North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: Vulnerbilities of Interconnection
- From: sgorman1
- Date: Thu Sep 05 18:35:38 2002
I believe we are talking about two different perspectives here
operational and end user. The concern I have is with the ability of
sectors dependent on information infrastructure to operate if there
are problems. What web-site is abvailable to the end user is not the
value judgement but if NASDAQ can facilitate stock trades, if banks
can clear settlements, etc.
It does get a little fuzzy in what you consider Internet and what you
consider private networks. From a physical perspective they all use a
common fiber infrastructure - it all runs in the same trench - so in
some terms it does not matter. There has been quite a bit of
discussion about physical downage being an inconveniance, and if you
limit yourself to just the Internet (web sites, email, porn, etc) this
is a valid statement. Where this goes off track is that the Internet
is only part of the equation - the operation of several critical
infrastructures is dependent on fiber based communications. A cut is
a cut - it does discriminate against private networks, security
protocols, encryption or anything else. A leased line does not mean
you get a special ditch.
----- Original Message -----
From: batz <email@example.com>
Date: Thursday, September 5, 2002 7:41 pm
Subject: Re: Vulnerbilities of Interconnection
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> :The question is what if someone was gunning for your fiber. To
> :cuts have been unintentional. Obviously the risk level is much
> :doing a phyisical attack, but the bad guys in this scenario are
> :teenage hackers in the parents basement.
> This happened recently in Quebec where there is a labour
> dispute with Videotron and one of the unions representing its
> The dispute has been exaserbated by the sabotage of the companies
> Now, while this may affect Videotrons bottom line, it only becomes
> critical infrastructure issue when it becomes a Hydro Quebec
> or it interferes with the provinces ability to deliver services.
> Honestly, if a few million people can't get their porn streams, the
> world isn't going to end. If 911 operators, or ambulance services
> can't direct emergency crews for 10 people, then you have a serious
> :There is a good foundation of knowledge on the implications of
> :attacks, but the what-if of an intentional physical attack is an
> :important question I believe. The context in this discussion has
> :very valuable and many thanks to everyone that has offered opinions.
> The What-If questions have to be sorted from a particular view, and
> it will be the legislators view which will ultimately matter. You
> can bluesky, whiteboard, game and scheme all you like, but there are
> only a few opinions that matter when it comes to deciding what
> is of importance to national security, and until we hear from
> we can be as paranoid and imaginative as we want, and it won't help
> the infrastructure become more secure.
> So, as for Nasdaq, vs Google, vs the GSA vs Agriculture vs CNN,
> until we have the correct order in which to place these entities,
> we can't provide a useful or accurate model of how vulnerable the
> infrastructure is.
> You mentioned that you thought Nasdaq would be the most important
> asset to protect, but what happens if some Internet
> traders on AOL can't make their trades because of a fiber cut, vs
> not being able to get their infotainment from CNN, vs weather
> and crop data data not getting to farmers on time. It's a relative
> and ultimately political discussion.