Go Back   Wireless and Wifi Forums > News > Newsgroups > alt.computer.security
Register FAQ Forum Rules Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Advertise Mark Forums Read

 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2010, 10:14 PM
Leroy N. Soetoro
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Uncle "Socialist" Sam Wants You to Have an Online ID

http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-...e-sam-wants-on
line-id/?cmpid=prn_baynote_Uncle_Sam_Wants_You_to_Have_an_ Online_ID&cmpid
=prn_baynote_Uncle_Sam_Wants_You_to_Have_an_Online _ID#content

As our daily interactions and transactions have become increasingly
“wired,” we have yet to see any truly comprehensive attempts at securing
online identities.

Our complex system of usernames and passwords is astoundingly outdated
and increasingly prone to security breaches and theft. Yet, so far it
has been mostly up to the individual to protect himself against various
forms of identity fraud—with larger corporations taking relatively
little responsibility.

But this could change in a big way. Right now the federal government is
proposing a new system being referred to as the “Identity
Ecosystem”—which was highlighted in the recently-released draft paper,
“National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace” [NSTIC].

The Identity Ecosystem would allow Americans to choose to obtain a
single authenticated ID for online transactions. Like a passport, this
single ID could travel with them online and be used to access everything
from e-mail, to online health records and banking information.
Furthermore, the Identity Ecosystem would only reveal the least amount
of information necessary for each transaction.

To highlight the potential consumer benefits of such a system, the White
House’s proposal uses the example of an individual filling a
prescription online. Under the “smart ID card,” the pharmacy would only
receive proof that the individual is over 18 and that the prescription
is valid. No other information like birth date or the reason for the
prescription.

Right now the only online ID management options available to consumers
are tools like OpenID and Microsoft’s U-Prove. While these systems work
across a variety of popular platforms such as Google (GOOG: 442.79
,+6.24 ,+1.43%), Yahoo (YHOO: 14.34 ,+0.27 ,+1.92%) and Blogger, they
are best used for cases of low-assurance clearance (i.e., personal
e-mail and social networking sites). So-called “high-assurance” sites,
like banking and health services, aren’t set up to support wide-access
systems; they present too much of a liability.

What’s important to note is that membership in the smart ID program
would be voluntary—both for consumers and companies. Individuals who
wanted to become members might apply for a smart identity card through
their state government. Because the program is voluntary, the government
is stressing the importance of consumer confidence, education and
usability.

It’s easy to see why consumers would benefit from an easy-to-use, secure
and universal system. What’s harder to understand is the overall impact
on e-commerce.

This program could eliminate the biggest obstacle to the e-commerce
industry: fear of identity theft and fraud, which could literally lead
to billions of dollars in new online spending. It could also jumpstart
health e-commerce, a market that has yet to take off because of serious
privacy and security risks.

But the costs associated with implementing such a system would likely be
enormous. The NSTIC has anticipated some kickback and will be offering
businesses incentives such as tax credits/breaks, insurance, grants and
loans for early adoption.

However, the question is: Are these incentives enough?

Although the NSTIC proposal is somewhat vague on this issue, the
government will have to be prepared to work with the hardware industry
in order to ensure that smart-card readers, scanners, etc. are
integrated with standard systems. Obviously, consumers that adopt such a
system with their existing hardware will need to somehow upgrade their
systems. It will certainly require a lot of negotiations within the
industry, as the government may run into disputes over patent ownership
between companies with conflicting interests. In order to integrate the
system into existing sites, companies will need to pour money and
resources into writing code to integrate an ecosystem with existing Web
assets. And it is tantamount to their task that Web developers avoid
security blunders in the process.

Consider how long it has taken us to get this far - and it’s easy to see
how challenging it will be to teach common users how to successfully
utilize an ecosystem that controls all of your online authentication
with various “user-controlled” settings.

Should this system be implemented, consumers must be prepared for a
“new” experience and accept that convenience over security can no longer
be their daily mantra.

Implementing such a comprehensive system will be tough—and requires
widespread and fairly immediate support. The government must be able to
win over consumers and businesses at the same time—or the Identity
Ecosystem is likely to become a chicken-egg problem—with consumers
unwilling to join a program that businesses aren’t a part of, and vice
versa.

Furthermore, many modern services are complex. Take for instance online
health: this would require the collaboration of doctors, hospitals,
insurance providers, pharmacies and individuals.

The bottom line here is that the White House’s proposal depends on
businesses voluntarily agreeing to turn the current e-commerce system
upside down, incur massive new costs and collaborate with competitors –
a dim possibility, to say the least.

Although the White House should be applauded for this idea, it is
doubtful that such a voluntary approach is likely to win over the big
companies who will end up footing the bill or passing it on to
consumers.

The private industry has been trying to enact this type of online
assurance model for some time now, and with little success. It is far
more likely that the White House will have to work with Congress to
legislate this type of a reform.

Comments:

sickofitinca
California
Another way for the Gov't to get larger and spy on CITIZENS!! What
fruitcake came up with this one? I agree with the person that suggested
we watch our Senators and Reps on-line activities. Then we can force
more resignations and save ourselves the duty of voting them out. Trust
those dopes to keep that stuff secret? Sorry, not me, I'll go to jail
first. They can't seem to find a way to get our gun rights repealed, so
they try something else as an end run. Hackers would have a field day
with this one. Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 9:23 AM

ohspareme

In NO way would I trust the Gov to handle something like this! Scary,
scary thought! Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 8:42 AM

doonboggle

1984 ... we are here ! Hail to the Master ! Sieg Heil !
Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 8:38 AM

charlietx

Can just see the headlines now - "Hackers Break National Idenity
Encryption in 36 Hours, 300 Million Identities For Sale". Give me a
break - this is just another empty promise. Sunday, July 04, 2010 at
7:55 AM

allanhunt

I believe many of our comments are being censured before getting through
to be censored.When I post a comment it posts differently.It does not
say out and out will not post.It only comes up "Thank you for
participating"and never posts.I have seen this a number of times.Do not
under any circumstance opt for an on line ID.We are being censored now
and have lost our freedom of speech. Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 6:25 AM



--
Nancy Pelosi, Democrat criminal, accessory before and after the fact, to
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York's
million dollar tax evasion. On February 25, 2010, the House ethics
committee has concluded that Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles
B. Rangel knowingly accepted Caribbean trips in violation of House rules
that forbid hidden financing by corporations. Democrat criminal Nancy
Pelosi is deliberately ignoring the million dollar tax evasion of
Democrat Charles Rangel.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to be forced to remove Charles B. Rangel
from the House Ways and Means Committee.

Felony President.

Obama violated the law by trying to buy Joe Sestak off with a political
appointment in exchange for not pursuing an election bid to replace
Arlen Specter. Obama violated the law by trying to buy former Colorado
House Speaker Andrew Romanoff off last fall to see if he'd be interested
in an administration job -- instead of running against Sen. Michael
Bennet.

18 USC, Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
activity

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position,
compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or
made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special
consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as
consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the
support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in
connection with any general or special election to any political office,
or in connection with any primary election or political convention or
caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 07-06-2010, 10:41 PM
Shall not be infringed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Uncle "Socialist" Sam Wants You to Have an Online ID

On Jul 6, 6:14*pm, "Leroy N. Soetoro" <leroysoet...@usurper.org>
wrote:
> http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-...uncle-sam-want...
> line-id/?cmpid=prn_baynote_Uncle_Sam_Wants_You_to_Have_an_ Online_ID&cmpid
> =prn_baynote_Uncle_Sam_Wants_You_to_Have_an_Online _ID#content
>
> As our daily interactions and transactions have become increasingly
> wired, we have yet to see any truly comprehensive attempts at securing
> online identities.
>
> Our complex system of usernames and passwords is astoundingly outdated
> and increasingly prone to security breaches and theft. Yet, so far it
> has been mostly up to the individual to protect himself against various
> forms of identity fraud with larger corporations taking relatively
> little responsibility.
>
> But this could change in a big way. Right now the federal government is
> proposing a new system being referred to as the Identity
> Ecosystem which was highlighted in the recently-released draft paper,
> National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace [NSTIC].
>
> The Identity Ecosystem would allow Americans to choose to obtain a
> single authenticated ID for online transactions. Like a passport, this
> single ID could travel with them online and be used to access everything
> from e-mail, to online health records and banking information.
> Furthermore, the Identity Ecosystem would only reveal the least amount
> of information necessary for each transaction.
>
> To highlight the potential consumer benefits of such a system, the White
> House s proposal uses the example of an individual filling a
> prescription online. Under the smart ID card, the pharmacy would only
> receive proof that the individual is over 18 and that the prescription
> is valid. No other information like birth date or the reason for the
> prescription.
>
> Right now the only online ID management options available to consumers
> are tools like OpenID and Microsoft s U-Prove. While these systems work
> across a variety of popular platforms such as Google (GOOG: 442.79
> ,+6.24 ,+1.43%), Yahoo (YHOO: 14.34 ,+0.27 ,+1.92%) and Blogger, they
> are best used for cases of low-assurance clearance (i.e., personal
> e-mail and social networking sites). So-called high-assurance sites,
> like banking and health services, aren t set up to support wide-access
> systems; they present too much of a liability.
>
> What s important to note is that membership in the smart ID program
> would be voluntary both for consumers and companies. Individuals who
> wanted to become members might apply for a smart identity card through
> their state government. Because the program is voluntary, the government
> is stressing the importance of consumer confidence, education and
> usability.
>
> It s easy to see why consumers would benefit from an easy-to-use, secure
> and universal system. What s harder to understand is the overall impact
> on e-commerce.
>
> This program could eliminate the biggest obstacle to the e-commerce
> industry: *fear of identity theft and fraud, which could literally lead
> to billions of dollars in new online spending. It could also jumpstart
> health e-commerce, a market that has yet to take off because of serious
> privacy and security risks.
>
> But the costs associated with implementing such a system would likely be
> enormous. The NSTIC has anticipated some kickback and will be offering
> businesses incentives such as tax credits/breaks, insurance, grants and
> loans for early adoption.
>
> However, the question is: Are these incentives enough?
>
> Although the NSTIC proposal is somewhat vague on this issue, the
> government will have to be prepared to work with the hardware industry
> in order to ensure that smart-card readers, scanners, etc. are
> integrated with standard systems. Obviously, consumers that adopt such a
> system with their existing hardware will need to somehow upgrade their
> systems. It will certainly require a lot of negotiations within the
> industry, as the government may run into disputes over patent ownership
> between companies with conflicting interests. In order to integrate the
> system into existing sites, companies will need to pour money and
> resources into writing code to integrate an ecosystem with existing Web
> assets. *And it is tantamount to their task that Web developers avoid
> security blunders in the process.
>
> Consider how long it has taken us to get this far - and it s easy to see
> how challenging it will be to teach common users how to successfully
> utilize an ecosystem that controls all of your online authentication
> with various user-controlled settings.
>
> Should this system be implemented, consumers must be prepared for a
> new experience and accept that convenience over security can no longer
> be their daily mantra.
>
> Implementing such a comprehensive system will be tough and requires
> widespread and fairly immediate support. The government must be able to
> win over consumers and businesses at the same time or the Identity
> Ecosystem is likely to become a chicken-egg problem with consumers
> unwilling to join a program that businesses aren t a part of, and vice
> versa.
>
> Furthermore, many modern services are complex. Take for instance online
> health: this would require the collaboration of doctors, hospitals,
> insurance providers, pharmacies and individuals.
>
> *The bottom line here is that the White House s proposal depends on
> *businesses voluntarily agreeing to turn the current e-commerce system
> *upside down, incur massive new costs and collaborate with competitors
> *a dim possibility, to say the least.
>
> Although the White House should be applauded for this idea, it is
> doubtful that such a voluntary approach is likely to win over the big
> companies who will end up footing the bill or passing it on to
> consumers.
>
> The private industry has been trying to enact this type of online
> assurance model for some time now, and with little success. It is far
> more likely that the White House will have to work with Congress to
> legislate this type of a reform.
>
> Comments:
>
> sickofitinca
> California
> Another way for the Gov't to get larger and spy on CITIZENS!! What
> fruitcake came up with this one? I agree with the person that suggested
> we watch our Senators and Reps on-line activities. Then we can force
> more resignations and save ourselves the duty of voting them out. Trust
> those dopes to keep that stuff secret? Sorry, not me, I'll go to jail
> first. They can't seem to find a way to get our gun rights repealed, so
> they try something else as an end run. Hackers would have a field day
> with this one. Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 9:23 AM
>
> ohspareme
>
> In NO way would I trust the Gov to handle something like this! Scary,
> scary thought! Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 8:42 AM
>
> doonboggle
>
> 1984 ... we are here ! Hail to the Master ! Sieg Heil !
> Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 8:38 AM
>
> charlietx
>
> Can just see the headlines now - "Hackers Break National Idenity
> Encryption in 36 Hours, 300 Million Identities For Sale". Give me a
> break - this is just another empty promise. Sunday, July 04, 2010 at
> 7:55 AM
>
> allanhunt
>
> I believe many of our comments are being censured before getting through
> to be censored.When I post a comment it posts differently.It does not
> say out and out will not post.It only comes up "Thank you for
> participating"and never posts.I have seen this a number of times.Do not
> under any circumstance opt for an on line ID.We are being censored now
> and have lost our freedom of speech. Sunday, July 04, 2010 at 6:25 AM
>
> --
> Nancy Pelosi, Democrat criminal, accessory before and after the fact, to
> House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York's
> million dollar tax evasion. *On February 25, 2010, the House ethics
> committee has concluded that Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles
> B. Rangel knowingly accepted Caribbean trips in violation of House rules
> that forbid hidden financing by corporations. *Democrat criminal Nancy
> Pelosi is deliberately ignoring the million dollar tax evasion of
> Democrat Charles Rangel.
>
> House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to be forced to remove Charles B. Rangel
> from the House Ways and Means Committee.
>
> Felony President.
>
> Obama violated the law by trying to buy Joe Sestak off with a political
> appointment in exchange for not pursuing an election bid to replace
> Arlen Specter. *Obama violated the law by trying to buy former Colorado
> House Speaker Andrew Romanoff off last fall to see if he'd be interested
> in an administration job -- instead of running against Sen. Michael
> Bennet.
>
> 18 USC, Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
> activity
>
> Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position,
> compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or
> made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special
> consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as
> consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the
> support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in
> connection with any general or special election to any political office,
> or in connection with any primary election or political convention or
> caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be
> fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
>
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net ---


Just how many mark of the beast's do we need? And we can't even get
our president to show his birth cert.

Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2010, 10:39 AM
nobody >
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Uncle "TeaBag" Leroy Wants You to Have No Braincells

On 7/6/2010 3:14 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:

"a bunch of Tea-bagger crap quoted off FauxNeawahs.."

Seriously..

Most of the Left Wing are loons.

Most of the Right Wing can't think for themselves.

The rest of us are basically ****ed; we can't get a word in edgewise.

"Leroy", if you don't like this, get a working brain that has a working
knowledge of how US politics works.



Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 07-07-2010, 06:30 PM
Strabo
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Uncle "TeaBag" Leroy Wants You to Have No Braincells

nobody > wrote:
> On 7/6/2010 3:14 PM, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:
>
> "a bunch of Tea-bagger crap quoted off FauxNeawahs.."
>
> Seriously..
>
> Most of the Left Wing are loons.
>
> Most of the Right Wing can't think for themselves.
>
> The rest of us are basically ****ed; we can't get a word in edgewise.
>
> "Leroy", if you don't like this, get a working brain that has a working
> knowledge of how US politics works.
>
>


However US politics works, is anathema to American interests.
It's a waste of time. Our job is to remove politicians and
replace them with statesmen.

Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.


Reply With Quote
Reply


« ProxSurfs Proxies for Sunday, July 4, 2010 | REVIEW: "SSL and TLS: Theory and Practice", Rolf Oppliger »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:43 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45