From the National Journal:
Cyber-defenders know what to prepare themselves for because the United States has used the kinds of weapons that now target the Pentagon, federal agencies, and American corporations. They are designed to steal information, disrupt communications, and commandeer computer systems. The U.S. is forming a cyberwar plan based largely on the experience of intelligence agencies and military operations. It is still in nascent stages, but it is likely to support the conduct of conventional war for generations to come. Some believe it may even become the dominant force.
Senior military leaders didn’t come of age in a digital world, and they’ve been skeptical of computerized attacks. Mostly younger officers, who received their early combat education through video games and Dungeons & Dragons, wage these battles. To them, digital weapons are as familiar and useful as rifles and grenades. [...]
Today, cyber-warriors use the global telecommunications network to commandeer an adversary’s phones or shut down its Web servers. This activity is a natural evolution of the information war doctrine.
[...]
President Obama confirmed that cyber-warriors have aimed at American networks. “We know that cyber-intruders have probed our electrical grid,” he said at the White House in May, when he unveiled the next stage of the national cyber-security strategy. The president also confirmed, for the first time, that the weapons of cyberwar had claimed victims. “In other countries, cyberattacks have plunged entire cities into darkness.”
[...]
Military officers describe cyberspace as the fifth domain of war, after land, sea, air, and space. But cyberspace is unique in one important respect — it’s the only battlefield created by humans.
[..]
In a 2008 article in Armed Forces Journal, Col. Charles Williamson III, a legal adviser for the Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Agency, proposed building a military “botnet,” an army of centrally controlled computers to launch coordinated attacks on other machines. Williamson echoed a widely held concern among military officials that other nations are building up their cyber-forces more quickly. “America has no credible deterrent, and our adversaries prove it every day by attacking everywhere,” he wrote.
[...]
Presumably, China has no interest in crippling Wall Street, because it owns much of it.
[source: National Journal]
From the ABA Journal:
An Illinois judge has decided that an anonymous commenter on a newspaper website will be unmasked, even though the mother of a teen about whom “Hipcheck16″ allegedly made “deeply disturbing” comments hasn’t yet decided whether to sue over the posting.
Continue reading about Judge rules anonymous web site commenter will be “unmasked”
The Obama admin has switched from a proprietary content management system in favor of open-source Drupal software. “Open source is a great form of civic participation,” the White House’s new media director Macon Phillips said. Dries Buytaert added, “this is a clear sign that governments realize that Open Source does not pose additional risks compared to proprietary software, and furthermore, that by moving away from proprietary software, they are not being locked into a particular technology, and that they can benefit from the innovation that is the result of thousands of developers collaborating.”
Read the rest of the piece here.
Continue reading about White House Website Switches To Open Source
In 2004, Micheal Moore went on record:
I don’t agree with the copyright laws and I don’t have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it with people as long as they’re not trying to make a profit off my labour. I would oppose that. I do well enough already and I made this film because I want the world, to change. The more people who see it the better, so I’m happy this is happening. Is it wrong for someone who’s bought a film on DVD to let a friend watch it for free? Of course it’s not. It never has been and never will be. I think information, art and ideas should be shared.
I have yet to see Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story. The fact that Moore did not release his latest documentary under a Creative Commons License, in my view, undermines his credibility, motivation, intention, and message. It’s not like we have the technology to disseminate and distribute films to a wide audience for free.
My view is, if you’re going to criticize an economic system and advocate for a different, more justiciable economic system, then it behooves you as an activist, journalist, and filmmaker to operate within the structures of the more justiciable economic system — especially when those alternative structures already exist. Lead by example. Walk the walk. Get it? What was it that Mahatma Ghandi said, something about “Be the change you wish to see in the world.”
What gives Moore? Why isn’t your latest film released on the internet under a CC license? If you honestly oppose the oppressive structures of capitalism, then why do you continue to prop up those structures?
Continue reading about Michael Moore: pirate my film, please
BBC writes:
Google has confirmed to BBC News that its e-mail system – Gmail – has been targeted as part of an “industry-wide phishing scheme”.
The search giant said that it had taken immediate action to safeguard the affected accounts.
Phishing involves using fake websites to lure people into revealing data such as bank account details or login names.
BBC News has seen two lists that detail more than 30,000 names and passwords that have been posted online.
It’s important to keep on eye on how this develops as certain corporate conglomerates try to centralize the internet, block the flow of information, and make it less democratic.
“The head of the FCC plans to propose new rules that would prohibit Internet service providers from interfering with the free flow of information and certain applications [...]
