National Infrastructure Protection Center
After Scott Larson was so kind to come the the Dearborn NANOG and tells us all about the FBI's new cyber-security program, has anyone bothered to call the NIPC about any of these events? http://www.nipc.gov/ I leave it as an exrcise for the reader to try to figure out the correct phone number to call. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation
On Mon, 16 Nov 1998, Sean Donelan wrote:
After Scott Larson was so kind to come the the Dearborn NANOG and tells us all about the FBI's new cyber-security program, has anyone bothered to call the NIPC about any of these events?
Keep in minds that our friends at the FBI would love nothing more than to have wiretaps on everything conceivable. "Threat assessment" by the USG sounds like "numbers to point to to enact new legislation." /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell (800) 299-1288 v CTO (925) 377-1212 v NameSecure (925) 377-1414 f Coming to the ISPF-II? The Forum for ISPs by ISPs http://www.ispf.com \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
We've just gotten refered to the local FBI office when we had a problem. (Which of course doesn't have any computer people at it.) When the problem was traced in another provider in State it got dumped to the local policy computer crimes unit, however the "unit" was on vacation that week. (Packets went through MAE-West, but I guess that doesn't count.) Despite the fact that we've assisted the local office on a number of occasions (tracing forged email, etc.), there isn't any real interested unless you have large amounts of damage, i.e. $100,000+. In message <981116171257.1a434@SDG.DRA.COM>, Sean Donelan writes:
After Scott Larson was so kind to come the the Dearborn NANOG and tells us all about the FBI's new cyber-security program, has anyone bothered to call the NIPC about any of these events?
I leave it as an exrcise for the reader to try to figure out the correct phone number to call. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation
--- Jeremy Porter, Freeside Communications, Inc. jerry@fc.net PO BOX 80315 Austin, Tx 78708 | 512-458-9810 http://www.fc.net
Unnamed Administration sources reported that Jeremy Porter said:
Despite the fact that we've assisted the local office on a number of occasions (tracing forged email, etc.), there isn't any real interested unless you have large amounts of damage, i.e. $100,000+.
And that fact [that I know to be true...] ought to be of interest to any one of a number of print journalists. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
[ On Tue, November 17, 1998 at 14:29:25 (-0500), David Lesher wrote: ]
Subject: Re: National Infrastructure Protection Center
Unnamed Administration sources reported that Jeremy Porter said:
Despite the fact that we've assisted the local office on a number of occasions (tracing forged email, etc.), there isn't any real interested unless you have large amounts of damage, i.e. $100,000+.
Same thing seems to be true here in Canada w.r.t. the ability of an incident to capture the attention of the RCMP, though of course there are always "exceptions".
And that fact [that I know to be true...] ought to be of interest to any one of a number of print journalists.
Hmmm.... I don't know. It's all about risk assesment.... The RCMP or FBI or whomever don't want to know about kids stealing candy down at the local corner store. Perhaps similar responses are necessary (eg. give a good talking to the guardians or other responsible parties associated with the perpetrators of such inconsequential attacks). Unfortunately due to the international nature of the Internet I'm not sure such peer pressure tactics will work quite so well with parents or whomever, assuming you can even track them down. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
And that fact [that I know to be true...] ought to be of interest to any one of a number of print journalists.
Hmmm.... I don't know. It's all about risk assesment.... The RCMP or FBI or whomever don't want to know about kids stealing candy down at the local corner store. Perhaps similar responses are necessary (eg. give a
Maybe, but then: "They are attacking my firewall with packets full of kiddyporn" ought to work... Only half ;-\ -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
David Lesher wrote:
Maybe, but then:
"They are attacking my firewall with packets full of kiddyporn"
ought to work...
Only half ;-\
<this getting off topic> You could be accused of receiving kiddie porn. The law in the US, AS ENFORCED, does not consider whether you actually solicited it or not. OTOH, it's not enforced very much. CLEOs tend to spend more time at Congressional hearings asking to have cushier jobs. One wonders why they bust a big international trading ring, but the flow on USENET continues. </this getting off topic> -- -- *-----------------------------* Phil Howard KA9WGN * -- -- | Inturnet, Inc. | Director of Internet Services | -- -- | Business Internet Solutions | eng at intur.net | -- -- *-----------------------------* philh at intur.net * --
participants (6)
-
David Lesher -
Jeremy Porter -
Patrick Greenwell -
Phil Howard -
Sean Donelan -
woods＠most.weird.com