再保险:你的法律顾问在击败DDOS攻击

大卫·勒布朗说:我也相信,我们应该提出一个建议的最佳实践列表有人提供互联网服务,和一些鼓励(跟随他们,甚至阻止人们忽视他们,(如,而不是路由数据包)。我完全同意。鼓励和沮丧,一个可以使用的社会技术(榜样的例子,大厅的耻辱,奖项——诺贝尔奖如何安全成就,或类似——总统奖章?),钱(罚款和补助),大棒。本文档只使用政府的例子和保守的资助。仍值得商榷,政府是一个榜样对许多人来说,这是一场赌博(可能值得,但仍然一场赌博)押注出来的研究。AlanPaller@AOL。COM说:与所有的可见性>,我们真的让它正确。所以请尽可能>至关重要。请原谅我残酷的诚实。本文档是一个没有实权的nice-old-lady认罪。 The only people happy with it will be those who get funding because of it. Mainly what it will accomplish is put the conscience of politicians and others to rest for having thrown some money at the problem and for having agreed on a sermon about it. The policy-setters of the US should realize that if the internet is going to be an infrastructure of the economy, then it should be treated with the care, resources and law enforcement power that other infrastructures get. How many power companies have to plead for people not to short-circuit the power lines or throw pipes at them (because the sparks are beautiful and "cool")? How many states have to plead for people to not spill oil on the highways (it's so "cool" to see the car crashes) or not go at 200 miles per hour ("see how good I am at building cars and driving?")? At the barest minimum, there should be an internet hall of shame (and funding for it) listing companies and individuals not complying with the current accepted security practices (some were detailed in this document), and this hall of shame should be constituted as being impossible to sue for libel, free from injunctions and other legal wrenches. There should also be a national, federal or presidential, annual award for contributions to security. I would also like to add that public places and food are made safe by inspecting factories and the kitchens of restaurants. I believe that in cases where there is evidence of neglect, it should be possible to enforce security audits with threat of disconnection from the internet for non-compliance. Non-compliance to repeated notices about security neglects should be prosecutable, perhaps under criminal negligence. Repeating offenders should be barred from the internet from some time, just like some people can loose their driving license. As many people realize, what allows countries to make their own laws are border controls and tariffs. Free trade is only possible between countries that have closely similar laws. Consequently, if the US is to have any control over the internet, it has to control its borders. Internet interfaces with other countries should be controlled like the physical US borders and coastlines. Finally, there's a saying that to get rid of predators, you get rid of their prey or make it inaccessible. Critical security software for home users (e.g., firewalls and virus/trojan checkers) should be made free or close to free, perhaps with government subsidy or a coupon system. If it becomes hard enough to find victims, maybe hackers will loose interest. I am certain that the very intelligent people reading this will find many faults with what I propose. However, this society has to give itself the power to protect what is important for it. I'll let you decide if the internet is important enough. Pascal