Security

The affordable 1TB drive has arrived

Leave a comment

Newsfactor reports that the modern space race has led us to a one-terabyte drive for $399. They also point out some other interesting data points on modern reliability, performance and energy-consumption requirements:

…Hitachi’s new drives beat older models in more than just space. The Deskstar offers increased shock protection and three “idle” modes designed to help the drive consume less power. In turn, the CinemaStar boasts Smooth Stream Technology designed to maximize the performance of audio and video applications.

The “big” question (pun not intended) might also become how to secure huge repositories of data.

A traditional file system is hardly trustworthy enough to do a truly secure delete/move, for example. If we really are on the road to consumer product farms for data (e.g. 1-TB mirrored shared network storage systems at home), then I bet the next question will become how to use the space for database repositories with superior indexing, journaling and cleaning capabilities.

I mean it’s great to have a massive storage space to cram all your stuff into, but only if you can trust that it will not be lost, stolen and/or damaged.

Security

The botnet plague

Leave a comment

The New York Times had an interesting article a few days ago about the ongoing prevalence of botnets. It suggests they are still growing in sophistication and size. The article is worth a read partly because of the amusing quotes like this one:

“It’s a huge scientific, policy, and ultimately social crisis, and no one is taking any responsibility for addressing it,� said K. C. Claffy , a veteran Internet researcher at the San Diego Supercomputer Center.

Sound familiar? We don’t need a military solution, we need a political one…and then there is this quote about how the security industry has been reacting to botnet risks:

“This is a little bit like airlines advertising how infrequently they crash into mountains,� said Mr. Dagon, the Georgia Tech researcher.

Eh? Is that supposed to be a good thing? Some people like security/safety record data, while some just care about legroom and/or price. For example:

Serry Winkler, a sales representative in Denver, said that she had turned off the network-security software provided by her Internet service provider because it slowed performance to a crawl on her PC, which was running Windows 98. A few months ago four sheriff’s deputies pounded on her apartment door to confiscate the PC, which they said was being used to order goods from Sears with a stolen credit card. The computer, it turned out, had been commandeered by an intruder who was using it remotely.

“I’m a middle-aged single woman living here for six years,� she said. “Do I sound like a terrorist?�

She is now planning to buy a more up-to-date PC, she said.

Clearly a price-sensitive customer, who perhaps does not appreciate being told she has to purchase a new computer to be safe from the botnets. On the other hand, do the botnets open up the possibility again of the ultimate alibi? They are often nearly impossible for the average user to detect, so will the increase in sophistication and size result in a corresponding rise in claims of plausible deniability?

History, Security

Senator Brownback opposes Bush plan

Leave a comment

A rather stunning critique of the Bush plan for troop escalations has come from the Republican Kansas Senator Sam Brownback:

“I do not believe that sending more troops to Iraq is the answer,” Brownback said while traveling in Iraq. “Iraq requires a political rather than a military solution.”

Brownback had previously supported a short-term surge of troops if it could help achieve long-term political stability, which the Bush Administration has said it hopes a troop surge will help achieve.

But Brownback rejected that argument after meeting this week with several Iraqi leaders, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and U.S. military commanders.

“I came away from these meetings convinced that the United States should not increase its involvement until Sunnis and Shi’a are more willing to cooperate with each other instead of shooting at each other,” Brownback said.

“The best way to reach a democratic Iraq is to empower the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own nation building,” Brownback concluded, saying it is not in U.S. interest to get deeply involved in sectarian strife.

Not surprisingly, Brownback’s comments also reflected the reality on the ground that Iraq may be moving dangerously towards balkanization.

I think many people, especially conservatives who back the President, do not realize that the surge is in fact a “flip-flop” from the Rumsfeld doctrine, which failed miserably. If you know anything about the early successes in the war, you might know that the wisdom of the Generals who asked for troops on the ground was overruled by Rummie and thus Bush.

Moreover, Rummie disbanded and dismissed US Army leaders who wanted to use classic counterinsurgency tactics with boots on the ground, instead favoring highly mobile and mechanized “Stryker” brigades. So Brownback is really echoing an opinion that it is too late to flip-flop and now implement what was dismissed by Rummie. The military role has been altered so much by executive mismanagement that a political solution is the best counterinsurgency plan for the current situation.

Meanwhile, the House of Representatives has just seen a new bill introduced (HR 413) that tries to repeal the legislation that gave the President the authority to invade Iraq:

A BILL

To repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243) and to require the withdrawal of United States Armed Forces from Iraq .

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PUBLIC LAW 107-243.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.

SEC. 2. WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM IRAQ .

The President of the United States shall provide for the withdrawal of units and members of the United States Armed Forces deployed in Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom in a safe and orderly manner.

It will be interesting if this brings up the argument again that the “Mission Accomplished” speech by Bush ended the scope of his authorization and the time spent since then has been unauthorized.

Energy, Security

ORV route designation

1 Comment

The risks of off-road vehicle (ORV) use have become an increasingly serious issue for public land management. The U.S. Forest Service is now undertaking a motorized vehicle route designation process to regulate use on National Forest lands and minimize impact. Alternatively, I suppose, the vehicle owners/manufacturers could work to self-regulate and significantly reduce the impact of ORV so their routes would not have to be so limited. The hurdles to this latter approach appear to be at least twofold:

  1. Innovation in ORV has not been geared towards reducing impact. The converse, actually, it has been pressure from outside regulation that has led the manufacturers and consumers to become more aware of the externalities of ORV use. Innovation in the market regarding conservation thus has come as a result of regulation.
  2. Self-regulation by highly independent groups would still beg the question of how to prevent irresponsible use, which would likely end up becoming an argument for an independent/third-party enforcement agency, which just prolongs acknowledgment of the need for U.S. Forest Service involvement rather than providing a realistic alternative. There could be innovation here as well, such as using satellite tracking to ensure compliance, but this again raises questions of privacy, etc. that are historically best handled through a body of common law.

The groups impacted by ORV externalities include a wide variety of perspectives (bikers, hikers, campers, equestrians, hunters, fishers, conservationists, etc.) with a common goal of finding an ecologically sustainable, manageable, and enforceable ORV route. California has some interesting details available on their National Forest site that explains what has been happening:

The U.S. Forest Service ORV route designation entails a Five Step Process:

1. Compile an inventory of existing roads, trails, and routes used by wheeled vehicles;
2. Issue a Temporary Forest Order that prohibits wheeled vehicle use off of mapped/existing routes or open areas;
3. Develop site-specific proposals for changes to the National Forest System roads, trails and areas;
4. Conduct National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses of roads, trails, and areas for public motor vehicle use; and
5. Issue a Motor Vehicle Use Map showing National Forest System roads, trials, and areas authorized for public motor vehicle use.

“Wheeled” vehicles? Seems to bounce back and forth with “motor vehicle”. Wonder where the official definition of these terms might be.