Breaking News
Blog

Is White House Executive Order on Cybersecurity Enough?

Jim Deerman
11/19/2013 11:20 AM EST

 4 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
anon9303122
User Rank
Author
Re: a step
anon9303122   11/20/2013 11:43:40 AM
NO RATINGS
Let's hope they are better at network defense than they are at setting up health care websites.

cookiejar
User Rank
Author
Cybersecurity a joke
cookiejar   11/20/2013 11:43:20 AM
NO RATINGS

The whole cybersecurity issue is a bad joke. 

On the one hand, the government wants to keep data and infrastructure secure from hackers, be they employed by corporations or other governments or simply playing at home. 

On the other hand, the largest, most sophisticated hacker is the government itself who also insists on convenient back doors in all communication systems, ready for massive exploitation.  There are so many government employees and contractors that inevitably a significant number will go rouge.

You can't have your cake and eat it.  

It does not compute.



Charles.Desassure
User Rank
Author
We Call It Collaboration
Charles.Desassure   11/19/2013 1:26:28 PM
NO RATINGS
Thanks for this article.  Well, I have a lot to say on this topic, but since this is not a book novel.  I will try to keep it short.  We all know that cybersecurity is a major problem in this country and will continue to be a problem because the average American really do not know how to use technology effectively.  I wonder why many of these department leaders have not completed a management training course? Effective management is about vision.  You mean to tell me that the President of the US has to provide a White House Executive Order on Cybersecurity (WHEOC)  to tell departments that they need to work together to provide processes and solutions to address future attacks?  The problem is beyond cybersecruity, the problem appears to be department management.   The key to solving cybersecurity is working together... collaboration.

Caleb Kraft
User Rank
Author
a step
Caleb Kraft   11/19/2013 12:57:02 PM
NO RATINGS
Is it enough? who knows. It is surely a step in the right direction though. Sharing information has proven time and time again to be beneficial in terms of security.

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed