Question For Programmers/Remediators Re: The Blame Game

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Just curious.

Cnn Headline News reported today that the government is warning its agencies and those in charge of critical infrastructures that Y2K remediators may have "sabotaged" sysytems and wrote "back doors" into security systems. They reported that any Y2K-related disruptions will really be caused by cyber terrorists that are currently working on fixing the Y2K bug.

Now that your benevolent government has painted yellow stars on you IT folks when the failures and glitches crop up, I'm wondering if any of you consider this a "sign", or an impetus to say "Adios Muchachos"?

Rats fleeing a sinking ship perhaps? Or will it be more like the Exodus of the Hebrews before a pissed-off Pharoah?

Anyone else feeling like a Jew in 1936 Nazi Germany?

How long until Y2K Krystallnacht?

Just wondering.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999

Answers

I've said it before, and I'll say it again....

The "sheeple" will DEMAND retribution, *IF* things get really bad. The scope of that retribution will depend DIRECTLY on how bad it gets. The two groups that will be singled out are the "hoarders" and the "programmers".

"KILL THE HOARDERS! IF IT WEREN'T FOR *THEM*, WE COULD GET FOOD!!!" and "KILL THE PROGRAMMERS! IF IT WEREN'T FOR *THEM*, WE WOULDN'T BE IN THIS MESS TO BEGIN WITH!!!"

I have GUNS and ammo. Just got another 1000 rds yesterday. Have 1000 rds in the pipeline (Sept. delivery, "specialty" ammo), and will get at least another 1000 rds of "regular" as well. Have 300 shotshells, will get another 700. And two more guns. (Another Mini-14/AR-15 and a shotgun).

Get as well armed as you can. Quickly. (I had a person with whom I correspond by email tell me that he had PROOF that the gov't would suspend ammunition sales on Oct 1st. Then he went on 2 weeks vacation. When he gets back, I'm gonna want to see that PROOF. But just in case.... well, you know....)

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), July 29, 1999.


--Invar I kinda read that message in that report as well. IMHO I think Uncle Sam is gonna take this one on the chin. As well as any corporate companies that try and skate through at everyone else expense.

-- kevin (innxxs@yahoo.com), July 29, 1999.

Just in time for hunting season, should be well received. Also will be the tip off for part of the idiot population.

-- naw (Rambo@thewoods.com), July 29, 1999.

INVAR,

First I would like to say thank you for your return. I have long missed your most thought awakening posts.

This post, however, scares the crap out of me. Seems like they are indeed setting us programmers up to take the fall. I am mad about this, because.... hell, I am trying to fix the stuff not trying to screw it up anymore than it already is. I feel as if I have been slapped in the face.

I'm hoping that CNN runs this little blurb again tonight so that I can hear the exact wording. Maybe I'll have an accident and hit myself in the head so that I cannot remember anything about computers anymore.... if you catch my drift.

Next job.... cruise director.... yeah that's the ticket.

-- (cannot-say@this.time), July 29, 1999.


INVAR......yet another example of your paranoia surfacing in spades......

You wrote ---- . They reported that any Y2K-related disruptions will really be caused by cyber terrorists that are currently working on fixing the Y2K bug. ---

Okay, WHO reported that and secondly, did they REALLY say that "ANY y2k-related disruptions will really be caused by cyver terrorists", or was it more like "SOME" y2k related disruptions...........etc.

Are they really out to get you or is your paranoia in overload today?

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999.



Unless something's changed, folks working on sensitive government projects have security checks done before work will be allowed. I suppose they could have found a few folks who seemingly passed these checks and MAY have been in a position to do something like this. In many places they also have auditors that come through and review the code. This was done to find folks who say rounded half-cents into their own private accounts?

In general, however, programmers are not exposed to security systems.

I don't see this as a sign of anything and I know of no programmers who would hide in fear due to this. Dennis obviously DOES fear this, but I haven't seen him quit his job either. His fear may be due more to his picture and pictures of his stash being shown on the front page of his local newspaper? He can answer that better than I.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 29, 1999.


If anyone is to blame, it's the stupid DOD that turned down the 4 digit year standard, what, 40 years ago.

Back doors? Maybe a few, but I can't beleive it's that big of a deal. Just some more freaking spin, IMHO. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), July 29, 1999.


Although it is true that in ordinary times, most people have to get these security clearances and governments are extraordinarily careful, it is interesting to me that within the agencies I worked there were systems that were sent out of the country for remediation.

That was a big wonder about to me at the time. Exactly how careful is that being?

-- Jean (jmacmanu@bellsouth.net), July 29, 1999.


Stick it up your wazoo Craig.

I simply reported what the CNN HEADLINE NEWS BIMBO READ OFF HER TELEPROMPTER INTO THE CAMERA THAT WAS BEAMED INTO MY HOME VIA TV SET.

Since news today (and CNN in particular) report press releases and polls as legitimate news...I have no way of knowing where they got their sources from.

Since I am not a programmer, I haven't a clue what a "back door" is.

So if it's paranoia you stupid shit, then it's on behalf of CNN or whatever agency sent them their press release about remediators CAUSING Y2K disruptions.

Asshole.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Sysman,

But you have to think of the spin that they are spewing out this time. Someone that doesn't really know you, but knows what you do (work on computers) will be looking for your head on a platter if TSHTF next year. No matter that you didn't do anything wrong.

Hear the spin... Everything is fine... go back to sleep... go back to sleep... it is their fault... they built in the traps to crash the system... go back to sleeeeep... go back to sleeeeeeeep.... back to sleeeeeeeeeeeeep.

Brainwashing, that is what I call it. They are planting the seeds in their (sheeple's) minds now. It could backfire on them though, because without us... who is going to fix it?

-- (cannot-say@this.time), July 29, 1999.



Actually Anita, that's a little scenario that's been playing around in the back of my head since about last December. It doesn't take a great leap of logic to understand that POLITICIANS will say and do ANYTHING to survive. The same goes for CEO's. It goes sorta like this:

POLITICIANS: "The CEO's told me everything was gonna be okay. I believed them."

CEO'S: "The CIO told me everything was gonna be okay. I believed him."

CIO'S: "The dept managers told me everything was gonna be okay. I believed them."

MANAGERS: "The programming staff told me everything was gonna be okay. I believed them."

PROGRAMMERS: "We said NO SUCH THING!"

Who is going to be believed...? (Sh*t rolls downhill, right?)

*IF* rollover is BAD, retribution will be REQUIRED in order to maintain civil order. SOMEONE will have to be blamed. "Action" against the "blamed" group will also be REQUIRED. COUNT ON IT.

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), July 29, 1999.


Uh,. . .this story probably didn't come from a press release. It came from this:

July 29, 1999 Senate Y2k Hearing

Read Senator Dodd's questions near the end of the thread. :)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), July 29, 1999.


there will be enough blame to go around for everyone, govt, programmers, hoarders, pollies, doomers... all... blame is the least of my worries

and i am caught between bugging out and helping with repairs when TSHTF... i am very willing to work and repair in the "real world" as long as i am safe and i don't have to move somewhere else (homewise)... i do expect that cobol programmers will be a commodity and those of us that work for public agencies will be in demand... and rightfully so... the added bonus is i expect to have a paid job after the first of the year...

i don't want to be an "enemy of the state" or an "enemy of the people"... and again, being an enemy of the people is not what i am concerned about... i am very concerned about being an "enemy of the state"... really..

keep the faith..

-- booann (cantsay@lovemyjob.edu), July 29, 1999.


THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT **WILL NOT** TAKE THE BLAME FOR **Y2K**. They have a PLAN!! I cannot overemphasize these points.

CNN is the PROPAGANDA outlet for this Administration.They haven't had an ORIGINAL thought in years!!

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacvc.com), July 29, 1999.


Temper, temper INVAR...........try a little self control.......

So is this your way of backtracking and admitting that they didn't say "ANY disruptions" but was more likely something like "SOME disruptions"?

And what's this other fear-filled diatribe all about then: "How long until Y2K Krystallnacht?"

If wild fear-mongering speculation is your game, I'd say you're a master at it!!

Not to mention that the Jewish community are not likely elated at your pathetic comparison of '99 computer programmers with the Jewish situation with the Nazis in '36.

Try getting a grip on reality. You might just like it!

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999.



Hey Craig, hang onto your hat your going for a ride !!

Your Pal, Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), July 29, 1999.


Cram it up your ass Craig...you've apparently taken Condescension Pills from Poole.

Try this asshole, from the PARANOID folks at CNN and YOUR government:

Link at:http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9907/29/threat.y2k.ap/

(For information purposes only)

Experts warn of new Y2K threat: the hired help

July 29, 1999 Web posted at: 11:50 AM EDT (1550 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two of the government's top computer security experts are warning that some programmers hired to fix Year 2000 problems may be quietly installing malicious software code to sabotage companies or give themselves access to sensitive information after the new year.

The ominous warnings were part of testimony prepared for a hearing today about the so- called Y2K glitch and cyberterrorism before the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem.

Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center, said experts hired by U.S. companies to fix their computers could secretly program "trap doors" -- ways to let them gain access later -- or add malicious code, such as a logic bomb or time-delayed virus that could disrupt systems.

"While systems have been and will continue to be extensively tested, the probability of finding malicious code is extremely small," agreed Richard Schaeffer, director of the Defense Department's Infrastructure and Information Assurance program.

Neither expert suggested the possible scope of the problem.

Schaeffer said problems are complicated by the New Year's rollover, when some computers programmed to recognize only the last two digits of a year may mistake 2000 for a full century earlier.

"It may be difficult to distinguish between a true Y2K event and some other anomaly caused by a perpetrator with malicious intent," Schaeffer wrote in prepared testimony.

Both experts said the risks were exacerbated by the amount of software repaired by companies overseas. Vatis called the situation "a unique opportunity for foreign countries and companies to access, steal from or disrupt sensitive national and proprietary information systems."

"Since any vulnerabilities that are implanted will persist as long as the software is in place, this is a problem that will last well beyond January 1, 2000," Vatis said.

Vatis recommended that companies thoroughly check the backgrounds of companies they hire for software repairs. He also said they should test for the existence of trap doors after the repairs, possibly even hiring teams to try to electronically crack into their own networks.

The latest warnings come on the heels of new disclosures about White House plans to create a government-wide security network to protect the nation's most important computer systems from hackers, thieves, terrorists and hostile countries.

The 148-page proposal from the Clinton administration describes building an elaborate network of electronic obstacles, monitors and analyzers to prevent and watch for potentially suspicious activity on federal computer systems.

Civil liberties groups complain that the security tools also would make possible unprecedented electronic monitoring, especially because of the increasingly widespread use of computers by the government in almost every aspect of its citizens' daily lives.

The White House defended the proposal.

"We are very concerned about protecting privacy rights," said Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger. "But there is also a privacy right in not having hostile entities attack systems. We're not only talking about 17-year-old kids in their basement. We're talking about governments that we know are developing systems to get access to our computer systems."

The first 500 intrusion monitors would be installed on nonmilitary government computers next year, according to a draft copy of the proposal obtained by The Associated Press. The full system would be completed by May 2003.

The plan also suggests ways to convince private companies to monitor their corporate computer networks and share information about threats. But it said explicitly that the government will not force companies to permit federal monitoring of their systems.

END

CNN Headline News paraphrased this story and I reported what I saw and heard from THEIR abbreviated snip this morning.

As far as the Jewish comparison to 1935 Nazi Germany...many saw signs of labels and scapegoating and ignored them as being too fantastic to even consider. Only a handful split Europe before the real shit came down. The rest that waited....well can you say GAS CHAMBERS moron?

You will make a great slave since you have neither eyes to see or ears to hear.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Several months ago I read an article that said the government was teaching welfare recipients how to work on Y2k problems. If there are a lot of Y2k problems it is probably due to lack of knowledge and experience on the part of the "welfare programmer".

-- Linda A. (adahi@muhlon.com), July 29, 1999.

Good reporting INVAR, despite the flames. Heard the same report early this morning and knew the government had finally closed the gap between Y2K and terrorism!

The wording I heard that stopped me dead in my tracks was something to the effect that Y2K accidents would be "indistinguishable" from terrorist attacks.

Two days ago on this forum I said nearly the same words that the way things were building any Y2K related chemical spill, leak, explosion involving significant loss of life would be blamed by this administration on terrorism.

If the creek at Bellingham had been full of people like it normally is during summer, we would have had completely different reporting, spin and all!

Bin Ladin you better get your tent maker working again, I sense you're about ready to lose a few more tents! Unless we expended all our non-compliant cruise missiles already.

-- (snowleopard6@webtv.net), July 29, 1999.


It doesn't say "ANY disuptions" will be caused by etc............

That was my point and I was correct; While you can only resort to foul-mouthed rambling because you know you grossly exaggerated the point.

In actuality the the probability of finding malicious code is extremely small as you can see from the line below taken from the article you posted:

"While systems have been and will continue to be extensively tested, the probability of finding malicious code is extremely small," agreed Richard Schaeffer, director of the Defense Department's Infrastructure and Information Assurance program.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999.


Amen snowleopard.

Notable quotes:

""It may be difficult to distinguish between a true Y2K event and some other anomaly caused by a perpetrator with malicious intent," Schaeffer wrote in prepared testimony. "

"While systems have been and will continue to be extensively tested, the probability of finding malicious code is extremely small," agreed Richard Schaeffer, director of the Defense Department's Infrastructure and Information Assurance program. "

"Neither expert suggested the possible scope of the problem. "

Please re-read these statements again, couple that with what Reno and Bennet said last week about "Millenial Madness" amd "Apocalyptic Visions" held by some Christians and individuals worried about Y2K, and the news today about Clinton's bunker in DeeCee.

Who's being PARANOID Craig?

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Washington might as well have sent out engraved invitations to terrorist groups. Like the little kid that is always in trouble all he thinks is... "Well, I always get blammed for everything as it is, so I might as well just go ahead and do it, I'm going to be blamed for it!"

-- (snowleopard6@webtv.net), July 29, 1999.

Snowleopard writes ---Good reporting INVAR, despite the flames-----

heeheeheehee........gotta love the doomers backslapping one another.....why is it a flame just because I clearly caught INVAR in his gross exaggeration and called him to account for it....which he has not, nor cannot. Why, he can't even get his points across without being foul-mouthed. He has quite the potty mouth for someone who seems to intersperse Biblical phrases through much of his writings....

The problem is that real Y2K preparers have been given a very bad name by the paranoid extremists that seem to have taken over the cause.....It's difficult to express the seriousness of the situation to Joe Public anymore because it is so easy to get grouped in with the extreme-doomer-schizo-schoolbusburying-irrational ones that think that screaming the loudest makes them intelligent somehow......

Don't take your frustrations out on me.....I'm not the one that made you miss your comet..........

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999.


You are a buffoon Craig. Did you go to school to learn to be THAT stupid?

Your analysis of the news above proves what an imbecillic dolt you are!

To wit: ""While systems have been and will continue to be extensively tested, the probability of finding malicious code is extremely small,"

So in other words you deft idiot, even though they will extensively test the systems, the ability to find and fix "malicious" (read Y2K or hacked) code that may cause disruptions is extremely small.

Or better put, they cannot easily find and fix these types of problems, and they may cause problems which may not be directly caused by a normal Y2K glitch, but by programmers that bombed the code.

Notwithstanding this posted report, the CNN Headline News bit we saw this morning on this story was exactly as I posted on the start of this thread.

I don't give a shit if THIS piece didn't use "disruptions" but I know for damn sure that three pairs of ears heard it this morning, exactly as I posted it above.

Since most Americans get their filtered news wihtout bothering to check things for themselves...it doesn't really matter if you want to pick nits Craig. The impression (deliberate or not) has been planted that those hired to do the remediating are HACKING the code and thus will be responsible for any failures.

Perception is reality in this culture. That is how Clinton has such high poll numbers, and the Markets defy the gravity of logic.

You are not right about anything. You are a moron.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Anita,

Unless something's changed, folks working on sensitive government projects have security checks done before work will be allowed. I suppose they could have found a few folks who seemingly passed these checks and MAY have been in a position to do something like this.

I read an article last month that said the State dept. is over a year behind in running background checks (this revelation came as part of the Chinese Spying investigation). Apparently, they are letting people work before they've been cleared.

In many places they also have auditors that come through and review the code. This was done to find folks who say rounded half-cents into their own private accounts?

That takes place in some of the better run IT shops but it is no where near a standard. And even when it does occur, it rarely involves reviewing every line of code. The Energy Dept. actually SHUT DOWN ALL of their mainframes and supercomputeres after it was discovered that leaks of sensitive material were still occuring after the spy scandal broke. Doesn't sound like it's one of those better run shops does it?

In general, however, programmers are not exposed to security systems.

I don't know where you got that one. Ever see the movie 'Devils Advocate'? There's a scene where the lawyer son asks his lawyer dad (the Devil) "Why Law?". Dad answers "Because it's the ultimate backstage pass. We have our fingers in everything".

Well, that describes programmers too. We touch every part of your life, from the clothes on your back, to the food you eat, to what happens to that food after you flush. Programmers have been working in 'Security Systems' for years and bad ones can and have caused havoc.

I think the possibilty of sabotage and cyberattack are very real, but in no way are they/will they be widespread. Will programners in general take the blame? I doubt it. Start killing programmers and that missing dial-tone ain't ever coming back...

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), July 29, 1999.


Craig commented:

"The problem is that real Y2K preparers have been given a very bad name by the paranoid extremists that seem to have taken over the cause.....It's difficult to express the seriousness of the situation to Joe Public anymore because it is so easy to get grouped in with the extreme-doomer-schizo-schoolbusburying-irrational ones that think that screaming the loudest makes them intelligent somehow...... "

Hey Craigo, I'm a "real y2k preparer", it's people like you who HAVE to put handles on other folks, how sad. We really do quite well here discussing y2k WITHOUT you and Flinto and Marie and Poole and etc.

Give us a break, go back to Der Bonkah and play.

Your Pal, Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), July 29, 1999.


Craig, you ignorant slut...

I want you to point out EXACTLY where my "gross exxaggeration" was.

EXACTLY where. Also tell me why I cannot be called into account for the original posting.

If you can read and comprehend english, I think that account has been proven and substantiated.

But I want to know EXACTLY WHERE you think my "gross exxaggeration" was.

You picked a fight with the wrong Hombrey buddy boy. You are going to atone for it.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Here's a little more fuel for the "paranoid" fires:

"WASHINGTON, July 29 (UPI) - The Federal Bureau of Investigation is warning that the turn of the millennium could bring an increase in overall violent activity, including the possibility cyber-terrorists will be able to use the Y2K computer bug as a way to conceal their crimes.

Michael Vatis, the Director of the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center, told a Senate panel, "The difficulty of determining what system failures are caused by the millennial bug and which might be caused by intrusions or viruses, requires that we be prepared for any contingencies."

Vatis said the Domestic Terrorism Section of the FBI, in particular, believes that the special meaning of a new millennium may encourage violence by certain groups. For example, members of the domestic group Christian Identity are expected to follow their teachings and prepare for the Second Coming of Christ by taking violent action against their enemies.

While the agency has no concrete indications that computer systems will be specifically targeted, it is taking a closer look at the vulnerability of the technological infrastructure.

Michael Vatis, the Director of the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center, testifying before the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem Thursday said, "considering both expected violent millenium activity and broader trends in the cyber world, it is possible that we will see an increase in such activity."

Vatis went on to explain that efforts to battle millenial cyber attacks may be made more difficult because of complications caused by the Y2K computer bug.

He said that even attempts to rectify the Y2K bug by hiring programmers to rewrite computer code could inadvertently create an opportunity for more instances of cyberterrorism.

"Malicious actors, foreign or domestic, could use the Y2K remediation process to install malicious code in the "remediated software," Vatis said.

It is feared that foreign computer companies conducting Y2K work could be compromised by foreign governments and unlawful entities to gain access to American computer systems.

The FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center is evaluating these Y2K challenges as part of its responsibility to maintain awareness of cyber- threats and disseminate that information to appropriate government and private sector parties. "

More "paranoid" delusions Craig, or did I just prove what a dumbshit Debunker moron you really are?

BTW Craig, God calls things what they are. He pulls no punches. Neither do I. You sir, are a dumbshit, or a deliberate scoffer who delights in disruption and ridicule.

So which is it - you so-called Christian?

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Sysman said:

If anyone is to blame, it's the stupid DOD that turned down the 4 digit year standard, what, 40 years ago.

Exactly my thoughts.

However, Dennis is right, there will definitely be a need for blame to be placed if Y2K is "bad," but where is anyone's guess. All the suggestions I've seen on this post are plausible & reasonable - I'm sure blame will be placed all around depending on the situation.

-- Jim (x@x.x), July 29, 1999.


Just a thought, guys:

Is it possible to debate your views without calling each other names?

:(

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), July 29, 1999.


Not after my blood gets to boiling FM. Have to call 'em the way I see 'em.

I thought my original post was reasonable. I dislike INTENSELY, being called a paranoid liar when I in -fact simply posted the news, asked a question and made a statement. There was no namecalling or flaming in my post.

There are others that revel in chiding and stirring the goat.

Ba-aaaa-aaaad move on their part.

This goat is steamed.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 29, 1999.


Aw.......too bad INVAR......I'm having a great evening......you lost your temper because I don't believe that CNN said that "ANY" Y2K- related disruptions will really be caused by cyber terrorists that are currently working on fixing the Y2K bug.

I think it is far more likely that they said "SOME" etc......

It's not a picky point at all......you're trying to create an atmosphere of deep suspicion and fear that suits your world view.

If they did actually say "ALL" then please prove it to me. But for heavens sake show a little maturity and calm down. So far all you have proved is that you are a volatile and unstable person as witnessed by your language and vicious behavior.

If you acted that way on the street they would lock you up.......O, I suppose that would make the 'evil' state wrong wouldn't it for taking away your freedom.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999.


INVAR,

Remember this truth. IGNORANCE IS BLISS. Craig, y2kpro, and Gilda epitomize blissful ignorance. They, like most of the pastors who give no leadership concerning y2k, will never see the parallels between 1999 USA and 1935 Germany. Nor will they comprehend the immense danger we are facing with the massive Chinese technology transfers and Russian military buildups. It's far easier to stick your head in the television and trust the bimbo on the screen. These folks haven't got the common sense God gave a brass monkey.

-- trafficjam (judgementday@ahead.soon), July 29, 1999.


-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999. wrote:

"Aw.......too bad INVAR......I'm having a great evening......you lost your temper because I don't believe that CNN said that "ANY" Y2K- related disruptions will really be caused by cyber terrorists that are currently working on fixing the Y2K bug."

After reviewing the entire thread for a second time it appears that INVAR was actually set off by the arrogant and condescending sniper fire coming from you Craig.

Maybe you could see more clearly if you concentrate on the removal of the sequoia from your own eye, instead of the toothpick in INVAR's.

-- (cujo@baddog.byte), July 29, 1999.


Got Chainsaw?

-- (buzzzz@treekiller.logs), July 29, 1999.

Back to the original thought for a second:

If Y2K is 3 to 6 or so, maybe the governmant can blame IT people.

If its worse, I agree with those who say blame will go to either the "hoarders" or anyone in an "official" position: government, bank presidents, local grocery store owner. It will have to be someone obvious and available ---- programmers are to distant and strange for most of us. If things REALLY get bad, we need someone visible, local that we can actually "get".

-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), July 29, 1999.


Craig is really good at this , people.

Remember B'rer Rabbit and the Tar Baby?

-- mchnst (Gunmkr52@aol.com), July 29, 1999.


Craig The Condescending Stated:

"Aw.......too bad INVAR......I'm having a great evening......you lost your temper because I don't believe that CNN said that "ANY" Y2K- related disruptions will really be caused by cyber terrorists that are currently working on fixing the Y2K bug."

This morning's :30 blurb on Headline News went something like this (insert babbling bimbo reading teleprompter here): Government officials are warning today that problems caused by the so-called Y2K bug, may not be caused by legitimate computer glitches at all, but by those hired to fix the problem. The ominous warnings are part of testimony prepared for a hearing today about the so- called Y2K glitch and cyberterrorism before the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem. Experts warn that programmers in charge of remediating troubled computer code may actually be sabotaging systems and writing back doors into security programs. They say it may difficult to tell the difference between real computer malfunctions and cyber terrorism, designed to hurt sensitive infrastructures."

That's the reconstructed blurb three of us heard together this morning.

Just because YOU don't believe CNN Headline Newbimbo said that, doesn't mean she didn't say it you ignoramus.

So...if Craig The Condescending doesn't think it is so...then it isn't so...aint that so?

What a twit, picking nits.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 30, 1999.


Craig,

We've spoken before at length on this forum about this - the gubbmint has subtlely and not so subtlely been setting up the sheople for some time now to accept one of several scenarios that they can implement at will depending on how things pan out and how bold Clinton wants to be with his martial law and suspension of 2000 elections agenda...

1. blame cyber-terrorists to absolve his incompetent gubbmint from blame

2. ditto to initiate bank holidays, martial law, confiscations - the whole enchilada

3. all of the above

Invar as usual is on the money - programmers and IT folk in general are being set up for a fall if / WTSHTF, the public will turn vicious, alas venting their anger on the wrong people (the ones that REALLY need to be strung up after Tribunals finish with them - why they'll be holed up in bunkers drinking champers...) - wait and see, not long to go now...

Bottom line - wise up Craig, you can't go around acting like a 14 year old all your life...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 30, 1999.


TECH32:

I had no idea the government was so behind in processing the security checks. I don't do any work for the government that requires one, as I refuse to complete the form. I found some of the questions simply ridiculous in nature, but the real kicker for me was when they wanted addresses, etc. of ALL family living in foreign countries....for the past 12 years or something. Heck, I'm not even sure I could give them all MY addresses for the past 12 years, and have lots of family living in Europe.

When I said, "In general, however, programmers are not exposed to security systems.", I meant just that. Applications programmers aren't exposed to security (unless it's transaction or program security that STILL requires that one go through previous security). As a systems' programmer, I DID handle security, and network types would also. There are far MORE application programmers than systems' programmers or network folks, and few shops outsource their systems or network work. As with any job, Y2k or not, there could always be the disgruntled worker who would throw a wrench in the works.

If the government is outsourcing sensitive systems to foreign lands, someone in charge is making poor decisions indeed. Okay...okay...stop laughing, eh?

Back to INVAR's original post, I DO believe this was brought up in a hearing specifically discussing terrorism, etc. I would think that they'd cover any/all bases in a hearing on cyber terrorism, including possible threats from without AND within. I don't think the intent was to paint all programmers with a brush of terrorist, yet open the hearing to the possibility.

I'm up to $.04 now on this subject, and that's all I'm worth on it. I'm not in fear of any retributions, but if it looks warranted, I WILL hide my pocket-protector and perhaps even my System Reference Summary.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 30, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ