Schneier on Security

Clive Robinson • May 17, 2018 11:16 AM

@ Brent Longborough,

… seems to be almost an hourly thing in the current White House.

I was a little slow on the uptake compared to one or two others here who are also non US resident.

Put simply it appears Donald Trumps “Primary Mission” is to undo as rapidly as possible anything that Barack Obama achived. That is Donald is on a “revenge mission” to “wipe out Barak Obama’s legacy”.

As that is also a fairly prominent goal of quite a few Republicans and nearly all neo-cons, it’s fairly safe to say Donald Trumps position in the White House is more secure “than a ten dollar watch at a pickpockets convention”.

That is not only is the “Dough gnarled” doing what they want, he’s also giving them full deniability now and in the future, which is pure political opportunism if ever there was any…

As I pointed out some time ago President Trump is not a Republican, he’s a Trumpian pure and simple and he appears to be just following his “birther” argument and bitter hatred of Barack Obama. Which realy is not what you want in a position of power which others are prepared to make unassailable…

Anyway you have the mid-terms coming up in the US and based on current headless chicken behaviour seen in the MSM in not just the US I could be accused of trying to pervert the minds of US readers on this blog. So I will stop at pointing out what should be obvious to most on reflection, thus can in no way be regarded as “faux news” etc.

Clive Robinson • May 18, 2018 6:49 AM

@ Keith Glass, RealFakeNews,

We’re asking the wrong question. Has the White House Security “Czar” actually done anything to improve, or reduce, cybersecurity issues ?

In turn you are both asking the wrong question…

It’s a question not of what the czar as individuals can do, but more a question of what they will be alowed to do by not just those above them but more importantly those below them.

If those above the czar, give the czar effective powers to punish those below the czar with say multiple life sentances for even minor breaches of the rules, and can keep the czar alive and uninfluenced, then the czar might just have a chance of making changes.

However such power should never be invested in an individual, or even group… Thus the cyber czar is always going to fail against the other Gov agencies.

That is why the post is guarented to be a failure, thus those with even a modicum more of self preservation above idealism will head in the opposit direction faster than “escape velocity”.

It supprises me just how few people realise that the post is a “poisoned chalice”…

If your options are only “loose or just scrape a no-win draw” the sensible options are, firstly as voiced by the WOPR computer in the 1983 film War Games is “The only winning move is not to play”… Or secondlyvif that choice is not available as in the Startrek no-win Kobayashi Maru test is cheat by change the rules…

Clive Robinson • May 18, 2018 11:12 AM

@ Dan H,

I still see it is permissible for some such as Anura, Clive, echo, to post political commentary.

There is a big difference between “political”, “party political” and “making unsubstantiated accusations against individual politicians”.

As I’ve indicated I have clearly deliniated standards when it comes to evidence, this has made me unpopular with other comnenters who scream “treason” and the like without checking what evidence is required and what the leagal process is.

Whilst accusing an individual of “treason” without strong evidence is reprehensible, saying that in your view an action or series of actions that have been publically reported, if true are indicators of “treasonous” behaviour, is a whole different matter. You will need to check with a local legal expert, but you will find that the first is at best legaly questionable because you are accusing a person of a legislated criminal act, thus it is not considered “free speech” –ie you are shouting fire without evidence of one– whilst the latter is a personal observation of behaviour which is not a legislated criminal act, that is further expressed as such for the purpose of discussion that is based on reported information, which is free speech.

Thus whilst people might disagree I can say that based on Donald Trumps behaviour his priority appears to be to destroy Baracks legacy, I am drawing a correlation on actions not accusing of a crime. You are likewise alowed to bring forward your view on actions you have seen and agree or disagree. As long as it is kept civil and does not degenerate and verifiable actions are brought forward then discussed especially as they relate to security then it should fall within the rules the moderator or owner judges by.

Thus as I’ve said I am not alone in the perception that Donald Trump has an agender to undo Baraka Obama’s legacy. You might or might not agree with that. But this political post that has been disolved by Donald Trump was originated by Barak Obama. Thus I see a point that reinforces other observations on Donald Trumps behaviour. You however might take the view that the post has been disolved because it has not achieved anything meaningfull. That may well be true but does it square with other Donald Trump behaviours. You could also take the view that the only people prepared to accept such a post are not of the right caliber for some reason, thus you would have to again give indicative evidence of that as well as squaring it with other Donald Trump behaviours.

Now because the post is in effect cybersecurity czar post disolved I think most would agree that it is very much relevant to security. Again you may chose to disagree and give your reasons and expect to have to defend them within that perspective.

Likewise if you disagree with things I’ve said, provided you can give evidence not emotion to back up your opinion, the points can be discussed and limits of view points assessed.

The point is information that is verifable as from another source and made public is fair game to be discussed if pertinent. Evidence likewise, even if it is only opinion given as testimony. Emotion and unsuported accusations that are often another form of “emotion” as such is likely to be non constructive, thus lack relavance and cause the discussion to degenerate.

If people consistantly cause a discussion to degenerate they are likely to be met with blunt or hostile comment just as they would in other social settings.

Now I know you have made past comment with which others agree with, some I have agreed with as well, so I expect you will do in the future as well. You have also on occasion given the source or evidence of what you are presenting, I may not agree with it for various reasons, but I’m not attacking you or the source unless there is something obviously factually incorrect, or does not align with other information accepted as factual.

I try not to let emotion but logic and experiance guide my view point and will often give my reasoning sometimes in depth where I think it may be required (for which others have pointed out I can make very lengthy posts).

For very many reasons people got quite upset over the 2016 election and the emotional response was high as was the lack of knowledge about what had been done “in the name of the citizens” in the past.

For instance in todays news, we hear that the US has by interference derailed peace talks in the Korean Penisular… What gives Donald Trump the right to say that the current North Korean leader has to go? The answer is the same right as do Russia and China have to say he should remain if he wishes to do so. That is very little or no right. The objective of peace talks supprise supprise is to get a peacefull and constructive outcome, not derail talks and perpetuate hostile activities potentially harming considerably more people.

The problem is the US Gov –as seen by many in other countries– has unjustly set it’s self up as a faux moral guardian whilst actually war mongering for profit on a neo-con adgender for a few who will not suffer the consequences of such activities. Also in the news it appears that conflict in Afghanistan has required the deployment of yet more troops from the US and UK, and presumably other nations (the news was brief and not at all clear). Such engagments have not just been criticized by increasing numbers, but also the more rapidly rising number of saterical pieces about US military and NATO behaviour. In fact in some more rightwing news sources people have raised the question of NATO’s future after Brexit.

However I doubt based on past behaviour that this will make much of an apperance in the US MSM, I guess we will know by Monday morning Washington time. It’s why I say people should look at the media from several countries, but treat all of them as being somewhat biased, and try and figure out what the reality is for themselves.

Clive Robinson • May 18, 2018 8:13 PM

@ echo,

Things are now so complicated its not possible for one person to design an aircraft or write an OS from scratch over a weekend.

I’ve been a practicing engineer in these areas –and a few others– for well over a third of a century now. And I can not recall enyone doing any of those activities from scratch over a weekend.

I’ve ported *nix in three days from one CPU faimily to an entirely differrnt CPU family, but much of the I/O was in reality sufficiently common that only a few hundred lines of assembler code had to be translated and fine tuned.

As for designing planes, when I was a lot younger, I designed a few gliders for RC control in a couple of days but then spent a few weeks actually building all the detailed parts and drawings. When a tenager I actually designed and built canoes and small sailing craft in wood and fiberglass. Also my own satellite dishes and other antennas which only needed ten or twenty minutes to design but half a day or so to make basic jigs. As part of my electronic engineering training I also learnt the fundementals of “tool making” which I still practice today. In quite a few cases it’s been way quicker to repurpose an existing tool as a “clive special” than order in the correct tool even on overnight delivery. Sadly my eyesight and manual dexterity are not what they once were, but I can still duplicate a five lever mortice lock key by eye and needle files and bench vice alone.

The point is these skills take time to learn and can be very much faster, but there are limits on what you can do without “force multiplication”.

But the one thing you can say is the number of parts / lines of code go up by a positive power for each increase in length etc.

But at the end of the day most designs are not originals, just original in small parts. That is the designs stand on the shoulders of their predecesors for nine tenths of their design and are tempered by the learned knowledge of the designer. If you think about it for example a car is more or less identical to many other cars except for a few cosmetic changes.

Somebody I know has four PhDs and their hubby two. Unlike her husband her PhDs were in almost unrelated subjects. But as she freely admits the first was hard very hard the second difficult the third whilst not easy, she had got the form in her stride thus cranked the handle, and the fourth was almost subconsciously done whilst on an industrial assignment. As her hubby jokes she writes up her diary / lab book as though it was just another thesis… She is however a great beliver in the three hour rule of working, whilst workin 12hour days from time to time. That is you have a creative one to three hours in a day. The rest of the day is spent on non creative activities such as admin or active relaxation. Like me she is also “a menace on a push bike” because of trying to make use by creative thinking whilst traveling to work etc (worse than using a mobile phone). How either of us have survived the all to frequent inadvertaint contact with vehicals and tarmac is a secret neither of us is party to. Sadly I have had to give up cycling especially competative cycling, whilst she appears to be keen to be cycling competitively for the rest of her life, and anoyingly she is still better with both bow and rifle than I am (I blaim my eye sight and muscle/nerve degeneration). Though as she freely admits I can see around the corners of a cork screw way better when it comes to thinking hinky than she can, so not all is lost 😉 But we do trade recipes as she is a bit of an alchemist when it comes to chutneys, pickles and has the artistic touch when it comes to cakes, whilst I go for conserves, fruit cheeses, charcuterie, pies, bread[1] and center piece joints etc.

[1] I would advise anyone who can lift a finger into making bread. It’s good excercise and the doughs you make are living things that respond to how you treat them. Kneeding and knocking back can be therapeutic if not cathartic as you could say imagine the dough is your annoying bosses head etc 0:) but more seriously there is very little in the way of food stuffs you cannot add to bread. I’ve been known to tunnle bone lamb shanks, cook them on low for three hours then wrap them in dough with suitable herbs in it and bake them, delicious either hot or cold.