The Morgan Doctrine: Data Exhaust: Romney's Life is in Danger

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Data Exhaust: Romney's Life is in Danger

While only one passing mention of cyber security came up in last night's presidential debate (Romney mentioned Chinese cyber attacks in a compound sentence), my handy-dandy Quantum Leap Buzz social media analytics notification came alive with Obama supporters actually making threats on Romney's life. I'm rather surprised the news hasn't covered this. Then again, social media analytics is constantly putting me onto trending stories that NEVER make mainstream media newscasts. Below is my "buzz furball" for the "kill Romney" movement.

Hopefully SOMEBODY in the Secret Service candidate protection detail is paying attention. I now return to my regularly scheduled Cyber Privateer dialogue.

4 comments:

JOSEPH from SPAINNovember 1, 2012 at 12:54 PM
Hello
This is very serious.

Whether true or false threaten someone's life is evil.

I've just found something related about threats from the extreme left in foxnews:
video.foxnews.com/v/1937586131001/

The problem is to differentiate between a murderer or an angry person among multiple reports.

But if Obama wins, as I hope, Romney should become another historical figure in the history books and nothing else.

I do not know how you can find another Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. or Sirhan Bishara Sirhan but someone should do something, there should be some filter.

Bye.
ReplyDelete
Replies
Destroying AngelNovember 1, 2012 at 1:52 PM
Joseph, thanks for your note. My Buzz analytics engine keeps telling me Romney will win (I'm zeroing in on Ohio only right now). I get hourly "money ball breakdowns" of sentiment. We'll see in a few days whether or not I'm smoking my lunch. I also hope Romney's Secret Service detail is top rate, because there are some VERY angry lefties out there.

Best to you in Spain. And thanks again for the note.
ReplyDelete
Replies
JOSEPH from SPAINNovember 16, 2012 at 2:16 PM
Hello.

Now Romney is just a chapter of American history and no jackal has tried to kill him.

Now I hope that Obama is going to Jerusalem.

But there are things I do not understand:
Is the Fox news is correct? Is the United States is so racially divided?
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/index.html#/v/1972309834001/kelly-file-philly-precincts-vote-unanimously-for-obama/?playlist_id=86923

When I chose months ago as a possible electoral ticket Romney/Santorum, I became aware that in Twitter was the favorite Ron Paul. I think people who use twitter is usually left. There is a bias.

I do not understand the history of the CIA chief, Petraeus, Obama should know all for months. A spy story seems old fashioned. And the story of Benghazi is very strange, Italy and its military bases are very close.

Could this be another Watergate as O Reilly says?
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/index.html#/v/1972187064001/is-the-libyan-situation-another-watergate/?playlist_id=86923

If counterespionage services can not avoid enemy attacks in the old style how can prevent modern cyber attacks?

Do we need to think about the day after the attack?
Allow the attack and protect the aircraft carrier as was done in Midway 1941.
ReplyDelete
Replies
Destroying AngelNovember 16, 2012 at 3:01 PM
IMHO, answers to your many thoughtful questions are:

My bet is that Obama will NOT go to Jerusalem. I do not think the US is racially divided as much as we are a nation of self-defined demographic voters. Jury is out on the CIA and Petraeus. And finally, Benghazi could well be another Watergate.

Net net: We probably don't have the will to do what it will take to prevent cyber attacks. Luckily, the Senate killed the cybercrime bill. And heck, Network Solutions just endured another DD0S attack without figuring it out, and they are much more Internet savvy that any security firm in the marketplace. If they couldn't thwart the attack, then we are all doomed. Unless of course some country in the world…any country…embraces The Morgan Doctrine.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Implementation suggestions for THE MORGAN DOCTRINE are most welcome. What are the "Got'chas!"? What questions would some future Cyber Privateering Czar have to answer about this in a Senate confirmation hearing?

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Background: Welcome black hats, white hats and cyber swashbucklers

The Revolutionary War was fought, financed, and pretty well WON by bonded privateers, legalized pirates who were given Letters of Marque and Reprisal by the Continental Congress and authorized to attack, capture and monetize British ships. The purpose of this site is to explore the possibility of a modern-day doctrine much like the Monroe Doctrine, by means of which the U.S. government could legally and, more importantly, effectively stop international hackers. Current cybercrime law is not only ineffective, but downright stupid. My Linux servers are attacked hundreds of times a day (mostly from China and former USSR domains), yet if I retaliate against those servers with some creative technology at my disposal (I know some VERY smart guys), then I am in violation of federal law and subject to some onerous penalties. We need more than a new law. We need a new international doctrine. I call it The Morgan Doctrine, named after Morgan Rapier, a fictional character I've created (hey, this is my way of establishing ownership of the concept, should it ever see the light of day).

Why a new international doctrine? Simply, nothing else will work. Introduced on December 2, 1823, the Monroe Doctrine told the world to keep their hands off the Americas. Combine this with current legal thinking on "hot pursuit" of fugitives. In 1917 the US Army went into Mexico after Pancho Villa. More recently, in 1960 Israeli Mossad agents abducted Adolf Eichmann from Argentina. Granted, much of the world regards the Eichmann adventure as a violation of international law. I don't share that opinion and therefore use it as the third leg of my Monroe-Pancho-Aldof platform for The Morgan Doctrine.

If someone comes into your home and attacks or attempts to rob you, you may shoot them dead. You may do so as long as they expire on your property. But what about cyber criminals? They attack you in your home from their homes. Retaliate in kind, and you go to jail. The Morgan Doctrine states simply that if you attack my computers (or my banking assets held in US-based computers), then under a certain set of well-defined conditions, a licensed and bonded "cyber privateer" may attack you in your home country and split the proceeds with the U.S. government. For the sake of argument, let's call it a 50-50 split (heh heh).

Right now, American law enforcement is completely unequipped to deal with the sheer number international cyber hackers. Sure, I could report each of the thousand daily attacks to the FBI, as could the millions of other attackees in the USA. But the volume of such reports would make any meaningful resolution laughable. Not to mention that the FBI has no jurisdiction outside the USA. Yet to make such "enforcement" profitable to recognized (ie, "bonded" "deputized") privateers, as Heath Ledger's Joker said in his last role, "Now you're talking!" You raid our bank accounts, we raid yours. You make money from off-shore child pornography, we're going to loot your bank accounts and, with some REALLY creative black hat operations, you will be taken off the grid worldwide to the extent that you'll not even complete a cell phone conversation for the remainder of your miserable depraved life. Okay, that last part probably won't fly, but you get my drift.

The purpose of this site is to explore the mechanics, legalities and practicality of The Morgan Doctrine.

And I will be the sole arbiter of whether or not your comments get posted. As Mel Brooks wrote, "It's good to be king."