The Internet Isn’t As Powerful As We Think… Yet

[...] Is the Internet as powerful as we think it is? [...]

I have to say that i disagree. When the LA Times and Twitter stopped working it was their servers that were failing, not the internet. I do not believe that the government are dependent on the internet, there will always be alternatives that are available if they have problems, plus all secure and important government data should be done on an intranet, which, one would hope, is very secure, with minimal vulnerabilities. If a terrorist wanted to destroy the internet, or take it down, it would be far easier to physically disable the hardware than attempt to take it all down through hacking.

I would also disagree with the statement that the internet has evolved in the past few years than it has in its history. I would argue its growth has been rather consitent since its birth in the 1960s, as improvements in computer hardware and data communication methods are made.

I dont think the Government and other important infrustructure should use a per say normal internet.Meaning why they need to be on the internet to communicate?Like the power companies.The bill paying part can be on the net,but not the operation.Employees dont need the internet to do their jobs.At least i dont think they need the internet to do they jobs.When you have employees shopping and IM-ing friends and family from work you leave it open to attack.

We are relying too heavily on the net, assuming that is there, have been and always will be.
Internet is THE revolution of our times, but is becoming (or have always been?) vulnerable not only to attacks, but also to its own evolution. If evolution is not followed by a “consolidation” of the net, we will be surprised how fast our digital and real life will get worse.

[...] Are we relying too heavily on the net? bradleybradwell at Lockergnome (http://www.lockergnome.com/bradleybradwell/author/bradleybradwell/) writes an article on Internet vulnerability (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/bradleybradwell/2009/07/03/the-internet-isnt-as-powerful-as-we-think-yet). [...]

You are completely right in that busineses, Industry, and/or governments should not rely on such a vunerable system as the internet. Personal use is OK in that if we can not access the internet, no catastrophe happens. Terrorists WILL use the vunerability if governments get to rely on any system.

IMHO, the Internet is but an extension of the human mind that is aiding the human family in moving into another level of consciousness.

As such its vulnerability sets up a “warning” sign that needs to be addressed.

Let me interject here some new knowledge that not all may be aware of. Findings by cellular biologist Drl Bruce Lipton, and others working in the new field of Epigenetics reveal that each cell in our body is configured exactly like a computer chip. Furthermore the head brain and the heart brain are now recognized as “dual core” processors and the “liquid crystalline in our bodies (discovered by biologist Mae Wan Ho) is the ’semi-conductor” for our operating system. In his book, “The Dance of Life,” author Dr. V. Vernon Woolf and an associate, Ron Blue. write of the body/mind as a “quantum computer”.

All of which, when taken into consideration with the writings of Zacharia Sitchen based on his translations of the Sumerian Tablets and interwoven with Biblical tales, substantiate that homo sapiens is a bio-engineered and cloned entity created by the extratresstrials from the Planet Nibiru approximately 432,000 years ago, raises the question as to whether we are the artificial intelligence we have been looking for.

And, if so, if the Internet went down wouldn’t we be able to quickly regain the ability to communicate telepathically by moving our focus to operating within the “theta” brainwave zone since there are those among us who are already operating as “remote viewers” using this modality, and as trained initially by the military to do so?

Should we rely on ANY one resource too much? If we rely too heavily on our power grid, the terrorists can take it out; if we rely too heavily on our water supply, someone could poison it…..so I guess the answer is to NEVER do anything mission critical relying on ANY resource without a backup plan.

You have a good point. But, I’d say right now our main concern should be fixing the economy, even though it seems we’ve already failed at that.

Excellent points you make – the impact of a terrorist attack on the internet could cause untold chaos…

[...] the Internet as powerful as we think it [...]

[...] I wrote an article that stated the Internet isn’t as powerful as we think. Alberta is the first province in Canada to have moved all personal health records to the Internet [...]

Here I sat, all ready to “smooth the fears” a bit and throw oil on the troubled waters, when I read the last post:

“Alberta is the first province in Canada to have moved all personal health records to the Internet”

This gave me pause and cause to re-evaluate my position. I’m well aware that there has been a push to put medical records on the Internet for increased ease of accessing them by Doctors and hospitals, especially in emergency situations. This, of course, I completely oppose, as should every critically thinking person, IMO.

With the news being rife with stories of various companies’ websites being hacked and people’s personal information stolen, one can imagine that, with even more vital and personal records being available, unimaginable havoc could be wreaked on one’s life and well-being. Our economic well-being is vulnerable enough!

I would have to respectfully disagree with Ben Evans on one of his points. It would be far HARDER to physically take down the hardware at this point. With the multiple-redundancy that is built into the Internet at this point…non-centralized servers which can be routed around and the flow of information re-directed…they would have to make multiple attacks in many places to effect much of an impact. The most they could do would be to cut off a few localized areas, and I doubt that would last for long. Hacking would be (and has been proven to be) much more efficacious.

While the various *nixes have proven highly resistant to virus’ and hacking attacks, and purportedly a majority of the Internet’s servers are based on them, it’s just a matter of time before a vulnerability is discovered and exploited. Virus’ for Linux servers have already been written (and patched for); it’s just a matter of someone to come up with one sufficiently virulent and fast acting.

A few months back I was talking to a person who told me that his brother was a “professional hacker” who worked for the government and various corporations attempting to hack into their systems to discover vulnerabilities. While there are undoubtedly many such “benevolent hackers” finding security holes, for each one there are also undoubtedly 100 malevolent ones trying the same thing, obviously for different reasons.

Even the promised “security” of “Cloud Computing” leaves doubts in my mind. With my personal information and data spread hither and yon, shared on “random servers,” I believe in the old adage, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.” It WILL be hacked. It’s what hackers do, and with the promise of financial and other types of reward, they’ll work hard to accomplish it.

In my final evaluation; while I wouldn’t say the Internet is “incredibly” vulnerable to terrorist attack, I WOULD say that it is unacceptably vulnerable. We and the government(s) should be exceedingly careful in what services and information we put on it, and the extent to which we rely on it.