dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
560

Noah Vail
Oh God please no.
Premium Member
join:2004-12-10
SouthAmerica

Noah Vail

Premium Member

Air Force blocks NY Times and Guardian over WikiLeaks

said by UK Reuters :

WASHINGTON | Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:42pm GMT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force has blocked access for computers on its network to The New York Times (NYT.N), the Guardian, and at least 23 other websites carrying WikiLeaks documents, a spokesman said on Tuesday.

Major Toni Tones, a spokesperson at Air Force Space Command in Colorado, said the command blocked at least 25 websites that have posted WikiLeaks documents.

The Air Force "routinely blocks Air Force network access to websites hosting inappropriate materials or malware (malicious software) and this includes any website that hosts classified materials and those that are released by WikiLeaks," she said.

Submitted w/o comment.

at least for now

NV

jvmorris
I Am The Man Who Was Not There.
MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA

jvmorris

MVM

Which, of course, brings us to the following article in Air Force Times, »www.airforcetimes.com/ne ··· -121410/

Noah Vail
Oh God please no.
Premium Member
join:2004-12-10
SouthAmerica

Noah Vail

Premium Member

said by jvmorris:

Which, of course, brings us to the following article in Air Force Times, »www.airforcetimes.com/ne ··· -121410/

That was a good article.

The military is slowly embracing Internet Sabotage. They're still doing baby steps, but you can tell they're really diggin' the idea of it.

NV
DufiefData
join:2006-06-13
Gaithersburg, MD

DufiefData to Noah Vail

Member

to Noah Vail
Actually from what I understand the policy isn't exactly crazy. The problem is that the outward-facing computers are supposed to remain eternally sanitized from any classified info, otherwise they're considered "polluted" and the security policies either have to be implemented or they break down.

If the docs had been properly declassified this would probably be different.

I guess the AF just wasn't planning for the day when open websites would be posting classified info all over the place. They probably figured their security policies would prevent that.... :-p

Noah Vail
Oh God please no.
Premium Member
join:2004-12-10
SouthAmerica

Noah Vail

Premium Member

said by DufiefData:

If the docs had been properly declassified this would probably be different.

Agreed. Properly secured or properly declassified.
said by DufiefData:

I guess the AF just wasn't planning for the day when open websites would be posting classified info all over the place.

Is anybody wondering what the AF was doing with gigabytes of classified State Dept data?

All the bits and pieces I read keep leading me to the same few conclusions. First is that this wasn't ever an AF problem, it was a DHS problem. DHS's fault really, end to end.

Post Sept 11, there was a hot and heavy push to make inter-agency data become available; intra-agency. DHS was made benevolent dictator over several 3-letter bureaus; and forced them to play nice together.

Must have been a heck of a time.

Problem is that once secure data was diversified, the train went off the rails. I bet there were a hundred agency people who were having conniptions over the abandonment of established practices. I also bet no one was listening to them.

I'll thirdly bet that the first major leak we heard of isn't the first one that happened.

I believe much, if most of the leaked data shouldn't have been classified.
That aside, data that is classified needs to be housed in a properly tiered security structure. From what I see, DHS blew it in every possible way.

NV

rcdailey
Dragoonfly
Premium Member
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA

rcdailey

Premium Member

USAF did want to be the agency in charge of cyberwarfare for the entire DoD, but that was not approved. So, they are just part of the structure, though I am sure that USAF wants to be the largest part.