Those are the three big ones; the rest is in the details. And it’s the details that matter. There are lots of serious issues that you’re going to have to tackle: data privacy, data sharing, data mining, government eavesdropping, government databases, use of Social Security numbers as identifiers, and so on. It’s not enough to get the broad policy goals right. You can have good intentions and enact a good law, and have the whole thing completely gutted by two sentences sneaked in during rulemaking by some lobbyist.
Security is both subtle and complex, and — unfortunately — doesn’t readily lend itself to normal legislative processes. You’re used to finding consensus, but security by consensus rarely works. On the internet, security standards are much worse when they’re developed by a consensus body, and much better when someone just does them. This doesn’t always work — a lot of crap security has come from companies that have “just done it” — but nothing but mediocre standards come from consensus bodies. The point is that you won’t get good security without pissing someone off: The information broker industry, the voting machine industry, the telcos. The normal legislative process makes it hard to get security right, which is why I don’t have much optimism about what you can get done.
And if you’re going to appoint a cyber security czar, you have to give him actual budgetary authority. Otherwise he won’t be able to get anything done, either.
This essay originally appeared on Wired.com.
Have Your Say: Memo to the President
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report here.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 12th, 2008 at 7:50 pm and is filed under Surveillance, Civil Liberties & Human Rights News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Translations
Loading ...Related News
- One out of ten trust government data security
- The return of the ID card debate
- Boycott these companies - they support human rights violations
- Will Darling’s data giveaway kill off ID cards?
- 2007 ‘worst ever year’ for privacy
Email This Page To A Friend
Latest Headlines
- Channel 4 journalist grills Olympics organisers over human rights
- India to examine protest deaths
- Rwanda: Obscuring the Truth About the Genocide
- Another inconvenient truth: Fiscal Armageddon, coming to a cinema near you
- British libel laws violate human rights, says UN
- What’s on Tap and What You Need to Know About Drinking Water
- BAE case in the Lords
- Guantanamo general calls 2nd general ‘bullying’
- Antiwar activists seek expanded police probe
- Is Perpetual War Our Future? Learning the Wrong Lessons from the Bush Era
More Breaking News
Archive
