Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Majority of Americans Support “Internet Kill Switch”
Geekosystem ^ | 10/27/10 | Robert Quigley

Posted on 10/28/2010 7:30:52 AM PDT by MissTed

This is why many major policy decisions should not be made by a populace which, while well-meaning, is ignorant of the basic issues, or by the publicity-seeking politicians who pander to them.

Sixty-one percent of Americans said the President should have the ability to shut down portions of the Internet in the event of a coordinated malicious cyber attack, according to research by Unisys.

“A majority of the American population is willing to grant the President the authority to cut short their Internet access to protect both U.S. assets and citizens, suggesting that the public is taking cyber warfare very seriously,” said Patricia Titus, VP and CISO, Unisys. “Our survey shows that the American public recognizes the danger of a cyber attack and wants the federal government to take an active role in extending the nation’s cyber defense. It will be up to officials in all branches of the federal government to respond to this call to action in a way that is measured and well planned.”

Now, Unisys is in the business of helping “governments around the world” “solve their business problems through systems that optimize the organization and secure the enterprise,” so it’s probably not too surprising that they’d interpret their own poll in a way so conveniently helpful to their core business. The way Unisys phrased the question makes it appear that there was at least some mild push polling at work; however, the “Internet kill switch” is a policy proposal that we have to take and address seriously, if only because many U.S. politicians continue to seriously consider it.

As we’ve written in the past: While proposed in the name of national security, an Internet kill switch would make the Internet more vulnerable, not less, in addition to raising major questions about potential government abuse. In the words of Robert Schneier:

Computer and network security is hard, and every Internet system we’ve ever created has security vulnerabilities. It would be folly to think this one wouldn’t as well. And given how unlikely the risk is, any actual shutdown would be far more likely to be a result of an unfortunate error or a malicious hacker than of a presidential order.

But the main problem with an Internet kill switch is that it’s too coarse a hammer.

Yes, the bad guys use the Internet to communicate, and they can use it to attack us. But the good guys use it, too, and the good guys far outnumber the bad guys.

Shutting the Internet down, either the whole thing or just a part of it, even in the face of a foreign military attack would do far more damage than it could possibly prevent. And it would hurt others whom we don’t want to hurt.


TOPICS: Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: obamunism; polls; privacyrights; unisys
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
I wouldn't want the President to have access to my television remote. 61%??? Really???
1 posted on 10/28/2010 7:30:55 AM PDT by MissTed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MissTed

Has Julian Asange of Wikileaks weighed in on this?


2 posted on 10/28/2010 7:33:17 AM PDT by sarasota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed
You should have read the whole article.

"Now, Unisys is in the business of helping “governments around the world” “solve their business problems through systems that optimize the organization and secure the enterprise,” so it’s probably not too surprising that they’d interpret their own poll in a way so conveniently helpful to their core business. The way Unisys phrased the question makes it appear that there was at least some mild push polling at work"


3 posted on 10/28/2010 7:35:47 AM PDT by Bigh4u2 (Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

In a real world, our president would be a natural-born American of American parents, proud of all legal citizens of the 57 United States of America, and with American interests at heart.


4 posted on 10/28/2010 7:35:57 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (Government does nothing as economically as the private sector. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed; rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

5 posted on 10/28/2010 7:36:52 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed
IF that is true, and I am by no means conceding that it is, then the "Majority of Americans" are idiotic sheep.
6 posted on 10/28/2010 7:38:11 AM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

Sadly, he isn’t. He ISN’T a natural-born citizen, he ISN’T proud of ALL our LEGAL citizens, and he DOESN’T have our country’s best interest at heart. He’d use the ‘kill switch’ to destroy freedom of speech and shut down patriotic American’s voices through sites LIKE FREE REPUBLIC .

Oh...and there are only 50 states, no matter we he says.


7 posted on 10/28/2010 7:41:39 AM PDT by hoagy62 (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

Have they been testing the kill switch on FReeRepublic last week????


8 posted on 10/28/2010 7:45:29 AM PDT by GitmoSailor (AZ Cold War Veteran -Will the NOV election only be LOST under MARTIAL LAW?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

I’d say these are the same Americans who aren’t opposed to net neutrality.


9 posted on 10/28/2010 7:55:48 AM PDT by BigSkyFreeper (In 2012: The Rookie and The Wookie get booted from the White House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

Let’s re-phrrase that question

Would the majority of liberals be OK with President Sarah Palin having an internet kill switch?


10 posted on 10/28/2010 8:01:00 AM PDT by silverleaf ("This is not an election on November 2 . This is a restraining order" P.J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed
Rule 1: Yes, national security is important, and I WOULD be willing to give up email and the web if it were the only way to foil a truly foreign invader.

Rule 2: In order for Rule 1 to kick in, I would have to KNOW, not simply be assured by the government, that it was in fact necessary and not simply a power play by a government bent on dominating their erstwhile masters and taking away any means they might have to defend themselves against that domination.

I can't imagine the circumstances under which rule 2 could EVER be satisfied.

11 posted on 10/28/2010 8:03:25 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
I can't imagine the circumstances under which rule 2 could EVER be satisfied.

Foreign nukes falling from the sky would satisfy me for rule #2, but I can't imagine it mattering after that.

/johnny

12 posted on 10/28/2010 8:09:39 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

My crystal ball says that there will be a devastating cyber attack on the US october 2012, that will cause the internet to be closed down, except for financial institutions and military for a 2 month period.


13 posted on 10/28/2010 8:13:21 AM PDT by esoxmagnum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

The first sentence says it all.


14 posted on 10/28/2010 8:18:37 AM PDT by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

too many ignorant people


15 posted on 10/28/2010 9:23:32 AM PDT by tutstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GitmoSailor
Have they been testing the kill switch on FReeRepublic last week????

No. Probably just testing out their election-day denial of service attacks against FR. 

16 posted on 10/28/2010 9:40:33 AM PDT by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

I’ll bet the poll results would be different AFTER peoples’ online apps and social networks and email “freeze” for a couple of days.


17 posted on 10/28/2010 10:27:51 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (The establishment clause isn't just against my OWN government establishing state religion in America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

This’d be the kill switch for the Internet that has been built out of a design that owes its existence to a DARPA project that was set up to create redundant paths of communication between sites, so that even in the event of global thermonuclear war taking out 40% of the continental United States infastructure, telecoms traffic would just route its way around the missing bits.

And now with over 135,000 routers on the American internet backbone, not all of them under government control, AND failover / load balanced systems, and multilayered hardware (not to mention bespoke firmware stripping out default admin accounts and so on, on-demand manual dialup connections, redundant microwave links, fiber-optic links through Faraday cages to mitigate EMP damage, and so on), people actually think that such a thing as a kill switch is even viable?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Sounds like something Gene Roddenberry might’ve jotted down on his “Things to get Commander Data to do” list. But I guess he must’ve crossed it out on account of the Holodeck being more believable.

Mockery aside, even if you could script something to bomb out all those routers, it’d take time for the signal to propagate. Long enough for any sensible geek to pull the plug out and figure out a way round the problem.


18 posted on 10/28/2010 11:02:44 AM PDT by MalPearce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissTed

I’ve read the legislation, and I still can’t find the “kill switch” part of it. If someone can, please tell me where it is.


19 posted on 10/28/2010 1:26:46 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper
Foreign nukes falling from the sky would satisfy me for rule #2

When nukes are falling, how do you know if they're foreign?

20 posted on 10/28/2010 4:41:07 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (You shall know the truth, and it shall piss you off mightily)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson