If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NextGov)   When you think of someone who is heading up cybersecurity efforts in the US on behalf of the DHS, that person should be go around saying, "I just don't use e-mail at all... Some would call me a Luddite"   (nextgov.com) divider line 104
    More: Obvious, DHS, cybersecurity, Janet Napolitano, private network  
•       •       •

1915 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Sep 2012 at 9:27 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



104 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-30 07:54:33 AM
I guess she'll have to hire someone who understands cybersecurity to do the work.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2012-09-30 08:07:17 AM

St_Francis_P: I guess she'll have to hire someone who understands cybersecurity to do the work.


Being someone in her position and not using email is a very wise thing to do. Knowing just how insecure email actually is and not putting information into a system which is viewable from both within and from external entities tells me this person actually understands cyber security and SHOULD be in the job.

Unlike the Bush administration who didn't realize their own servers were creating copies of all their email correspondence then when those emails were subpenaed, they illegally deleted them.
 
2012-09-30 08:10:06 AM

NFA: St_Francis_P: I guess she'll have to hire someone who understands cybersecurity to do the work.

Being someone in her position and not using email is a very wise thing to do. Knowing just how insecure email actually is and not putting information into a system which is viewable from both within and from external entities tells me this person actually understands cyber security and SHOULD be in the job.

Unlike the Bush administration who didn't realize their own servers were creating copies of all their email correspondence then when those emails were subpenaed, they illegally deleted them.


I was being facetious in any event. She obviously won't do the actual work, anymore than the head of my company will design our equipment.
 
2012-09-30 09:00:09 AM

St_Francis_P: NFA: St_Francis_P: I guess she'll have to hire someone who understands cybersecurity to do the work.

Being someone in her position and not using email is a very wise thing to do. Knowing just how insecure email actually is and not putting information into a system which is viewable from both within and from external entities tells me this person actually understands cyber security and SHOULD be in the job.

Unlike the Bush administration who didn't realize their own servers were creating copies of all their email correspondence then when those emails were subpenaed, they illegally deleted them.

I was being facetious in any event. She obviously won't do the actual work, anymore than the head of my company will design our equipment.



You wouldn't see a problem with, say, Google's CEO being unable to connect to the Internet? How about the Secretary of the Air Force - if he knows all about missiles, but jack shiat about the characteristics of the other forces under his command, is that OK? Of course not - that would be silly. An exec unable to understand at a high level all the core competencies her organization fills will not serve the executive role well. And like it or not, cybersecurity is a core competency for DHS.

Napolitano has absolutely no tools in her bag to assess the competency of whomever is responsible for cybersecurity. So to assess that person, she'll end up essentially polling his popularity among industry and DHS staffers. Not a terribly effective way of managing. Hell, at least Google's CEO would be able to tell how successful his underlings are by looking at market numbers and revenue.

I'll grant that this probably fell in her lap, and it'll be a decade or so before you find many exec-level folks in law enforcement with reasonable cybersecurity creds. But she should at least show some interest in learning about it, instead of pulling the "My computer totally hates me!" routine.
 
2012-09-30 09:07:45 AM

Babwa Wawa: I'll grant that this probably fell in her lap, and it'll be a decade or so before you find many exec-level folks in law enforcement with reasonable cybersecurity creds.


That. And I very much doubt top management anywhere will start having cybersecurity skills anytime soon.
 
2012-09-30 09:28:02 AM
Lucky we have someone right here among us with a Masters Degree in Cybersecurity.
 
2012-09-30 09:33:04 AM
Does this person have multiple butt cheeks?
 
2012-09-30 09:36:59 AM
Accidentally the headline.
 
2012-09-30 09:38:06 AM

Babwa Wawa: You wouldn't see a problem with, say, Google's CEO being unable to connect to the Internet? How about the Secretary of the Air Force - if he knows all about missiles, but jack shiat about the characteristics of the other forces under his command, is that OK? Of course not - that would be silly. An exec unable to understand at a high level all the core competencies her organization fills will not serve the executive role well. And like it or not, cybersecurity is a core competency for DHS.

Napolitano has absolutely no tools in her bag to assess the competency of whomever is responsible for cybersecurity. So to assess that person, she'll end up essentially polling his popularity among industry and DHS staffers. Not a terribly effective way of managing. Hell, at least Google's CEO would be able to tell how successful his underlings are by looking at market numbers and revenue.

I'll grant that this probably fell in her lap, and it'll be a decade or so before you find many exec-level folks in law enforcement with reasonable cybersecurity creds. But she should at least show some interest in learning about it, instead of pulling the "My computer totally hates me!" routine.


Well look at if from a slighty different point of view. I wouldn't really have a problem if my county sheriff had no idea whatsoever about how to go about cooking crystal meth, but still road his deputies asses about arrested drug dealers. Or if the local game warden didn't hunt or fish himself.
 
2012-09-30 09:38:26 AM
That's not such a huge deal. She doesn't do the actual work; she just sets policy. That being the case, the real zinger in the article is this:

Any standards would be administered within a partnership between businesses and government, Napolitano said.

Notice that the public is mentioned nowhere? That's because when government and business conspire with our data, nothing bad can happen.
 
2012-09-30 09:39:48 AM

propasaurus: Lucky we have someone right here among us with a Masters Degree in Cybersecurity.


Who is a Phoenix...
 
2012-09-30 09:40:23 AM
Got a story to tell you bros. And yes, it is a cool one.

I used to love using e-mail for personal correspondence. On at leas one of the mailing lists I was on, I was listed as one of the 2 most frequent commenters. Then I got a job that required me to be available via e-mail for my entire shift, and my primary way of communicating with supervisors, cow-orkers and other departments became e-mail.

I rarely use e-mail at home now.
 
2012-09-30 09:40:53 AM
Hi, did you need help? I'm on the intelligence committee which means I'm pretty smart about things.

scrapetv.com
 
2012-09-30 09:41:43 AM
When you think of someone who is submitting headlines at Fark, that person should be go around saying, "I just don't have good English skills... Some would call me a moran"
 
2012-09-30 09:42:26 AM

propasaurus: Lucky we have someone right here among us with a Masters Degree in Cybersecurity.


404 page not found: Does this person have multiple butt cheeks?


D'oh! Beat me to it.
 
2012-09-30 09:43:18 AM

whatsupchuck: When you think of someone who is submitting headlines at Fark, that person should be go around saying, "I just don't have good English skills... Some would call me a moran"


www.effective-lead-guitar.com
 
2012-09-30 09:44:52 AM
she doesn't use email because she has to be at the NOC in 26 minutes
 
2012-09-30 09:45:30 AM

Karac: I wouldn't really have a problem if my county sheriff had no idea whatsoever about how to go about cooking crystal meth


I would have a huge problem with this. If the county sheriff, particularly in a small county, can't tell the difference between someone doing some home chemistry for fun and cooking up a batch of meth, there's a huge problem that needs to be addressed. Having incompetent leadership paves the way for ineptitude and corruption.
 
2012-09-30 09:46:12 AM
You think this is bad, I bet the Commander-in-Chief doesn't even know how to drive a tank.
 
2012-09-30 09:52:30 AM
The whole advantage of email is you get a time and date stamp along with exactly what someone said. If you're not using that, how do you know stuff is getting done exactly the way you want?

If you call me up and we agree to something, I won't start working until I get an email from you confirming what we agreed to. I'm not interested in hearing "That's not how I remember our discussion. This is all your fault".
 
2012-09-30 09:53:16 AM
Her not using email and heading up cyber-security isn't necessarily a bad thing, it depends on why she doesn't use email. If she doesn't use email or or very few cyber communication service because she doesn't know how to use them, then that is bad. If she isn't using them because she knows of the inherent security risk with each one and only uses secured methods then that shows that she understands the job.
 
2012-09-30 09:54:12 AM

Babwa Wawa: Napolitano has absolutely no tools in her bag to assess the competency of whomever is responsible for cybersecurity.


A guilty pleasure is watching the confusion and sense of betrayal from hosts of online tech podcasts when their free personal accounts and aggregated password managers are hacked or monetized. Not using email or having personal accounts (note wording "I don't have any of my own accounts..") suggests to me she understands the risks better than most.

/still pays in cash and for a blind .net domain for email
 
2012-09-30 09:54:47 AM

ampoliros: Notice that the public is mentioned nowhere? That's because when government and business conspire with our data, nothing bad can happen.


But the Job Creators® are better than the rest of us. It must be so, they said so on Fox Izvestia.
 
2012-09-30 09:56:25 AM
She said she doesn't use email...says nothing about whether she understands it. *I* don't use email because prefer to call people. Many of my coworkers don't use email because they prefer to text message. My main client doesn't use email because,he prefers to meet in person.
 
2012-09-30 09:57:48 AM
If she used a secure e-mail provider like @reagan.com, she wouldn't have to worry about Al-Qaeda reading her e-mail. The spirit of Reagan will protect her and her computerized letters.
 
2012-09-30 09:59:15 AM

Karac: Well look at if from a slighty different point of view. I wouldn't really have a problem if my county sheriff had no idea whatsoever about how to go about cooking crystal meth, but still road his deputies asses about arrested drug dealers. Or if the local game warden didn't hunt or fish himself.


Actually, you need to know how criminals operate in order to be effective against them. My brother in law is a state trooper - he knows exactly how meth is cooked and goes on at length about the various realistic and unrealistic aspects of Breaking Bad.

The game warden absolutely needs to know enough about hunting and fishing so he can find those places where people are prone to, you know, hunt and fish at times when they are likely to be, you know, hunting and fishing.

St_Francis_P: That. And I very much doubt top management anywhere will start having cybersecurity skills anytime soon.


At the same time, she needs to make this a priority, and she's advertising that she isn't. Let's say I'm in the Navy, and I came up through the carrier groups to become Commander of the Pacific Fleet. Should I not bother to learn anything about the submarines under my command, trusting that my sub commanders will do everything right? Should I publicly express not only my ignorance of the submarine fleet, but my disinterest in learning anything about the submarines under my command?

That is in effect what Napolitano said here.

That she's unfamiliar with technology is excusable. That she is uninterested in it is unexcusable. That she would publicly state as much is ridiculous.
 
2012-09-30 10:00:08 AM

rudemix: Accidental the head.


FTFY
 
2012-09-30 10:00:21 AM

neenerist: A guilty pleasure is watching the confusion and sense of betrayal from hosts of online tech podcasts when their free personal accounts and aggregated password managers are hacked or monetized. Not using email or having personal accounts (note wording "I don't have any of my own accounts..") suggests to me she understands the risks better than most.


"Some would call me a Luddite" suggests to me that she's a Luddite.
 
2012-09-30 10:00:38 AM

Babwa Wawa: St_Francis_P: NFA: St_Francis_P: I guess she'll have to hire someone who understands cybersecurity to do the work.

Being someone in her position and not using email is a very wise thing to do. Knowing just how insecure email actually is and not putting information into a system which is viewable from both within and from external entities tells me this person actually understands cyber security and SHOULD be in the job.

Unlike the Bush administration who didn't realize their own servers were creating copies of all their email correspondence then when those emails were subpenaed, they illegally deleted them.

I was being facetious in any event. She obviously won't do the actual work, anymore than the head of my company will design our equipment.


You wouldn't see a problem with, say, Google's CEO being unable to connect to the Internet? How about the Secretary of the Air Force - if he knows all about missiles, but jack shiat about the characteristics of the other forces under his command, is that OK? Of course not - that would be silly. An exec unable to understand at a high level all the core competencies her organization fills will not serve the executive role well. And like it or not, cybersecurity is a core competency for DHS.

Napolitano has absolutely no tools in her bag to assess the competency of whomever is responsible for cybersecurity. So to assess that person, she'll end up essentially polling his popularity among industry and DHS staffers. Not a terribly effective way of managing. Hell, at least Google's CEO would be able to tell how successful his underlings are by looking at market numbers and revenue.

I'll grant that this probably fell in her lap, and it'll be a decade or so before you find many exec-level folks in law enforcement with reasonable cybersecurity creds. But she should at least show some interest in learning about it, instead of pulling the "My computer totally hates me!" routine.


And yet the CEO of my software company knows literally nothing about software development, his every decision results in our customers becoming less happy and our software of lower quality... and the board of directors rewards him with gigantic bonuses every year while the rest of the company lives in constant fear of the inevitable just-before-christmas layoffs.

Perhaps this problem isn't with government specifically, but with human nature to promote buddies and sycophants to positions of importance. Any illusion that we live in a meritocracy is an illusion.

In every job I've ever worked there is a similar theme: Do not go out of your way to do work. For multiple reasons. If you do good work, people will just inundate you with the most complex and complicated problems, which will be a liability later on because inevitably you will not be successful with all of them. Then you get negative marks for failing; because EVERYONE remembers that one time you screwed up, but not the 10,000 times you did great. Meanwhile the people who do mediocre work never get asked to do the hard stuff so they always succeed, and have plenty of time left over to schmooze their way up the ladder or create elaborate CYA (cover your ass) schemes which prevents them from ever being blamed for anything.
 
2012-09-30 10:03:42 AM
Since when is the head of DHS the person heading up cybersecurity?
 
2012-09-30 10:04:30 AM

MithrandirBooga: Perhaps this problem isn't with government specifically, but with human nature to promote buddies and sycophants to positions of importance.


A threadjack of massive proportions.

We're talking here about an exec with no knowledge of even the use cases of the products he agency is supposed to protect.

Does Ballmer need to be able write code? No. Does he need to be able to use Windows? Yes.
 
2012-09-30 10:05:59 AM

PanicMan: The whole advantage of email is you get a time and date stamp along with exactly what someone said. If you're not using that, how do you know stuff is getting done exactly the way you want?

If you call me up and we agree to something, I won't start working until I get an email from you confirming what we agreed to. I'm not interested in hearing "That's not how I remember our discussion. This is all your fault".


The last time I did that with a committee, four of the respondents said, "Yep! That's what we agreed to!" but the person who was supposed to head up the project replied, "That is nowhere near what we agreed to!" She yelled and screamed and threw a purple hissy fit until my boss, who was at the meeting and had agree with my email summary, told this lady she could do whatever the hell she wanted, and then called me into his office and asked me what the ***** I was doing sending out email without his permission!


Why yes, I did leave their employ. Funny that.
 
2012-09-30 10:06:29 AM
Email is only slightly more secure than using billboards along I-90 to communicate. Sounds like the person in charge actually has a farking clue.
 
2012-09-30 10:06:54 AM

Babwa Wawa: Karac: Well look at if from a slighty different point of view. I wouldn't really have a problem if my county sheriff had no idea whatsoever about how to go about cooking crystal meth, but still road his deputies asses about arrested drug dealers. Or if the local game warden didn't hunt or fish himself.

Actually, you need to know how criminals operate in order to be effective against them. My brother in law is a state trooper - he knows exactly how meth is cooked and goes on at length about the various realistic and unrealistic aspects of Breaking Bad.

The game warden absolutely needs to know enough about hunting and fishing so he can find those places where people are prone to, you know, hunt and fish at times when they are likely to be, you know, hunting and fishing.

St_Francis_P: That. And I very much doubt top management anywhere will start having cybersecurity skills anytime soon.

At the same time, she needs to make this a priority, and she's advertising that she isn't. Let's say I'm in the Navy, and I came up through the carrier groups to become Commander of the Pacific Fleet. Should I not bother to learn anything about the submarines under my command, trusting that my sub commanders will do everything right? Should I publicly express not only my ignorance of the submarine fleet, but my disinterest in learning anything about the submarines under my command?

That is in effect what Napolitano said here.

That she's unfamiliar with technology is excusable. That she is uninterested in it is unexcusable. That she would publicly state as much is ridiculous.


First off in large counties the sheriff is less about being a cop and more about administration and politics. So in large counties they would have advisers and may not know every little aspect of law enforcement.

Secondly Napolitano didn't say that she was unfamiliar with the technology, just that she didn't use it. There are many people who are familiar with email and don't use it, or use it very little, because of the security risk. Your assuming that she doesn't understand email because in your little mind everybody who is anybody uses email is just wrong. You probably think that everybody that doesn't use Facebook is also technology illiterate.
 
2012-09-30 10:07:54 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

PanicMan: The whole advantage of email is
you get a time and date stamp along with exactly what someone said.
If you're not using that, how do you know stuff is getting done
exactly the way you want?

If you call me up and we agree to something, I won't start working
until I get an email from you confirming what we agreed to. I'm not
interested in hearing "That's not how I remember our discussion. This
is all your fault".


This is also why I use Message Authentication Codes.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlBoUNgACgkQIeCXxXWexLrA+ACfWrhajiu+1vY4QaqOwnyOQiYG
JpQAniPT5RzaaLpq2u73GXGg156YlJcp
=QnYR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
2012-09-30 10:13:04 AM

ongbok: Secondly Napolitano didn't say that she was unfamiliar with the technology, just that she didn't use it. There are many people who are familiar with email and don't use it, or use it very little, because of the security risk. Your assuming that she doesn't understand email because in your little mind everybody who is anybody uses email is just wrong. You probably think that everybody that doesn't use Facebook is also technology illiterate.


Quit it with the personal insults, dude - I'm pointing out that we probably shouldn't have someone who self-identifies as a Luddite in charge of cybersecurity. If you think that's unreasonable, then we disagree, that's all.
 
2012-09-30 10:14:24 AM

MithrandirBooga: Any illusion that we live in a meritocracy is an illusion.


why isn't this a meritocracy? because you aren't rich and if life was far an immensely intelligent and incredibility hard working person like yourself would be?

ongbok: Secondly Napolitano didn't say that she was unfamiliar with the technology, just that she didn't use it. There are many people who are familiar with email and don't use it, or use it very little, because of the security risk. Your assuming that she doesn't understand email because in your little mind everybody who is anybody uses email is just wrong. You probably think that everybody that doesn't use Facebook is also technology illiterate.


obama uses a BlackBerry. he uses email, on a freaking cell phone. the POTUS.
anyone like yourself who is assuming that this self described luddite might actually know wtf is going on with ordinary everyday technology because of a further assumption that she has the most super secret job in the entire world that prohibits her use of technology is an asshole.
 
2012-09-30 10:16:59 AM

Babwa Wawa: "Some would call me a Luddite" suggests to me that she's a Luddite.


She's breaking the stocking frames to force the textile companies to start paying their workers better wages?
 
2012-09-30 10:17:07 AM

Babwa Wawa: ongbok: Secondly Napolitano didn't say that she was unfamiliar with the technology, just that she didn't use it. There are many people who are familiar with email and don't use it, or use it very little, because of the security risk. Your assuming that she doesn't understand email because in your little mind everybody who is anybody uses email is just wrong. You probably think that everybody that doesn't use Facebook is also technology illiterate.

Quit it with the personal insults, dude - I'm pointing out that we probably shouldn't have someone who self-identifies as a Luddite in charge of cybersecurity. If you think that's unreasonable, then we disagree, that's all.


She doesn't self identify as a luddite. She said people like you would consider her a luddite because she doesn't use email. I'm not a luddite but think I am because I don't use Facebook. Like i said small minded people that don't see the bigger picture would think something is wrong with her because she doesn't use email. That isn't an insult.
 
2012-09-30 10:22:06 AM
dl.dropbox.com
Subby?


/To be fair,email is both insecure and provides a ready record that could be used against you in a court of law.
/I'd use it as little as possible if I was in that line of work.
 
2012-09-30 10:22:11 AM

ampoliros: That's not such a huge deal. She doesn't do the actual work; she just sets policy. That being the case, the real zinger in the article is this:

Any standards would be administered within a partnership between businesses and government, Napolitano said.

Notice that the public is mentioned nowhere? That's because when government and business conspire with our data, nothing bad can happen.


Good catch. Very good catch.
 
2012-09-30 10:23:36 AM

andrewagill: Got a story to tell you bros. And yes, it is a cool one.


No; no it's not.
 
2012-09-30 10:25:49 AM

digistil: Email is only slightly more secure than using billboards along I-90 to communicate. Sounds like the person in charge actually has a farking clue.


Since it's the federal government, theoretically all e-mail between co-workers should be through a secure server center. It's not like we're talking about them sending e-mails back and forth about national security using yahoo and hotmail accounts.

Done properly, e-mail is incredibly secure.
 
2012-09-30 10:27:12 AM
Most Generals suck at firing weapons, too
 
2012-09-30 10:27:18 AM

ampoliros: That's because when government and business conspire with our data, nothing bad can happen.


Lists of your FARK alts and porn fetishes will destroy you.
 
2012-09-30 10:27:37 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-30 10:27:55 AM
Bureaucrats just need to know how to tell people what to do.
 
2012-09-30 10:28:10 AM

ongbok: She doesn't self identify as a luddite


When a person says "some would say I hate soccer. I never watch it unless I have to" that means they're not a soccer fan.
 
2012-09-30 10:28:34 AM

ongbok: Her not using email and heading up cyber-security isn't necessarily a bad thing, it depends on why she doesn't use email. If she doesn't use email or or very few cyber communication service because she doesn't know how to use them, then that is bad. If she isn't using them because she knows of the inherent security risk with each one and only uses secured methods then that shows that she understands the job.


With no email trail, you can deny everything. Holder can deny everything, even with an email trail.
 
2012-09-30 10:30:37 AM

NeedleGuy: andrewagill: Got a story to tell you bros. And yes, it is a cool one.

No; no it's not.


It's not a CSB? Does that mean you actually liked it or... damn it, does denying a sarcastic remark work like a double negative, or is it an intensifier?
 
Displayed 50 of 104 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report