Trump Signs Executive Order On Cybersecurity (techcrunch.com) 173
President Trump on Thursday signed a long-delayed executive order on cybersecurity that "makes clear that agency heads will be held accountable for protecting their networks, and calls on government and industry to reduce the threat from automated attacks on the internet," reports The Washington Post. From the report: Picking up on themes advanced by the Obama administration, Trump's order also requires agency heads to use Commerce Department guidelines to manage risk to their systems. It commissions reports to assess the country's ability to withstand an attack on the electric grid and to spell out the strategic options for deterring adversaries in cyberspace. [Thomas Bossert, Trump's homeland security adviser] said the order was not, however, prompted by Russia's targeting of electoral systems last year. In fact, the order is silent on addressing the security of electoral systems or cyber-enabled operations to influence elections, which became a significant area of concern during last year's presidential campaign. The Department of Homeland Security in January declared election systems "critical infrastructure." The executive order also does not address offensive cyber operations, which are generally classified. This is an area in which the Trump administration is expected to be more forward-leaning than its predecessor. Nor does it spell out what type of cyberattack would constitute an "act of war" or what response the attack would invite. "We're not going to draw a red line," Bossert said, adding that the White House does not "want to telegraph our punches." The order places the defense secretary and the head of the intelligence community in charge of protecting "national security" systems that operate classified and military networks. But the secretary of homeland security will continue to be at the center of the national plan for protecting critical infrastructure, such as the electric grid and financial sector.
Cyber (Score:5, Funny)
We're going to have tremendous cyber, folks. You and me, we'll have the best cyber. We're going to have so much cyber, you're going to say "Please, Mr. President, I'm so tired of cybering!" It's going to be some very great cyber, believe me.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Didn't you invent "Cybering" just this past week? I'm sure you did, you said it, so it must be that Cybering was invented by you. No wonder it will be best.
So best, people will ask for more and more of the Cybering. Through the series of Tubes in a Wide Stance, because it is morning in America in this decade.
Re: (Score:1)
Didn't you invent "Cybering" just this past week? I'm sure you did, you said it, so it must be that Cybering was invented by you. No wonder it will be best.
So best, people will ask for more and more of the Cybering. Through the series of Tubes in a Wide Stance, because it is morning in America in this decade.
No, that was Al Gore. Right after he invented the Internet.
Come on people, it was missing and I know a lot of people were just waiting for this joke.
Re: (Score:2)
He cybered his butt.
Dammit, at least try to stay with the lingo!
Re: (Score:2)
Dammit, at least try to stay with the lingo!
Woooshh! Trump invents the lingo.
Re: (Score:2)
*sigh*
He cybers the lingo...
Re: (Score:2)
Dammit, at least try to stay with the lingo!
Woooshh! Trump invents the lingo.
In Soviet Russia, lingo invents Trump!
Re: (Score:2)
They're soviet now again?
And when did Putin change his name to "lingo"?
Much security. (Score:3, Funny)
I feel safer already!
Re: (Score:2)
I can hear it now:
head of government agency: I can't imagine how this could have happened! I used Microsoft, that is, the best that there is. There is nothing more I could have done to prevent this. I even accepted the help of the helpful Windows Tech Support people who called me and helped secure all the systems on my network.
Distracted yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Handy timing, obvious to distract from Comey's sacking, the subpoena, etc.
But can I point out just one of the more obscure stuff recent you may have missed?
Kushner corp trying to raise $150 million from Chinese investors for a 15% stake in some project that magically costs $1 billion, 1 Journal Square:
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/06/news/jared-kushner-nicole-family-event/index.html
Except it doesn't cost $1 billion, the land cost $27 million, and $1 billion would put it in the top 10 most expensive skyscrapers, for a basic 79 story tower.
Why do billionaires not have enough equity or cash to fund this $150 million? Why expensive investors from china?... Because their projects are all in negative equity and they need to keep finding more investors to keep the company going.
This is how Kusher and Trump corp both work: They do a project, perhaps it costs $300 million. They borrow from the banks, who take the documents as collatoral, and lend a portion of the money , e.g. $200m. Outside investors are told the project costs e.g. $600 million, and $150 million/25% is up for sale to them. In reality their $150 million is buying $25 million of equity, but they don't know the full picture because the details are kept secret.
Money is scraped off the deal, in licensing fees, management fees etc. This is the profit for Kushers and Trumps, it's what keep their company going, and lets them pay the interest on their portion of bank loans.
Their property empire requires a constant stream of new investors buying into a false valuation of a project. Threats of lawsuits keep dissent down, and the books are kept secret so nobody can see. This is why the press was barred from the Kushner China investor meeting, because you don't want anyone connecting the dots.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So it's a Ponzi scheme, only one that can be floated for years or decades rather than falling apart in months. It's not legal, but due to the secrecy, nobody has yet figured out it's not legal. And now that the people running the scheme are in charge, it will become legal.
Steal enough, and you can buy legitimacy.
Re:Distracted yet? (Score:4, Informative)
Its not a Ponzi scheme and it is legal.
The Property makes it legal (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Is "get elected so you can make the rules" part of the curriculum? It's Berlusconi in America.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it's legal, alright. The Trumps just know when to get out of a Ponzi scheme, and leave others holding the bag. His investors always lose, but he always gets out with money. That's his genius. When the Donald tries his hand at an actual business, he fails. But he was brought up in the real estate game, so that's the one thing he knows, aside from selling his name. Now he passing it onto the next generation.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Distracted? By your conspiracy theories or slashdot's daily bullshit?
But seriously,
"Their property empire requires a constant stream of new investors buying into a false valuation of a project. Threats of lawsuits keep dissent down, and the books are kept secret so nobody can see."
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT TECH BUSINESSES DO.
Re: (Score:1)
Handy timing, obvious to distract from Comey's sacking, the subpoena, etc.
You can expect to see a lot more people getting fired. It's Trump's modus operandi. He's basically threatening to fire people in this executive order.
Re: (Score:2)
You can expect to see a lot more people getting fired. It's Trump's modus operandi. He's basically threatening to fire people in this executive order.
Aren't incompetent government workers protected by their union? Is it only the agency heads who are fire-able?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Business vs. Government (Score:3, Interesting)
President Trump wants people to be accountable. Isn't that exactly what we have been demanding for.. oh I don't know... longer than I have been alive? Comey had numerous problems, and up until he was fired both sides of the aisle voiced opinions of "incompetent", "abused his power", and "usurped Constitutional authority". Republicans were upset for numerous reasons, but primarily for making himself the Judge and Jury for the Hillary email crimes. Democrats because they feel he impacted the election of t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But what are these Commerce Department standards, and are they any good? This may just be a way to make ALL government departments predictably permeable.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Incompetence and maliciousness often look the same, and the presence of one doesn't rule out the other.
Of course the democrats were political pandering with both comments, same for the republicans. That doesn't reduce the optics of this. Their is a standard for political positions like this where you make a clean transition by asking for the person to step down, and they always resign in these type of positions. Outright firing would be seen as a attempt to cause disgrace to the person, a person Trump h
Speaking from Ignorance (Score:1)
Of course the democrats were political pandering with both comments, same for the republicans. That doesn't reduce the optics of this. Their is a standard for political positions like this where you make a clean transition by asking for the person to step down, and they always resign in these type of positions.
You have obviously never worked in high level security of any type. One does not ask people with a certain level of access and clearance to resign or give them notice. You cut and cauterize immediately. If you don't understand the "why" you are not even trying.
Comey can still testify before Congress, and most likely will. Flynn was removed from post and is being asked to testify, so why would Comey be a special case? Repeating leftist platitudes instead of thinking for yourself is a bad tactic. Histor
Re: (Score:2)
>And who can't keep the story straight? The Trump Administration or the Leftist media who has been caught lying repeatedly? "Comey asked for money to investigate and was fired" which was a lie. "The Deputy AG said he would resign" was a lie, as is nearly everything else they claim in their FAKE news.
To my knowledge, none of them have been denied by anyone with direct knowledge. Deputy only said he wasn't going to, never said he didn't tell anyone he didn't plan to. The only other denials are all "not t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You would have to have something factual to dispute. There has only been one other director of the FBI fired, and he was asked to step down first, and refused. If it was about access to confidential information, anyone who knows anything about secrecy, knows the most important thing is to stop their access by making sure those who give them access are alerted to stop them, that was never done by Trump, Comey's office didn't know either. That along with your side rant about supposed lies, without any pro
Re: (Score:1)
Running for president has drawn a lot of scrutiny and heat onto himself. I wouldn't be surprised if it proves to be his (and his family's) downfall too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Handy timing, obvious to distract from Comey's sacking, the subpoena, etc.
I think you're reading too much into it. Signing an executive order on something that is of little interest to most is not a distraction.
Re: (Score:3)
You raise money because up front costs are a worry and you share the burden. Land costs are trivial compared to construction costs.
For instance:
Building costs in the NYC area is $200/square foot for very basic construction. Kitchens and bathrooms and radiant heating, and wood floors add tremendously to the cost. And that's not including elevators and balconies and roof gardens.
Construction costs easily reac
Re: (Score:2)
Investors do their own research you numbskull. They should not, and do not, rely solely on the words and evaluations of the seller of a property. As one with half a brain might imagine, an investor of millions of dollars has their own staff of professionals in the real estate business that can compare similar properties. Kind of like Zillow, but with big buildings instead of houses. (I can't believe I just had to write something so incredibly obvious.)
I really don't know how to dumb this down any more t
Re: (Score:2)
Simplicity is good but don't forget curiosity. For shareholders, the consequence of having a self promoter con man as CEO is the possibility of loosing equity in the company. Looking at Donald Trump's past bankruptcies is a good indication of specular profits for Donald himself at the detriment of his shareholders.
Now that business man Donald Trump is the president. We, the American people are the shareholders left holding the empty bag as Donald's family profits from his latest scheme.
Simple enough.
Re: (Score:2)
loosing
Why do so many people insist upon using "loose" wherever they should be using "lose"?
Because Trump. You're not a loser, you're a loosah!
Re: (Score:2)
You should move to Thailand, 50k a year makes you a king out there.
Re: (Score:3)
Of all the things he did, THIS makes you think that?
All I see here is that he's yet another politician with zero idea what the internet is really like. Well, he's at least one step ahead of the rest, he knows what Twitter is.
Re: (Score:2)
What about this line:
"...Russia's targeting of electoral systems..."
The word "systems" implies that the evil Russians were actually hacking the voting machines.
The WaPo is the worst "fake news" outlet in the country.
One word could have made that non-fake, too. (Score:2)
What about this line:
"...Russia's targeting of electoral systems..."
The word "systems" implies that the evil Russians were actually hacking the voting machines.
They could have made that non-fake just by adding one word: "... Russia's alleged targeting of electoral systems ..."
But that would have brought down the whole propaganda operation by inserting doubt into the big claim, which is an absolute no-no if you're using the "Big Lie" methodology.
What about the CIA's Automated Implant Branch AIB (Score:2)
With the US government demanding better security products, the NSA and CIA contractors will have to work harder.
Only a few of the better anti virus brands found the equation group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] and Fluxwire Trojan and Archangel efforts.
"Found in the wild: Vault7 hackin
Re: (Score:2)
What does held accountable mean? (Score:2)
Re:What does held accountable mean? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean Myers v. United States? Welcome to 1926.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oblig. Godwin's Law (Score:1)
So what y'all are saying is that this is Trumps very own Reichskristallnacht?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Jawoll mein hairpiece!
Nice try (Score:4, Insightful)
"Picking up on themes advanced by the Obama administration"
Yeah no, but nice try. The Obama administration has the worst cyber security record of any administration, especially when you consider both public and private hacks where the government should have stepped in (i.e. hacks by other countries against US companies or government contractors). Remember the Chinese OPM hack? Yah, that was under Obamas watch. 21 million plus personal records exposed. Remember when the Chinese hacked and stole plans for stealth drones and other military aircraft? That was Obama too. Remember the DNC hacks? Yah, that was on Obamas watch as well (sorry, Trump wasn't even elected yet). There is a list as long as my arm proving that the Obama administration was absolute shit at cyber security and he basically just shrugged and did nothing besides blabber.
It remains to be seen if Trump can get the federal government IT and contractors to get their shit together on this issue, but dont piss down my back and say it is raining. If he starts firing department heads or charging federal employees with criminal negligence where appropriate, we might see the epidemic of hacking fall off somewhat as industry standard measures get adopted and enforced across the federal government.
Re: (Score:2)
So all the contractors can bid on government work and has to stay in plain text? So one big no bid company cant encrypt all the US gov data and stop other contractors working on the same big data sets?
So its kept in plain text to ensure tax payers can fund a wide variety of contractors to work with and on the same data?
Or all the equipment is just so old it can only work with and on plain text data sets that are on th
Re:Nice try (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, the government has a shit record for cybersecurity, but putting the blame squarely on Obama isn't really fair. Hindsight is always 20/20 and computer security has always been much more reactive than proactive. I'd argue the blame is Congress, the environment, and the government structure.
1) Congress controls the purse and laws. They're the ones that make sure all agencies have the funding to do what they need to do. These asshats in the big white daycare on capital hill haven't managed to agree on a budget before October in over a decade. That means most agencies get a fraction of the money they plan for.
2) The internet has changed in the past 10 years (as of 2012). We've gone from the beginnings of broadband to gigabit connections. From a millions users to billions.
3) The Fed as a whole is woefully slow to move on to new technology. They typically move to a new OS after it has been out for at least 3 years, which means they may get around to Windows 10 sometime in 2018 or 2019. Even those "best of the best" agencies are subject to this. I helped a migration to Windows 7 2.5 years ago, after it had been in the wild for 5 years.
Could these things have been changed by Obama? Not hardly. It would have been tricky even if Congress was willing to work with him. With a Congress too busy fighting with itself to make any progress about anything? Damned near impossible.
Re: (Score:2)
But you are completely right, Congress has been obsessed with stopping Obama at every turn, throwing up roadblocks in every way.
This is not a way to run a country. Even with government under one party, they still can't figure out how to pass a federal funding bill.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, Trump should just take all authority from congress and the supreme court. It would be far more efficient. /sarc off
There is a reason that we have the government run inefficiently, but the hacks that I pointed to above were for the most part foreseeable and preventable, had competent people been in place. However, when you appoint people based on their loyalty and service to your lordship Obama instead of competency, you get the shitstorm of failure as we saw. And after the fact, if you give less
Re: (Score:1)
I work for the Federal Government and I can tell you that GW Bush started it. As always when something like that starts, it was comical. Much to his credit during the Obama administration they really went after it. We saw agencies using secure benchmarks, doing audits, actually patching systems and working to eliminate old systems. There are a lot of old systems out there. From CCTV to even entrance controls. Some of them were even running Windows 95 up until a few years ago. Probably still some out there.
Ironic given recent news (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if the US press are allowed to bring in their own cameras, but the white house does have a staff photographer.
Re: (Score:2)
2) In the past it might have been okay before phones and photo cameras became recording devices that could capture audio. Also the rate of miniaturization means that spy equipment are now smaller and smaller.
Re: (Score:2)
Sean Spicer took a photo of the MLK bust in there with his phone, so the rest of your statement is an outright lie.
You are aware that there is a reason that there is an official WH photographer, right? Second if Spicer did that with his own camera, he was breaking with the policy. Third, the Trump administration not caring about security rules and policies does not surprise me.
Racist and unconstitutional (Score:1, Troll)
Like every "executive order" issued by Trump, this one is racist and unconstitutional. If Clinton won and issued the same decree, that would've been most enlightened [ntknetwork.com], of course.
Re: (Score:1)
There you are! Justifying Trump's dismissing a judge as "biased" because he was of Mexican descent [cnn.com]... Racist, racist, racist!
WTF?
expect no federal services online. (Score:1)
expect no federal services online.
Re: (Score:1)
expect no federal services online.
It's secure then, isn't it?
Trump woudn't know cyber from a hole in the ground (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Wow, we found another town's idiot. Your statement is just so ignorant. Question is, will your response be stupid. Ignorance can be fixed, stupidity is forever.
Trump Signs Executive Order On Cybersecurity (Score:1)
and then tweets about it from his Samsung Galaxy S3
Re: (Score:1)
Just because no one can offer proof that it happened doesn't mean that it didn't. Since so many news sources have reported that it happened, all thinking people know it did despite the lack of evidence.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Since so many news sources have reported that it happened, all thinking people know it did despite the lack of evidence.
That word, thinking. To quote Inigo Montoya, I do not think it means what you think it means.
Thinking people do not just regurgitate things reported in the news.
Re: (Score:2)
IIUC, there was evidence that some hacking from someone using a Russian handle over an ISP located in Russia happened. Of course, this could all be spoofed, so that's not real evidence that the attack originated in Russia, or that the attacker commonly used a Russian handle, or that the Russian government had any connection. And it's not evidence that nobody else hacked anything. And the story I read didn't even quantify the degree of penetration.
As I said before in a different context, there are degrees
Re: (Score:2)
Trump doesn't need them any more. Now he's in, he'll be able to rig the next election by himself.
That's if there is a next election...
Re: (Score:2)
Of course there will be! Even the Soviet Union had elections until the very end, with glowing approval rates of the reigning powers!
Re: (Score:2)
On time there was a mistake and the announcer read out next year's results.
Re: (Score:2)
That only shows that the glorious Soviet news were ahead of its times!
Re:What do you mean? (Score:5, Funny)
[x] I am a Citizen of the United States
[x] I have not previously submitted a vote in this election
[x] I am a white, rich, christian, heterosexual male
[x] I promise I am telling the truth and that the previous statements are equally truthful to this statement
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
SHINY apps. Shiny.
Re: (Score:2)
Apps
Nope. You won't need to do anything, your vote will be automatically made for you, no action on your part required. You won't even need to register to vote anymore; a Super Duper AI Deep Learning Algorithm Shiny Thingie will determine what political party you are automatically, register you, and make all your votes for you. No need for silly humans to bother themselves with learning how their government works, or any of those nasty annoying facts about candidates and issues, the Shiny machines will do it al
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What do you mean? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm always a little amazed at the people who find the Clinton's use of their influence, to get money for a charity that does actual charity, more appalling than Trump's phony charity, which only benefits Trump. Is it really so awful to strong-arm rich people into giving money to do good work? Or are you simply blind to, or ignorant of, the illegal shenanigans of the Trump Foundation?
Re: (Score:1)
You know what always surprises me? That Clinton was an active member of the Obama administration while this was all going on and they bury their head in the sand over it while pointing their finger and going TRUMP.
Re: (Score:2)
Much as we love to see the veiw from Reverse World, I think it's a bit much to expect to be modded up. It's no longer Funny, and it's certainly never been Insightful. What puzzles me is, why you people are even on this site, (assuming right-wing Anonymous Coward is more than one person). In other words, why would a person whose worldview is anti-science, anti-evidence, and anti-progress be hanging out on a science news site? Just to troll? That would be pretty pathetic. You spew racial epithets like a child
Re: (Score:2)
yes, they did win
Re: (Score:1)
Just think of what would have happened with Hillary being elected.
Just think, we could have had a President who didn't claim to invent a decades-old idiom, a President who didn't appoint a racist to head the DOJ, a President who didn't fly on expensive trips for golf outings at personally owned resorts, a President who didn't boast of a wasteful attack with Cruise missiles over dinner, a President who didn't issue bogus executive orders then denounce judges for holding her accountable. A President who didn't have a spokesman try to sell cheap jewelry after resenting how
Re: (Score:2)
He has a tendency to switch banks without telling the contractors.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just this dipshit, it's the system. It isn't the fault of one pig if the liver pie is rotten.
Re: (Score:2)
Blaming the victims (Score:2)
People tend to get the government they deserve. George Carlin had it right.
Blaming the victims may make a good kick-off point for a comedy routine. But it's also a handy way to spike efforts to fix the problem, thus benefiting the victimizers.
After the media "sucked the air out of the room" when any of the other Republican primary reform candidates were talking (by focusing on Trump - whom they though would be the easiest candidate for Hillary to trounce), Trump/Pence was the only checkbox on the president
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rome is burning and all anyone can do is comment on how good it looks in 4k.
Re: (Score:2)
This guy. Well said.
Bernie 2018!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Um, no.
Putin is not on par with Stalin (killed tens of millions), Mussolini (tried and failed at genocide, killed hundreds of thousands), or Hitler (killed million, tried genocide, kicked off WWII). He is a distinctly petty evil.
He's more like Francis II - reactionary ruler of an old fading power, that doesn't know how to deal with all the change in the world or the diminishment of his power. Putin flails around, which sucks for the Ukraine or Georgia, but he can't invade Europe. He assassinates journali
Hi, shill for the globalists. (Score:1)
This isn't purely about partisan US politics, this is about a web of influential hard to far right politicians acting with Putin's backing - Le Pen, Farage, Banks, Trump, Assange, are all interconnected on this and not by chance meetings, but by explicit, intentional communications with each other. Even outside of the Anglo-American-Franco circle it extends throughout Europe, Hungary's Jobbik, Greece's Golden Dawn, Geert Wilders, as so on - they're all very clear
Re: (Score:1)
lmfao
Red-pillers are so cute.