| 1 |
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 06:00:00 -0600 |
| 2 |
Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > And no, the intartubes will NOT be switched off. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I don't really think they can unless they just cut power to all the |
| 8 |
> computers. After all, the internet is supposed to be redundant right? |
| 9 |
> If there is a few computers still running that have a connection, it |
| 10 |
> is still working. Sort of anyway. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Does make one wonder tho. They have been talking about having a |
| 13 |
> internet "off switch" but I'm not sure it would be that easy. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
To switch off the internet, you don't switch off the computers on the |
| 16 |
internet. You switch off the routers that drive the internet. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
There is no "kill switch", what there is is the |
| 19 |
old-fashioned method called "making a phone call" and that conversation |
| 20 |
has all sorts of references to broken knees and such. This is how |
| 21 |
Egypt did it a year ago. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
But the internet is full of rogue and maverick sysadmins who don't take |
| 24 |
kindly to strong-arming, so coverage won't be complete. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Unless of course Cisco and Huawei put magic firmware code into their |
| 27 |
router interface hardware that we don't know about. If you are worried |
| 28 |
about that internet, *that* is the part of it you should be worried |
| 29 |
about. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Alan McKinnnon |
| 33 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives