Article

2007-08-14 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Delphi 2007-08-14 15:12|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 I am a communications expert (R&D) and the logic in the article blows right past me.

1) Yes fiber tends to run through the US.
2) Internet wise that is why the DoD created an internet designed on hierarchy instead of a mesh or other equally valid but more robust structures.... If the root nodes are in the US we can tap. It is an advantage. With other structures you might have root spheres or torus or something a bit more tricky to tap.
So we are blessed that the fiber comes to us due to the net structure.
3) How the hell does this tie into hacker attacks on the US and Greece and China and Russia
That's a big jump with no logic explaining it or making the case.
4) from what field did this claim come from:
ntercept capabilities are likely to be managed remotely, and vulnerabilities are as likely to be global as local. In simplifying wiretapping for U.S. intelligence, we provide a target for foreign intelligence agencies and possibly rogue hackers. Break into one service, and you get broad access to U.S. communications.
If you want to understand the net I can provide some sites that give clues but this is bogus...
If anything this makes a good argument for implementing other topologies within the DoD and later the US and leaving the rest of the world with a flat hierarchical net.

Consider what I said with these analogies.
Consider the current net somewhat like a binary tree. If you don't know what that is then think "Org Chart"
Now consider other topologies. The most common one is water supply in a city. Water has a mesh of connections in a subdivision. Leading in to the subdivision are one or more water supplies with pressure reduction valves. If there is more than one leading into the subdivision they are usually in opposite ends. If one fails the other still supplies water and pressure.
Now if you were to imagine sailing little itti-bitty boats (packets) in a subdivisions water pipes from a to b there are multiple paths you could take. (direct lines, squared arcs, great ciricles....) You can't do that with the internet and its trees. The only way from a to b is along the tree branches. One way and that's it. So you can be sure to tap any message on the internet along the path from a to b. Not so for trapping the sub in the water system. It has multiple paths. There is no single choke point or valley to watch.

So. The net is designed the way it is to make life easy for SAM and the NSA.

Posted by 3dc 2007-08-14 20:03|| 2007-08-14 20:03|| Front Page Top

#2 Thanks for the Rantburg U. lecture, 3dc. As someone once said to me long ago: remember the last time you saw or read a news article on a topic you're an expert in, and think about how many things were wrong. Why assume they're any better on topics you're not an expert in?

Posted by xbalanke 2007-08-14 21:06|| 2007-08-14 21:06|| Front Page Top

#3 3dc - thanks. As I read this article, I became suspicious that this was just an end-run attack on the wiretaps. It was just a vague suspicion based on the way the article was written. They never really told us HOW they could use the switches to increase their ability to wire tap - just that it was "tricky" and that communication technology is "is fragile and easily penetrated".

Then they gave examples that may or may not have been related to these land-based switches. It was all very vague.

After reading your post - it just makes me think that Congress didn't have the support it needed to shut down the FISA warrents so now it is trying to create a straw-boogy man that we need to be protected against so that they can try again from this angle.

Posted by AT 2007-08-14 21:39|| 2007-08-14 21:39|| Front Page Top

#4 3dc, neat summary. When reading the article, the bogusity meter pegged past the scale.

Grant the NSA what it wants, and within 10 years the United States will be vulnerable to attacks from hackers across the globe, as well as the militaries of China, Russia and other nations.

FUD. Plain and simple. Whether NSA monitors or not has no bearing on vulnerability of military or gummint networks. It is an entirely different issue. In fact, it is NSA that makes a substantial effort to develop a secure environment. Point in case is their Secure Linux Layer contribution.

Posted by twobyfour 2007-08-14 22:01|| 2007-08-14 22:01|| Front Page Top

#5 *happy sigh* I do so love Rantburg! Thank you, Professor 3dc!! I became suspicious as soon as I saw the title links to the Washington Post... and the writer's argument that fiber optics vs. airborne telecommunications -- I thought that most of us get our email through phone wires or cable. But I'm not really up on such things, so I could be wrong.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-08-14 22:23|| 2007-08-14 22:23|| Front Page Top

23:57 Zenster
23:53 Zenster
23:45 Zenster
23:44 JosephMendiola
23:42 Mike N.
23:34 Zenster
23:31 JosephMendiola
23:25 JosephMendiola
23:22 Mike N.
23:15 JosephMendiola
23:13 Mayor Nagin
23:12 mojo
23:09 Zenster
22:55 Jan
22:52 Zenster
22:50 Fred
22:48 trailing wife
22:46 DMFD
22:43 Zenster
22:34 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:33 phil_b
22:31 Mike N.
22:30 crazyhorse
22:27 Anonymoose