[161423] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Warren Bailey)
Tue Mar 12 19:16:43 2013
From: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
To: Mike A <mikea@mikea.ath.cx>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 23:16:26 +0000
In-Reply-To: <20130312220155.GA81374@mikea.ath.cx>
Reply-To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Contractors with facility clearances? I would find it hard to believe dot g=
ov would run secure circuits to a non secure facility. ;)
From my Android phone on T-Mobile. The first nationwide 4G network.
-------- Original message --------
From: Mike A <mikea@mikea.ath.cx>
Date: 03/12/2013 3:04 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Network security on multiple levels (was Re: NYT covers China =
cyberthreat)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 04:41:42PM +0000, Warren Bailey wrote:
> Not to mention, the KG units are dot government only.. For obvious reason=
s.
Erm ... yesandno. Lots of defense contractors have one end of a secured
circuit. Been there, installed-and-maintained them.
--
Mike Andrews, W5EGO
mikea@mikea.ath.cx
Tired old sysadmin
