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

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

see http://www.mhsc.com/news.htm
thank you.

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Roberto Gaetano [mailto:ga_list@hotmail.com]
|> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 9:29 AM
|> To: sandy@storm.ca; ga@dnso.org
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Net security's a losing battle
|> 
|> 
|> Hi.
|> 
|> I concur with Sandy's post, but would also add a comment.
|> 
|> The most spectacular effect that the terrorist attack has 
|> created is the 
|> collapse of the Twin Towers, and the most sad effect are the 
|> thousands of 
|> casualties, but there is another effect that has not to be 
|> underestimated: 
|> the critical situation in which the western economy has been 
|> put. I speak 
|> about the impact on airline industry, the burden on 
|> insurance companies, the 
|> drop in the stock market, and other things that will impact 
|> us for the years 
|> to come (higher insurance premia, higher cost of travel, 
|> longer boarding 
|> times, etc.).
|> 
|> The terrorists of the new millennium might well concentrate 
|> on these kind of 
|> damages, that are less likely to create horror for their 
|> acts, and therefore 
|> less likely to create a consensus front against them.
|> Our Net has been built and is being operated in a way that 
|> will survive well 
|> nuclear attacks, but less well electronic sabotage.
|> Somebody has asked in this forum what would have happened if 
|> a root server 
|> would have been located in lower Manhattan (or, for this 
|> purpose, even in 
|> the Twin Towers). The answer is, IMHO, "Nothing, the other 
|> 12 would have 
|> been more than sufficient". In fact, the Net would have 
|> suffered under 
|> (physical) attack to half a dozen of roots at the same time 
|> much less than 
|> what it suffered under Kashpureff's electronic attack few years ago.
|> 
|> I do believe that it is a responsible answer from ICANN to 
|> address these 
|> issues before the terrorists find out how they can attack 
|> the DNS and 
|> jeopardize its functioning, creating billions of damage to 
|> the western 
|> economy. The big problem is, IMHO, that a lot of people see 
|> the DNS as a 
|> milk cow, and are very little motivated to deploy secure 
|> procedures (more 
|> costly and requiring higher expertise) if they see this as a 
|> risk for their 
|> profits. Therefore the only way to progress on this is to 
|> include security 
|> requirements in the contracts ICANN has with the different parties 
|> (Registries and accredited Registrars).
|> 
|> I am saddened by the delay that this may have on other 
|> issues, on which I am 
|> contributing and I would see progressing (like the AtLarge), 
|> but I am also 
|> looking forward to see an open debate on security, as a 
|> vital subject for 
|> the survival of the Net as we know it today.
|> 
|> Regards
|> Roberto
|> (Sandy's excellent post cut for bandwidth)
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> _________________________________________________________________
|> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html