![]() |
|
« RFID, Texas Style | Main | Light Friday: The Simpsons, Stealth Sharks, Air Guitar... »
March 3, 2006
Overheard on IMT: 2/27/06-3/03/06
But forget for a few moments what we said. And let's see what you had to say
We have been assured ad infinitum that our private data is being guarded by trustworthy persons and will not be misused. That prompts the eternal question: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
-S. Lange, on Burning Question: Is Security Worth the Sacrifice of Security?
Privacy vs security is an admirmable tradeoff. I don't believe you have to necessarily sacrifice one for the other. If done right -- in the right hands of truly conscientious, ethical people, who don't snoop for details beyond their need or beyond some level of suspectability -- I believe it can work and we can be safe. A novel, naive notion, possibly, but then again so was democracy at some point and in many places, still is.
- J. Colizza, on Burning Question: Is Security Worth the Sacrifice of Security?
I have no secrets greater than the need to keep my country safe.
-K.G. Womack, on Burning Question: Is Security Worth the Sacrifice of Security?
The issue of privacy or security is a farce, [as] we have no real privacy in a country where you must constantly give your vital information to anyone you wish to have take you seriously; and then they in turn sell or divulge your information to other "interested" parties for the sake of various polls
-Brenda, on Burning Question: Is Security Worth the Sacrifice of Security?
I have no secrets, do you? If not, there is nothing to worry about. If you do have some secrets, I would like to know what they are, lest you become a threat to me, my family or my property
-Tom Kelly, on Database of Our Lives: Gov't System Sweeps for Security
Really? Well, suppose that a medical exam determined that I was impotent, or sterile, or whatever. I would sorta like to keep that private. Is that a threat to you? Would knowing that make you feel more comfortable? What if the information were accidently incorrectly entered (or maliciously entered incorrectly)?
-Jim Garrity, on Database of Our Lives: Gov't System Sweeps for Security
Suppose the process of data mining turned up a pattern of a local government abusing a citizen. Do you suppose that there would be any interest in big brother actually coming to the aid of a citizen whose own government had committed terrorist acts against him
-Don, on Database of Our Lives: Gov't System Sweeps for Security
I was going to post a comment here, but I'm afraid of what "list" NSA will put me on if I do!
-Mark, on Database of Our Lives: Gov't System Sweeps for Security
Yet another erosion of what it is to be an citizen of the United States. The cost of freedom is putting up with some risk ...
-Peter, on Database of Our Lives: Gov't System Sweeps for Security
Certainly, you have captured several of the most hazardous potential security threats. Other significant threats exist in the form of attacks on food, water, engineered structures and transportation assets. The probability of these attacks is greater because these assets are more difficult to secure, making the chances of a successful attack greater
-Mark Lowman, on How Vulnerable Are U.S. Power Plants?
There is also a precaution that you can take for the home and that is to have all of your sensitive information on an external drive that has an on/off switch. This way you can physically "pull the plug" on that drive. This way you can surf all you want to, do a virus scan, adware scan, clean out the PC, then turn on your "financial/ sensitive information drive." It will also lessen the likelyhood of a virus or other malware from transmitting private information when everyone is sleeping or out.
-Tom, on Prevent Computer Attacks at Home.
Comments in their entirety can be found via the attributed links. Leave your insight or your related rants, dear readers, and join in the conversation.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://news.thomasnet.com/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/446
|
Advertisement
|



