Search: Home Bugtraq Vulnerabilities Mailing Lists Jobs Tools Beta Programs
Information Resilience and Homeland Security
Richard Forno, 2002-05-09

Freedom of information may be a double-edged sword, but restricting information has only one edge - and it cuts off the lifeblood of a healthy democracy.

Comments Mode:
Information Resilience and Homeland Security 2002-05-10
Louis Helmke (1 replies)
So; what do you mean by restricting?

Removal so there is no access?
Or creating safeguards to grant access?

It sounds like the definition outlined in the article is removal of access. (Does taking if off the net imply no access at all???)

The article shows the natural tendancy to "over react" when weaknesses or vulnerabilities come to the forefront. Protect, Protect, Protect. This happens at all levels: personal, group, company, agency and government. And it makes you wonder if anyone really gets it.

But restricting information is not necessarily a bad thing. The implementation is what raises the ire of those in an "Open" society. The assumption; we (in our society) have the right to "Know" everything. Not true. There are times when ignorance is bliss (and necessary), and there are times when it is deadly. And SOMETIMES we ourselves are not the best judge of which is which. I agree that we must measure what is done with the exemptions. Measure what is available.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/80/12422#12422
Information Resilience and Homeland Security 2002-05-15
Louis Helmke (The rest of the comment)







 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2009, SecurityFocus