14 ms·

That's part of the reason for the Utah datacenter. Consolidating several NSA datacenters around the country into one super-secure fortress. First, separate off

by dm2 13y ago

That's part of the reason for the Utah datacenter. Consolidating several NSA datacenters around the country into one super-secure fortress. First, separate offline networks and the most advanced network security ever conceived will be put in place at this new datacenter. If you're thinking that a reverse engineered Stuxnet might be able to hop over to the secure network, I doubt it, and even if it does then what will it do to transmit the data out? It is slightly insulting to the engineers and security experts whose full-time job is to keep the NSA secure, but I suppose this scenario is worth discussing just in-case someone thinks of a clever way which the NSA has not. The most vulnerable aspect is any remote access either to company servers or to the NSA search tools. I would hope that a data dump or unrestricted access to the NSAs "database" would be completely impossible. Even with extensive insider knowledge of the Utah datacenters systems, an ex-employee would have zero chance of gaining unauthorized access.

nolok 13y ago
"No worry, it's impossible to break/hack/destroy/do !" is the start of so many disasters. Especially funny (in a way) at a time where leaks of secret/classified data and informations is becoming endemic.
- dm2 13y ago
  Whistle-blowing does not equal hacking.
  - nolok 13y ago
    Yes, but it still means the data finds a way out.
    - dm2 13y ago
      The leaked materials were not solely housed at an NSA datacenter.
      - nolok 13y ago
        Yes, and water is wet, that doesn't change anything to my two previous messages.
  - rmc 13y ago
    You can whistle blow a lot now-a-days...
    - dm2 13y ago
      Maybe at a private company, but it is not wise to disclose classified information about the US government if you are or were employed by them.
rmc 13y ago
Yeah and the Titanic was too big to sink. Humanity can often get it wrong.
mikeash 13y ago
Insulting? Really? It's a truism in computing that the only really secure computer is one that has been disconnected from the network, turned off, encased in solid concrete, and sunk to the bottom of the ocean. Even then, better hope James Cameron doesn't want what's inside. I'm sure NSA's security people are aware of this. If they are not, then they're not very good at their job.
- dm2 13y ago
  Why doesn't simply being disconnected from the internet and located in the middle of nowhere Utah locked in a super-secure fortress with the best network engineers, computer experts, and cryptologists suffice? And yes, it is insulting. The NSA has been at the forefront of encryption and network security for the past 60 years. Am I giving the NSA too much undeserved credit?
  - narcissus 13y ago
    If it's disconnected from the internet, how is it going to get any new data? If there's a way for it to get new data, then, well... isn't that exactly how Stuxnet happened?
    - dm2 13y ago
      An intermediary system. Sure, there will be internet access at the Utah facility, but the networks will be separated. Stuxnet was physically delivered on a USB drive. Stuxnet didn't have the requirement of sending back massive amounts of data (or any really).
      - narcissus 13y ago
        That's a good point. Having said that, I guess it just comes back to the fact that the intermediary is the real target then. So we hope the NSA has had it's crack team in there. Which means that we hope that it's disconnected etc. as well... I mean, at some point there needs to a source that is connected to the internet and I guess that source is the real target.
cmiles74 13y ago
This isn't a blockbuster action film, it's a data center. I think this sort of thing is interesting but I write software. I wouldn't bet any amount of money that everyone along the PRISM chain of decision making is as impressed with the idea of a super-fortress data center. Corners get cut, work is pushed towards those with connections instead of the ones who can best do the job. Compromises are made, money goes here instead of there. I find the idea of a super-fortress of data a bit far-fetched to begin with, that such a place would be goverment run seems even more ridiculous.
- dm2 13y ago
  The Utah data center is more of a consolidating effort than some new spy program. It's suppose to save money and increase security (and storage ability). The NSA has computer security technology that the public and other government do not. They also have an unfathomable amount of processing power without the Utah data center (Tordella). What congress in their right mind would slash the NSAs budget and put the entire nation at risk? Also, it isn't a set fact of life that all government agencies / programs are inefficient and incompetent.
greedo 13y ago
No, the most vulnerable aspect is almost always users. Human, fallible, greedy, lazy, sloppy, mismanaged users.

by dm2 13y ago

nolok 13y ago

"No worry, it's impossible to break/hack/destroy/do !" is the start of so many disasters. Especially funny (in a way) at a time where leaks of secret/classified data and informations is becoming endemic.

dm2 13y ago
Whistle-blowing does not equal hacking.
- nolok 13y ago
  Yes, but it still means the data finds a way out.
  - dm2 13y ago
    The leaked materials were not solely housed at an NSA datacenter.
    - nolok 13y ago
      Yes, and water is wet, that doesn't change anything to my two previous messages.
- rmc 13y ago
  You can whistle blow a lot now-a-days...
  - dm2 13y ago
    Maybe at a private company, but it is not wise to disclose classified information about the US government if you are or were employed by them.

rmc 13y ago

Yeah and the Titanic was too big to sink. Humanity can often get it wrong.

mikeash 13y ago

Insulting? Really? It's a truism in computing that the only really secure computer is one that has been disconnected from the network, turned off, encased in solid concrete, and sunk to the bottom of the ocean. Even then, better hope James Cameron doesn't want what's inside. I'm sure NSA's security people are aware of this. If they are not, then they're not very good at their job.

dm2 13y ago
Why doesn't simply being disconnected from the internet and located in the middle of nowhere Utah locked in a super-secure fortress with the best network engineers, computer experts, and cryptologists suffice? And yes, it is insulting. The NSA has been at the forefront of encryption and network security for the past 60 years. Am I giving the NSA too much undeserved credit?
- narcissus 13y ago
  If it's disconnected from the internet, how is it going to get any new data? If there's a way for it to get new data, then, well... isn't that exactly how Stuxnet happened?
  - dm2 13y ago
    An intermediary system. Sure, there will be internet access at the Utah facility, but the networks will be separated. Stuxnet was physically delivered on a USB drive. Stuxnet didn't have the requirement of sending back massive amounts of data (or any really).
    - narcissus 13y ago
      That's a good point. Having said that, I guess it just comes back to the fact that the intermediary is the real target then. So we hope the NSA has had it's crack team in there. Which means that we hope that it's disconnected etc. as well... I mean, at some point there needs to a source that is connected to the internet and I guess that source is the real target.

cmiles74 13y ago

This isn't a blockbuster action film, it's a data center. I think this sort of thing is interesting but I write software. I wouldn't bet any amount of money that everyone along the PRISM chain of decision making is as impressed with the idea of a super-fortress data center. Corners get cut, work is pushed towards those with connections instead of the ones who can best do the job. Compromises are made, money goes here instead of there. I find the idea of a super-fortress of data a bit far-fetched to begin with, that such a place would be goverment run seems even more ridiculous.

dm2 13y ago
The Utah data center is more of a consolidating effort than some new spy program. It's suppose to save money and increase security (and storage ability). The NSA has computer security technology that the public and other government do not. They also have an unfathomable amount of processing power without the Utah data center (Tordella). What congress in their right mind would slash the NSAs budget and put the entire nation at risk? Also, it isn't a set fact of life that all government agencies / programs are inefficient and incompetent.

greedo 13y ago

No, the most vulnerable aspect is almost always users. Human, fallible, greedy, lazy, sloppy, mismanaged users.