3 ms·
> Because it takes 1 person, in an isolated spot to ruin a whole chunk of a network. If that were true, we’d see a lot more sabotage.
by lxgr 2y ago
> Because it takes 1 person, in an isolated spot to ruin a whole chunk of a network.
If that were true, we’d see a lot more sabotage.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> If that were true, we’d see a lot more sabotage It is true. There is a lot of critical infrastructure out in the open that a dude with a pick-up truck of fertiliser could trash. (I'm not even getting to our electrical or natural gas distribution systems.)
- lxgr 2y agoI don't doubt that for critical infrastructure in general, but telecommunication infrastructure in particular seems redundant enough to be resilient against physical layer attacks of that kind. The last mile usually isn't, but recent events have shown that even cutting several cables doesn't have any noticeable impact on international traffic patterns: https://blog.cloudflare.com/resilient-internet-connectivity-baltic-cable-cuts/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/resilient-internet-connectivity-... I'm actually much more concerned about e.g. a logical attack against Cloudflare, which could actually bring down tons of services globally.
- XorNot 2y agoI mean shooting electricity transformers turns out to be pretty viable, it's just got the basic problem of (1) you probably need that electricity yourself and (2) while it might be hard to prevent, catching the guys who did it is a lot easier and no one wants to do 12+ months in prison.
- dole 2y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalf_sniper_attack https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalf_sniper_attack it’s been 10 years, and you think it’d be easier to catch someone in manhattan in this day and age but things fall through the cracks. I hope satellite surveillance advances to protect infrastructure assets but there’s really only so much unknown you can protect yourself from.