Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter or in some locations summer solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all. I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2018, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.
27 September 2017 | Huawei’s data center business has grown rapidly worldwide, but it has so far been unable to penetrate North America. Technology business unit leaders responsible for data center business should use this note to decide how to compete or partner with Huawei….
Gartner clients can access this research by clicking here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/05/us_watchdog_anthem_audits/ By Shaun Nichols The Register 5 Mar 2015 A year or so before American health insurer Anthem admitted it had been ruthlessly ransacked by hackers, a US federal watchdog had offered to audit the giant’s computer security – but was rebuffed. And, after miscreants looted Anthem’s servers and accessed up to 88.8 million private records, the watchdog again offered to audit the insurer’s systems, and was again turned away. “We do not know why Anthem refuses to cooperate,” government officials told The Register today. The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) told us it wanted to audit Anthem’s information security protections back in 2013, but was snubbed by the insurer. According to the agency, Anthem participates in the US Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which requires regular audits from the OIG, audits that Anthem allegedly thwarted. Other health insurers submit to Uncle Sam’s audits “without incident,” we’re told. […]
http://www.wired.com/2015/03/clintons-email-server-vulnerable/ By ANDY GREENBERG SECURITY Wired.com 03.04.15 FOR A SECRETARY of state, running your own email server might be a clever—if controversial—way to keep your conversations hidden from journalists and their pesky Freedom of Information Act requests. But ask a few security experts, and the consensus is that it’s not a very smart way to keep those conversations hidden from hackers. On Monday, the New York Times revealed that former secretary of state and future presidential candidate Hillary Clinton used a private email account rather than her official State.gov email address while serving in the State Department. And this was no Gmail or Yahoo! Mail account: On Wednesday the AP reported that Clinton actually ran a private mail server in her home during her entire tenure leading the State Department, hosting her email at the domain Clintonemail.com. Much of the criticism of that in-house email strategy has centered on its violation of the federal government’s record-keeping and transparency rules. But as the controversy continues to swirl, the security community is focused on a different issue: the possibility that an unofficial, unprotected server held the communications of America’s top foreign affairs official for four years, leaving all of it potentially vulnerable to state-sponsored hackers. “Although the American people didn’t know about this, it’s almost certain that foreign intelligence agencies did, just as the NSA knows which Indian and Spanish officials use Gmail and Yahoo accounts,” says Chris Soghoian, the lead technologist for the American Civil Liberties Union. “She’s not the first official to use private email and not the last. But there are serious security issue associated with these kinds of services…When you build your house outside the security fence, you’re on your own, and that’s what seems to have happened here.” […]
http://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-prefix-cyber-overused-1425427767 By DANNY YADRON and JENNIFER VALENTINO-DEVRIES The Wall Street Journal March 4, 2015 These days, CyberPatriots go to CyberCamps. Washington wonks ponder a Cyber Red Cross. Last week, the Director of National Intelligence told Congress a “cyber Armageddon” is unlikely. This week, CBS Corp. will premiere the latest iteration of its long-running cops and crime franchise, “CSI: Cyber,” whose protagonist describes herself as cybercop and is based, the network says, on a real-life cyberpsychologist. For some, it is cyber-overload. Stop using the word,” Alex Stamos, the chief information security officer at Yahoo Inc. told a “Cybersecurity for a New America” conference in Washington last week. Earlier, Mr. Stamos quipped on Twitter that he had won “CyberBingo” at his table after a conference speaker warned of a “Cyber Pearl Harbor,” a term popularized by former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in 2012. Mr. Stamos isn’t brushing off computer intrusions in his quest to hack away at “cyber” usage. As the guy in charge of keeping prying eyes out of one of the world’s most popular websites, you could say he is obsessed with them. […]
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-silicon-valley-hackers-still-wont-work-with-the-military-and-vice-versa By Kari Paul Contributor Motherboard.vice.com February 26, 2015 In the fight to defend cyberspace from its enemies, the US military is rushing to hire as many skilled hackers as it can. But no one is really sure how to get the two cultures to coexist. Although the feds have implied they’re willing to loosen up some of their policies so that weed-smoking, basement-dwelling hacker stereotypes can work for government agencies, there are still some significant hurdles preventing the two industries from working together in earnest. At the first annual Future of War Conference on Wednesday, a panel of experts weighed in on the simmering Silicon Valley culture clash after an audience member asked why the US doesn’t just militarize Silicon Valley if private sector technology is so far ahead of the government’s own. “The real reason is DoD does not have a culture that would allow them in any way shape or form to manage a silicon valley operation,” said Brad Allenby, a faculty member at Arizona State University Center on the Future of War. “Someone high on coke, Skittles and slinging code is not a good candidate for basic training,” he later joked. Peter Singer, a strategist and senior fellow at the think tank New America Foundation, said the chasm between the private tech sector and the government is only widening—a trend that will have big implications for the “extraordinarily difficult” technological components of future war. […]
http://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2015/02/cyber-collaboration-government-still-work-progress/106071/ By Hallie Golden Nextgov.com Feb 25, 2015 Amid the onslaught of cyberthreats faced by federal agencies, the potential for an even larger and more sustained catastrophic version of a digital attack has become an increasingly real possibility. If such a scenario were to took take place, the Defense Department would certainly play a lead role in the response. But it likely couldn’t do it alone, according to Lt. Gen. Edward Cardon, commanding general of the Army Cyber Command. “It’s not solely going to be a DOD problem,” he said this week at a New America Foundation event on cybersecurity. Despite the fact that his organization increased exponentially in a year
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/americas-cyber-espionage-project-isnt-defense-waging-war By Kevin Poulsen Threat Level Wired.com 02.18.15 “What we really need is a Manhattan Project for cybersecurity.” It’s a sentiment that swells up every few years in the wake of some huge computer intrusion—most recently the Sony and Anthem hacks. The invocation of the legendary program that spawned the atomic bomb is telling. The Manhattan Project is America’s go-to shorthand for our deep conviction that if we gather the smartest scientists together and give them billions of dollars and a sense of urgency, we can achieve what otherwise would be impossible. A Google search on “cyber Manhattan Project” brings up results from as far back as 1997—it’s second only to “electronic Pearl Harbor” in computer-themed World War II allusions. In a much-circulated post on Medium last month, futurist Marc Goodman sets out what such a project would accomplish. “This Manhattan Project would help generate the associated tools we need to protect ourselves, including more robust, secure, and privacy-enhanced operating systems,” Goodman writes. “Through its research, it would also design and produce software and hardware that were self-healing and vastly more resistant to attack and resilient to failure than anything available today.” These arguments have so far not swayed a sitting American president. Sure, President Obama mentioned cybersecurity at the State of the Union, but his proposal not only doesn’t boost security research and development, it potentially criminalizes it. At the White House’s cybersecurity summit last week, Obama told Silicon Valley bigwigs that he understood the hacking problem well—“We all know what we need to do. We have to build stronger defenses and disrupt more attacks”—but his prescription this time was a tepid executive order aimed at improving information sharing between the government and industry. Those hoping for something more Rooseveltian must have been disappointed. On Monday, we finally learned the truth of it. America already has a computer security Manhattan Project. We’ve had it since at least 2001. Like the original, it has been highly classified, spawned huge technological advances in secret, and drawn some of the best minds in the country. We didn’t recognize it before because the project is not aimed at defense, as advocates hoped. Instead, like the original, America’s cyber Manhattan Project is purely offensive. […]