Share your story
The central voice for Linux and Open Source security news
Home News Topics Advisories HOWTOs Features Newsletters About Register

Sign up!
EnGarde Community
What is the most important Linux security technology?
Linux Events
Linux User Groups
Link to Us
Security Center
Book Reviews
Security Dictionary
Security Tips
White Papers
Featured Blogs
All About Linux
DanWalsh LiveJournal
Latest Newsletters
Linux Security Week: March 30th, 2015
Linux Advisory Watch: March 27th, 2015
LinuxSecurity Newsletters
Choose Lists:
About our Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Get the LinuxSecurity news you want faster with RSS
Powered By

Bruce Schneier: that's not what I meant! Print E-mail
User Rating:      How can I rate this item?
Source: Computer World - Posted by Alex   
Latest News In a soberly worded response to Friday's edition of The Long View, Bruce Schneier clarifies that he didn't expect anyone to think he believes that 9/11 made us safer. I'm indebted to Bruce for clearing that up.

In his response, he comments:

Terrorist attacks have a secondary purpose of impressing supporters back home, and 9/11 has upped the stakes. ... From there to 9/11 making us safer is quite a leap. ... I suppose by extension we might be safer because of it. But you'd also have to factor in the risks associated with increased police powers, the NSA spying on all of us without warrants, and the increased disregard for the law we've seen out of the U.S. government since 9/11.

Or, as Daniel Staal interpreted it:

He's saying ... terrorism has become an all-or-nothing proposition: Either you pull of something spectacular, or you fail. And the more spectacular you try to be, the more likely you are to fail.

Thanks, Bruce; apologies for misunderstanding your post. And thanks for being a good sport about it.

While I'm talking about Friday's post, the subject of using NoSQL for the No Fly List bubbled up in one of the Slashdot threads. Thinking about this some more, I didn't really mean 'NoSQL' so much as a replicated database. As many commentators pointed out, the No Fly List is hardly likely to be a massive data set. Replicating it quickly and reliably should be a well-understood problem. Alternatively, real-time access to a centralized list might be an option.

Read this full article at Computer World

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment!

< Prev   Next >


Latest Features
Peter Smith Releases Linux Network Security Online
Securing a Linux Web Server
Password guessing with Medusa 2.0
Password guessing as an attack vector
Squid and Digest Authentication
Squid and Basic Authentication
Demystifying the Chinese Hacking Industry: Earning 6 Million a Night
Free Online security course (LearnSIA) - A Call for Help
What You Need to Know About Linux Rootkits
Review: A Practical Guide to Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux - Fifth Edition
Yesterday's Edition
Feds Charged With Stealing Money During Silk Road Investigation
EFF questions US government's software flaw disclosure policy
Hotel Router Vulnerability A Reminder Of Untrusted WiFi Risks
Partner Sponsor

Community | HOWTOs | Blogs | Features | Book Reviews | Networking
 Security Projects |  Latest News |  Newsletters |  SELinux |  Privacy |  Home
 Hardening |   About Us |   Advertise |   Legal Notice |   RSS |   Guardian Digital
(c)Copyright 2015 Guardian Digital, Inc. All rights reserved.