Their mere connectedness allowed for them to be "hacked" because of default credentials. Computers are not innately dangerous. Their data and connectedness to the web confer danger.
That is not demonstrated at all, the only thing that is clearly and undoubtedly demonstrated by your example of Internet of Things is that they get deployed in a Piss Poor way. There is no reason to believe that our security protocols are innately vulnerable simply because somethings are connected to the web, unless you can demonstrate that it is indeed as such, and simply asserting it is true won't due.
And I made the contention directly because of the example you used where the computers weren't Connected to the Web and STILL got affected, so your argument about that example cannot be that it was because it was Connected to the Web, because OBVIOUSLY it wasn't why they were hacked.
While a Forbes article does imply that nuclear safety mechanisms are safe and secure behind segmentation and out-only network engineering, that does not protect the entirety of nuclear power plant security.
My whole argument is demonstrated in that forbes article that I haven't even read. I asked you to demonstrate that these systems are connected to the internet and obviously you cannot.
The Ukranian example does not at all demonstrate that the power plants are segmented off.
the control systems in Ukraine were surprisingly more secure than some in the US, since they were well-segmented from the control center business networks with robust firewalls. But in the end they still weren't secure enough—workers logging remotely into the SCADA network, the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition network that controlled the grid, weren't required to use two-factor authentication, which allowed the attackers to hijack their credentials and gain crucial access to systems that controlled the breakers.
https://www.wired.com/2016/03/inside-cunning-unprecedented-hack-ukraines-power-grid/
So the point is that two-factor authentication Failed/Piss Poor Implementation Failed, not Interconnectedness or inherently because of it.
The mere targeting of our plants, as well as the attack on the Ukranians, would imply the opposite, that even if they are relatively segmented, there is still crossover enough for attack to be possible from the web as a whole.
The reason that crossover exists is what we are after, and it is only because Security Protocol isn't implemented
in a Diligent Enough Way.
This is unacceptable.
You're up in arms about the wrong thing.
As for your "any network engineer" example, that's simply a falsehood.
https://www.networkworld.com/article/2163584/malware-cybercrime/13-it-security-myths-debunked.html
Any network engineer with any background in security would tell you that connecting it with the internet does immediately put it at some level of risk, and the data and context involve would play a part in what level that risk should be viewed at.
That's in the context that you don't implement any security protocols, or somehow security protocols aren't inherently in the multitude of forms built and demonstrated to protect data If Implemented Properly.
Read only? Seems like UK at least would imply that hospital networks absolutely imply that hospital networks are overconnected. Basic security both doesn't work and is rarely implemented.
That's false, first nobody was talking about "Basic Security" and what that Basically entails, and you've not demonstrated that they are rarely implemented, I would expect rarely to translate directly to a world without any safeguards and regard that in a numerous amount of attacks, and their absence can only be explained by the good faith of people and nothing else. I expect to see examples of Piss Poor implementation of security as teh reason for all those like you said, and not inherent interconnectedness. Yes, very much Read Only indeed:
Again. I'm talking about the literal fall of Rome.
Point to it, is Rome not still Rome? Distinguish the Difference that makes it Not the Rome of before.
The Empire itself.[before the empire now]
That's a purely semantic argument against a point that is clearly a literal case for the fall of Rome as a ruling society and government.
Hardly, I contended that the Society and Government is directly Roman. It has Morphed, not gone away in the Slightest, Show me the Literal fall of Rome
Rome, even if I do humor your point of the Pope still being around, absolutely does not rule France, Spain, or America.
You're wrong: http://www.chick.com/bc/2001/tiara.asp
More so you are wrong by basically not contesting the reason why is absolutely Rules France, Spain and America
That is laughable. You're arguing using a largely semantic argument over the definition of "rule", trying to conjure up some ownership between the pope and established nations that does not exist.
- Treaties with St. Boniface and Treaties Between the Holy See and King Pepin the Short of the Franks;
Pepin delivered and defended the Papal states of the Holy See, confirming the “temporal powers” of Rome and laying the groundwork for his son, Charlemagne, to create the First Holy Roman Empire. (751-800 A.D.) - Charter of the First Holy Roman Empire, 800 A.D.
- King John of England breaks with the Roman Catholic Church, 1209.
Edict of Excommunication of John of England. - Treaty of King John of England, Cede to Innocent III, 1213 A.D.
John agrees that England and Ireland are both “fiefs” of Rome, and that his own crown will be forfeit to Rome if he breaks his sworn agreements favoring the Pope. - Magna Carta 1215 A.D.
In signing the Magna Carta King John silently invoked the 1213 Papal agreement relinquishing his crown to the Pope. Thereafter, all lands explored and claimed in behalf of Catholic Monarchs and including the British Monarch as a vassal of Rome, were in fact first and wholly claimed in behalf of the Holy See, which returned a portion of the profit to the vassal monarchs in the form of “jurisdictions”. The Holy See retained the global jurisdiction of the air, granted jurisdiction of the land to temporal authorities (recognized monarchs), and granted the international jurisdiction of the sea to the British Crown Temple to be administered under the ancient Law of the Sea (international admiralty) and Law Merchant (now Uniform Commercial Code). - Charter(s) of the Global Estate Trust (1455, 1456, 1479, and 1492 et alia) by Papal Bulls, especially the Inter Ceatera of May 3 and 4, 1493, by Pope Alexander VI.
- European Treaties bearing on the History of the United States and its Dependencies to 1648, Frances Gardiner Davenport, editor, Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1917, Washington, D.C., especially pp. 75-78.8. “The Privileges and Prerogatives Granted by Their Catholic Majesties to Christopher Columbus April 30, 1492
Rome fell not.