
Trump's plan to stop hackers - dsr12
http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/11/technology/donald-trump-cyber-plan/
======
piotrjurkiewicz
> At what point should we engage? At what point do we launch a
> counteroffensive?

At none point.

How would they know who is an attacker? Sources of cyberattacks can be faked.

------
prmph
Oh, the irony!

------
chinese_donald
"Companies and governments need clear rules on when a hack counts as
acceptable espionage or an act of aggression -- or an act of war."

Rules? Russian and Chinese hackers aren't going to care about any rules of
conduct. As long as our government isn't spying on its own citizens without
warrants, I really don't care what they do in terms of hacking the computers
of foreign actors.

This is actually a really good cyber security plan.

~~~
thephyber
> I really don't care what they do in terms of hacking the computers of
> foreign actors.

What if your American company was hacked and your devices were used as a proxy
to stage an attack on another American company?

Your statement just gave the downstream company your tacit authorization to
hack you back in order to "swim upstream" to find the original hacker. Or to
destroy their IP on your compromised device. Or to destroy your device
altogether

> This is actually a really good cyber security plan.

Nothing in this "cyber security plan" looks any different than what we already
know about the Obama cyber security plan. And Trump's cybersecurity advisor
(General Flynn) doesn't think it's possible that the FBI could scan 650,000
emails from Anthony Weiner's computer to search for known recipients,
keywords, or to de-duplicate the corpus.[1]

> As long as our government isn't spying on its own citizens without warrants

Where have you been for the past decade?

The US government (at federal, state, and local levels) is already spying on
citizens "without warrants" and it is increasingly being done for common crime
or pre-crime, as opposed to the "anti-terrorism" efforts with which these
technologies and policies were originally sold to the
public.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] The FISA court has been
accused of being a rubber-stamp (only 0.03% of all warrant requests have been
denied in 30-something years), all the judges are appointed by one Republican
SCOTUS justice, and until last year there was no adversarial concept in the
FISA court. It is no longer a "one suspect, one warrant" world.

[1]
[https://twitter.com/GenFlynn/status/795392694411468800](https://twitter.com/GenFlynn/status/795392694411468800)

[2] [http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-
watchdog-...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-surveillance-watchdog-
idUSBRE98Q14G20130927)

[3]
[http://www.sanjoseinside.com/2013/06/07/6_7_13_president_oba...](http://www.sanjoseinside.com/2013/06/07/6_7_13_president_obama_phone_call_surveillance_san_jose/)

[4] [https://www.aclu.org/blog/documents-reveal-unregulated-
use-s...](https://www.aclu.org/blog/documents-reveal-unregulated-use-
stingrays-california)

[5] [http://jalopnik.com/san-joses-garbage-trucks-may-do-
police-s...](http://jalopnik.com/san-joses-garbage-trucks-may-do-police-
surveillance-wit-1725745076)

[6] [https://www.wired.com/2015/05/even-fbi-privacy-concerns-
lice...](https://www.wired.com/2015/05/even-fbi-privacy-concerns-license-
plate-readers/)

[7] [https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-baltimore-secret-
sur...](https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-baltimore-secret-
surveillance/)

[8] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-
reco...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-
verizon-court-order)

[9] [http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/06/nation/la-na-
secret-...](http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/06/nation/la-na-secret-
surveillance-20130607)

[10] [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/national-
gu...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/national-guard-and-
police-in-military-style-helicopter-descend-on-81-year-old-s-home-to-seize-
one-a7348666.html)

[11] [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/08/what-you-need-know-
abo...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/08/what-you-need-know-about-fisa-
court-and-how-it-needs-change)

[12] [http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/13/10758380/stingray-
surveill...](http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/13/10758380/stingray-surveillance-
device-daniel-rigmaiden-case)

[13] [http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/you-
ma...](http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/you-may-already-
be-a-winner-in-nsas-three-degrees-surveillance-sweepstakes/)

[14] [https://noglobalwarrants.org](https://noglobalwarrants.org)

The 4th Amendment is largely dead. The government can access all of your
metadata (snail mail, email, phone calls, SMS messaging, social media
messaging, etc) is tantamount to being followed by a full-time private
detective, only they can do it affordably at scale.

Even if you don't think your metadata is worth getting worked up about,
thermal scopes, your electrical usage, sniff dogs on your front porch,
stingrays that affect all cell phone users within their radius. And everything
is digital, so there is potential for future abuse both within and without the
agency that collects the data.

~~~
chinese_donald
"Your statement just gave the downstream company your tacit authorization to
hack you back in order to "swim upstream" to find the original hacker. Or to
destroy their IP on your compromised device. Or to destroy your device
altogether"

Do you actually think this is the only way the government knows that an attack
took place from a foreign actor?

Botnets exist and our government knows full well that it's an infected machine
and not the user of that machine that's attacking websites on the Internet.

"And Trump's cybersecurity advisor (General Flynn) doesn't think it's possible
that the FBI could scan 650,000 emails from Anthony Weiner's computer to
search for known recipients, keywords, or to de-duplicate the corpus.[1]"

In 8 days? I'm suspect as well that they could actually comb through all of
the required emails in only 8 days. I'm not sure if you are intentionally
trying to mislead with your comment, but the link you provided doesn't show us
that he didn't think the government could do it. Only that it seems unlikely
that the government could get through all of the emails in 8 days.

"Where have you been for the past decade?"

Living through the Obama administration and his piss-poor policies on user
privacy. My point was that I am trying to be optimistic about Trump's
presidency and I hope these things change.

"Even if you don't think your metadata is worth getting worked up about,
thermal scopes, your electrical usage, sniff dogs on your front porch,
stingrays that affect all cell phone users within their radius. And everything
is digital, so there is potential for future abuse both within and without the
agency that collects the data."

I don't even want my Metadata being used by the government. I am 100% for
privacy of US citizens.

