With the recent events in Egypt and the debate over proposed legislation, “Cyber Security and American Competitiveness Act of 2011”, the term “Internet Kill Switch” has flashed into popular discussion. So what does the term mean, what does it look like, and can it be really be done?

Last week, Wired reported that the “Kill Switch” bill will introduce legislation that would give the US government power to limit Internet traffic in the event of cyber-security emergency. The intent of the bill is to provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector to respond swiftly to a significant threat. It is not a mandate to be able to shut down the entire Internet but rather authorizes the president to order access to “critical infrastructure” be turned-off.

Egypt’s actions follow other recent government ordered blackouts as seen in Myanmar and Iran. In each case, an autocratic government could assert control over a relatively small number of major ISPs (ASNs – Autonomous System Numbers). Flipping the switch was achieved by changes to the routing tables (CIDR deletions) used by the ISPs.

The question remains….. could the same approach be taken in the US? The ubiquitous and interconnected nature of the United States ISPs, and the reliance of the critical infrastructure sectors within the U.S. on those ISPs coupled with the lack of overall visibility present enormous technical challenges. Below are three to consider:

1) Master complete visibility and understanding of the Internet – In order to control, direct, or limit routing, which is essentially what would be required, the government would have to have visibility and a solid understanding of all Internet assets and their routing commands. When considering the global Internet, you must have the ability to view it, map it, and track it from multiple perspectives and vantage points. If this is not achieved, you could never be sure closing access in one area would not open access via another, nor could you be sure to maintain operations of those assets you wish not to impact.

 2) Overcome the size and scale of the countries Internet presence – (ASN’s in the US 16,000 in Egypt 96) When one considers the difference in scale of ownership and governance between the US government infrastructure and these other countries, it is hard to infer that the US government could induce a blackout to the same effect as these other cases.

3) Own the ability to take action – An effective surgical response requires sensing and validating the cyber-emergency from multiple sources, sharing the appropriate notice and responsibility with critical infrastructure partners and relevant agencies, and managing a distributed means to synchronize, execute, and monitor the shut down activity.

Until these challenges are overcome, a technical solution will be out of reach – even if a political solution is enacted.

Article from:

http://www.securityweek.com/internet-kill-switch-technically-feasible-us

Response By CompEngFriend

 1) critical infrastructure such as power generation and/or grid control, hospitals, traffic control systems, banking, etc. ARE NOT connected to the open Internet — they are implemented using isolated control networks. If these networks are NOT isolated, they definitely should be as a matter of standard, safe engineering practices. Any owners of critical infrastructure that is connected to the open internet should be fined or otherwise penalized.

2) The Suxnet worm gained access to the industrial control systems it infected via physical access to a computer system connected to the isolated control network. The worm was placed on a usb thumb drive that was physically inserted into a PC.

As you can see, there is no practical reason for a “Internet kill switch” to protect the “critical infrastructure” of the United States. The only reason to have an Internet kill switch is to limit the ability for the population to use the Internet as a communication media that is not controlled by the government.

The Internet is the most important, powerful, OPEN invention (since the printing press) for the dissemination of free speech and information. This is why the government wants to kill this technology!

Kids to Meet Marx in School – Care of Hollywood and The History Channel
Written by Patrick Courrielche

Children are uniquely malleable beings, readily convinced of magically colorful tales – Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are the first that come to mind. This innocence is beautiful, but it is a quality that can easily fall victim to radically foreign ideas if taught consistently and pervasively at an early age. One need only look at the birth of fascism or socialism to see a recipe for how radical ideas become ubiquitous among a nation’s youth.

Enter Howard Zinn – an author, professor and American historian – who, with the help of Hollywood and the History Channel, intends to change the way our pre-K through high school children learn American history. His current curriculum suggestions, like introducing three-year-olds to the lynching of African-Americans, or quizzing seven-year-olds on which Presidents owned slaves, should be a red flag to parents.

Zinn has spent a lifetime teaching college students about the evils of capitalism, the promise of Marxism, and his version of American history – a history that has, in his view, been kept from students. His controversial 1980-book The People’s History of the United States paints traditional American history as a façade – one that has grotesquely immortalized flawed leaders and is based on principles that victimize the common man. In 2004, Zinn wrote a companion book entitled Voices Of A People’s History Of The United States, which includes speeches and writings from many of the people featured in The People’s History.

These two books have now become the basis for a new documentary, entitled The People Speak, to be aired December 13th at 8pm on the History Channel. The trailer portrays the documentary as a collage of compelling one-person readings, told through the words of “ordinary” people who have struggled throughout American history against oppression. Produced by Zinn, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin, and Chris Moore, the documentary appears to be cloaked, ironically (given Zinn’s admitted socialist agenda), in many of the traditional ideas that were behind our founding. The verdict is still out on the doc, but it is not for the books that inspired the film as well as the educational initiative associated with it.

For the rest of the story please go here:

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/12/07/next-week-on-the-history-channel-hollywood-stars-introduce-your-kids-to-marxism/

Face Forward Comments:

I saw some of the material that is going to be used for this, Documentary.  It is a very one sided presentation that continues the attack on the heart of the nation.  It promotes racial division, and supports the belief held by this administration that we are an arrogant people and should pay for it.

Unless you want your child feeling guilty about something they had nothing to do with, wish for them to be a Marxist, or really think that history needs to be rewritten, I suggest you skip out on this family entertainment.

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

They’re not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.

“I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. “It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.”

Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller’s aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.html

Face Fwd Comments:

I hate being right all of the time…..See previous rant of mine.  “I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness,”  Vagueness is a tool of the liberals and enemy of freedom.  While I don’t have time to explain what a false flag is…….you need to understand what could happen using a false flag and how dangerous government control is becoming.

Once again, let your government representatives know that you will not allow this administration to control the media outlets.   The Internet has become the only platform where ordinary citizens can reach a mass audience.  It is the one place left where an individual can know they are not alone in the fight for truth.

The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama’s health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot — particularly in light of ABC’s health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.

The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.

To read the rest of the story please go here:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/27/abc-nbc-refuse-air-advertisement-critical-obamas-health-care-plan/

Face Fwd Comments:

I bet Walt Disney is rolling over in his grave or a least his animatronic body is.  Of course the media is in Obama’s pocket or they wouldn’t be treating the greatest american grass roots movement since the Viet Nam War protest (the Tea Parties), with all of the disdain that they have shown.  I understand NBC’s push……they have a huge investment with the GE Medical Division and of course their wind turbine division.  So they have to support the Obama administration to make sure their companies will make money. Some might say that in some perverted sort of way they would be practicing capitalism.  Actually, it is much closer to socialism where the line between the business practice and the government policy becomes blurred.  And in GM’s case completely erased.  Oh and by the way, wouldn’t all of the GM workers now be considered government workers?

Back to the networks…..I understand the NBC/GE connection and begrudgingly marvel, respect, and  admire how they have managed to get a complete integration between what they produce and the government’s policies.  ABC is the one I struggle with.  A government takeover of Disney Land?  More than likely not.  What I suspect is that Disney has been loosing money for years and was near the end of their ability to restructure their debt.  I believe that the Obama administration arranged for either a huge amount of their debt to be forgiven or at the very least, terms created that would be very favorable to ensure a profitable Disney corp.  You might say, Mickey sold his soul  to remain relevant.

The Obama administration now has three very strong government controlled media sources.  Viacom, GE/NBC and ABC/Disney are all producing pro Obama/socialist pieces and anti conservative thought pieces.  Not only do they control a majority of the televised broadcast media but they are also trying to shut down any voice of opposition.  With the war on talk radio being launched against Glenn Beck, the push to control radio programming and the first steps towards political censorship on the Internet, this administration waging a war on free thought. 

I am very disturbed by the American Media being turned against the people and you should be as well.  You need to contact your senator and represenative and let them know you want the media in the US to ran by people in the broadcast business not government.  If we do not act now, our children will grow up with their minds filled with government propaganda.  We need to return to a free press in this country.  The question I am asking myself and you should be as well is, “How do we do it”?