当前位置:黑龙江地方站首页 > 龙江新闻 > 正文


2018年02月26日 01:40:24    日报  参与评论()人

淄博哪家医院治疗性功能障碍比较好淄博治疗霉菌性尿道炎The demand by the FBI that Apple help it break into the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone breaches its constitutional rights under the First and Fifth Amendments by seeking to “conscript and commandeer” its employees, the Silicon Valley company argued in a legal response on Thursday.周四,苹果(Apple)在一项法律回应中主张,美国联邦调查局(FBI)要求其协助解锁圣贝纳迪诺击案凶手iPhone之举,侵犯了美国宪法第一和第五修正案赋予苹果的宪法权力,因为这是对苹果员工的“征召和强占”。Apple filed its “motion to vacate” last week’s order by a judge in California a day before Friday’s deadline, as Silicon Valley’s largest companies lined up behind the iPhone maker’s case.苹果在本周五的最后期限前一天提交了“撤销动议”,要求撤销上周加州一名法官下达的法庭令。硅谷的大企业纷纷对这家iPhone制造商的主张表示持。The filing is Apple’s first response to the court after more than a week of increasingly bitter argument between chief executive Tim Cook and FBI director James Comey.这一动议是苹果对法庭作出的首次回应。此前,苹果首席执行官蒂姆#8226;库克(Tim Cook)与FBI局长詹姆斯#8226;科米(James Comey)已打了一周多的口水仗,争论的火药味也越来越浓。“This is not a case about one isolated iPhone,” Apple wrote, but about US law enforcement seeking a “dangerous power” beyond the authority granted by Congress. “Once the floodgates open, they cannot be closed, and the device security that Apple has worked so tirelessly to achieve will be unwound without so much as a congressional vote.”苹果在法律回应中写道,“此案关乎的并非某一孤立的iPhone”,而是关乎美国执法部门试图获得一种逾越了美国国会授权范围的“危险的权力”。“闸门一旦打开,就无法关上。苹果付出不懈努力所实现的设备安全,将在国会还未就此案进行过任何表决的情况下就付之东流。”If granted, other judges would seek a similar order in “a matter of days”, it said.这项法律回应称,如果这项法庭令获得批准,其他法官将在“数日之内”寻求下达类似的命令。Mr Comey acknowledged on Thursday that the ruling in the San Bernardino case could set a precedent that would be analysed by other courts, but said that it would apply to only a few limited cases that might involve the same phone model and the same operating system.周四,科米承认圣贝纳迪诺击案的裁决可能会设置一个判例,而其他法院会研究这个判例。但他同时表示,此案将只适用于那些或涉及到相同手机型号和操作系统的少数有限案件。He said that Apple had helped in the past to unlock phones when a warrant had been presented. He added that the phone would remain with Apple during any attempt to unlock it and that the software code would never leave the company, minimising the risk of it falling into the wrong hands.他表示,过去当执法部门出示授权令时,苹果曾帮助解锁手机。他还表示,在对涉案手机进行任何解锁尝试期间,手机将归苹果保管,而且软件代码永远不会离开该公司,从而最大限度降低它落入坏人之手的风险。Mr Comey and Mr Cook will testify before the House judiciary committee next week about encryption, privacy and security.科米和库克下周将在美国众议院司法委员会(House judiciary committee)就加密、隐私和安全问题作。Several Silicon Valley companies are expected to file a joint motion next week in a broad show of support for Apple’s position. Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter said on Thursday that they would back Apple together in court, while Amazon said it was considering its legal options. Google is also understood to be backing Apple.几家硅谷公司预计将于下周提交一份联合动议,以充分展示对苹果立场的持。微软(Microsoft)、Facebook和Twitter周四表示,它们将一起在法庭上持苹果。亚马逊(Amazon)表示正在考虑在法律上可以做点什么。谷歌(Google)据悉也将持苹果。 /201603/429157淄博泌尿外科哪家医院比较好 It may come as a surprise to hear that the FBI are trying to force Apple to help them hack an iPhone: one used by one of the killers from December’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, California. Does the FBI not aly know everything that people are doing on their phones? In fact, Apple’s devices are among the most secure around — and chief executive Tim Cook’s loud proclamation of his wish to keep them so marks the latest broadside in a battle over just how far the remit of national security reaches.听闻美国联邦调查局(FBI)正试图迫使苹果(Apple)帮助他们解锁一部去年12月加州圣贝纳迪诺大规模击案一名行凶者使用过的iPhone,你或许会感到惊讶。FBI难道不是早已知晓人们在手机上所做的一切吗?事实上,苹果的设备是目前最安全的产品之一,而苹果首席执行官蒂姆錠克(Tim Cook)希望保护iPhone安全性的公开宣言,标志着一场关于国家安全之手应该伸多长的争论中的最新火力点。For the security services, no technology should be secure beyond penetration in the fight against terrorism. For tech firms, protecting users’ privacy is a cornerstone of both business models and trust. And if you think this is a little rich coming several years after Edward Snowden’s revelations of corporate co-operation with the National Security Agency, Google’s chief executive Sundar Pichai has posted some clarifying messages on Twitter. It would, he argues, be a “troubling precedent” to require companies actively “to enable hacking of customer devices and data” — something quite distinct from giving “law enforcement access to data based on valid legal orders”.对安全部门而言,在反恐斗争中,任何技术都不应成为无法破解的障碍。但对科技公司来说,保护用户隐私既是商业模式的基石,也是赢得用户信任的基石。如果在爱德华斯诺登(Edward Snowden)将企业与美国国家安全局(NSA)之间的合作曝光几年后,你觉得这有些让人费解,那么谷歌(Google)首席执行官桑德尔皮查伊(Sundar Pichai)在Twitter上的发帖则让人明白问题所在。他指出,这将成为一个“令人不安的先例”——要求企业积极“帮助破解用户的设备和数据”,这与“让执法部门基于有效法律命令访问数据”可远远不是一回事。The issue has arisen because Apple’s latest mobile operating system prohibits anyone from accessing users’ data without their unique passcode. (The killer, Syed Rizwan Farook, died in a police shootout). If an incorrect passcode is entered too many times, an iPhone can irrecoverably delete all data. Hence the FBI’s request, via a court order served on February 16: that Apple create a specially adapted version of its operating system — dubbed the “FBiOS” by security expert Dan Guido — allowing law enforcement to make an unlimited number of passcode guesses.问题源于苹果最新的移动操作系统禁止任何人在没有用户唯一密码的情况下访问他们的数据。行凶者赛义德里兹万法鲁克(Syed Rizwan Farook)在与警察的交火中被击毙。如果输入不正确密码的次数过多,iPhone将删除所有数据,且不可恢复。因此,FBI通过2月16日的一项法院命令要求,苹果开发一个专门改编的操作系统——安全专家丹圭多(Dan Guido)称之为“FBiOS”——让执法部门可以无限次地猜测密码。Opinion has divided along predictable lines. Tech firms, digital rights activists and a good number of iPhone users tend to support the privacy principle. State officials and the more conservatively minded back law enforcement. What is not in dispute is that the precedent at stake is one law enforcement have been seeking to set for some time, and that its outcome will have profound consequences for security, encryption and privacy.舆论方面针对此事的分歧也在预料之中。科技公司、数字维权人士及很多iPhone用户倾向于持隐私保护原则。而政府官员及思想更为保守的人士持执法机构。不存在争论的是:这一利害攸关的先例是执法部门一段时期以来一直试图确立的,而其结果将对安全、数据加密及隐私权产生深远影响。So far as specifics are concerned, even the most ardent libertarian will have little sympathy for the privacy of a dead killer. What counts, however, is not the morality of one case, but whether this constitutes the thin end of a perilous wedge. Here, the proponents of privacy have a powerful case to make.就事论事,即便最狂热的自由论者也不会对一名被击毙的行凶者的隐私抱以丝毫同情。然而,重要的不是某一案例中的道德准则,而在于这一先例是否会造成一种愈演愈烈的风险。在这一点上,隐私权的持者有强大的理由。Slippery-slope arguments stand or fall on the strength of their evidence for movement from the particular to the general. How convincing is it to suggest that security services may deploy new powers promiscuously once obtained? In the case of technology, the answer seems to be “very”. The past five years show something little short of mania on the part of the NSA and others for hoovering up data and undermining every encryption going. This is hardly surprising. It is what they do.极具争议的观点是否站得住脚,取决于从特例到一般的过程中持它的据有多强。关于安全部门一旦获得新的权力就可能任意行使的论断有多大说力呢?就技术而言,似乎是“非常有说力”。过去5年,我们看到了美国国家安全局及其他机构在搜集数据、破坏加密方面几近疯狂的一面。这不足为奇。这就是他们的工作。Yet technology presents special hazards under such an approach. Escalation is the rule rather than the exception when it comes to tech — as are unintended consequences. The most damaging cyber attacks are invisible until they have aly begun; the most alarming data losses often go undetected, and may remain so for years. It is an unforgiving arena in which to juggle protection and deception. But it is also one in which the very nature of the terrain makes a certain shared level of security integral to the health of the whole.然而,在这种做法下,技术意味着特殊的危险。对科技而言,不断升级是必然,而非例外——意想不到的后果同样如此。最具破坏性的网络攻击在实施之前通常无影无踪;最令人担忧的数据泄露常常不会被察觉,并且可能持续数年不被察觉。这是一个残酷的领域,很难在隐私保护和欺骗之间把握平衡,同时,这一领域的本质决定了某种共享安全级别,而后者不可避免地影响整体安全。Undermining encryption and opening back doors does not just give good guys tools for detecting bad guys. It also creates official data repositories and tools that are themselves vulnerable to assault. It exposes everyone to risks of infection and compromise, and debases vital currencies of trust and co-operation, together with the industries they support.破坏数据加密、打开后门不仅仅会为好人提供发现坏人的工具,还会创建自身易遭攻击的官方数据库和工具。这样做会使每个人面临遭受病毒感染并做出让步的风险,同时降低重要的信任与合作,以及这种信任与合作所撑的行业。Once developed, a technique can be used again and again. This is why staying safe in a digital age is a moving target, and absolute privacy a fantasy. Yet in these fraught circumstances, Mr Cook is right. Our future safety is best served by the best security for all.一项技术一旦被开发出来,就可以反复使用。这就是为什么在数字时代保安全是一个不断变动的目标,而绝对隐私权只是一种幻想。然而,在这些令人担忧的情况下,库克是对的。只有在所有人都享有最高安全的情况下,我们未来的安全才能得到最大保障。 /201602/428205张店区高新区妇幼保健院治疗前列腺炎多少钱

淄博前列腺炎多少费用Every silver lining has a cloud. The technologies that offer human beings comforts and opportunities that would have been unimaginable two centuries ago ultimately depend on an abundance of energy. Fire is the source of that energy. But the burning of fossil fuels, from which we gain so much, also releases the carbon dioxide that threatens to destabilise the climate.每一线光明都伴随一片乌云。技术给人类带来的舒适生活和机遇,是两百年前无法想象的,这些技术从根本上来说都要依赖大量的能量。而火是能量的来源。但化石燃料的燃烧虽然给我们带来许多好处,其释放的二氧化碳却会威胁气候稳定。For some, the answer to this challenge is to embrace poverty. But humanity will not — and should not be expected to — give up the prosperity that some aly enjoy and others greatly desire. The answer lies instead in breaking the links between prosperity and fossil fuels, fossil fuels and emissions, and emissions and the climate. We must not reject technology, but transform it.有些人认为,解决这一问题的办法就是安于贫困。但人类不会——也不应当——放弃一些人已经享有、而其他人还极其渴望的繁荣。相反,解决办法在于打破繁荣与化石燃料之间、化石燃料与排放之间以及排放与气候之间的联系。我们决不能抵制技术,而是要进行技术变革。This is not yet happening. BP’s latest Statistical Review of World Energy shows that global demand for commercial energy continues to grow, largely driven by growth of emerging countries, despite improvements in energy efficiency. Moreover, fossil fuels meet the bulk of that demand. In 2014, renewables contributed just over 2 per cent of global primary energy consumption. Together, nuclear power, hydroelectricity and renewables contributed merely 14 per cent. (See chart.)然而,目前还未形成这种局面。英国石油公司(BP)最新的《世界能源统计年鉴》(Statistical Review of World Energy)显示,虽然能源效率有所提高,但全球对商业能源的需求仍在继续增长,主要受新兴国家增长的驱动。此外,化石燃料满足了其中大部分需求。2014年,可再生能源仅占全球一次能源消费的2%多一点。核电、水电和可再生能源加在一起仅占14%。(见图表)A report entitled “A Global Apollo Programme to Combat Climate Change”, written by a number of high-profile British scientists and economists, offers a bold answer. It argues that carbon-free energy has to become competitive with fossil fuels. “Once this happened, the coal, gas and oil would simply stay in the ground.”由英国多位著名科学家和经济学家撰写、题为《应对气候变化全球阿波罗计划》(A Global Apollo Programme to Combat Climate Change)的报告,提出了一个大胆的解决方法。该报告认为,无碳能源必须能够与化石燃料竞争。“在那种情况下,煤炭、天然气以及石油就会保留在地下了。”The need, then, is to generate a technological revolution. The paper (named after the successful mission to the moon of the 1960s) argues that this will require rapid technological advances. Progress is happening, notably the collapse in the price of photovoltaic panels. But this is not enough. The sun provides 5,000 times more energy than humans demand from industrial sources. But we do not know how to exploit enough of it.所以,我们需要的是一场技术革命。该报告(根据上世纪60年代的登月计划命名)认为,这将要求快速的技术进步。进步正在发生,尤其是光伏电池板价格在大幅下跌。但这还不够。太阳提供的能源是人类在工业方面的能源需求的5000倍,但我们还不知道如何充分利用太阳能。Despite the evident need, publicly-funded research and development on renewable energy is under 2 per cent of all publicly-funded Ramp;D. At just bn a year, worldwide, it is dwarfed by the 1bn spent on subsidies for renewable production and the amazing total of 0bn spent on subsidising fossil fuel production and consumption.尽管有明显的需求,但在公共资金持的所有研发活动中,可再生能源研发仅占不到2%。全世界每年仅有60亿美元的资金用于可再生能源研发。相比之下,用于补贴可再生能源生产的资金为1010亿美元,补贴化石燃料生产和消费的资金更是高达5500亿美元。This is a grotesque picture. Far more money needs to go to publicly funded research. The public sector has long played a vital role in funding scientific and technological breakthroughs. In this case, that role is particularly important, given the agreed goal of reducing emissions and the fact that the energy sector spends relatively little on Ramp;D.这是一幅怪诞景象。必须在可再生能源研发方面投入更多的资金。长期以来,来自公共部门的资金在实现科学技术突破方面发挥了至关重要的作用。就可再生能源领域来说,考虑到各国协商的减排目标以及能源行业在研发上投入相对较少的事实,公共部门的作用显得尤为重要。The envisaged programme would have a single purpose: “To develop renewable energy supplies that are cheaper than those from fossil fuels.” The authors suggest that to do this, research should focus on electricity generation, storage and smart grids. The suggested programme would amount to bn a year, still a mere 0.02 per cent of world output. That is indeed a minimal amount, given the goal’s importance.该报告中提出的计划只有一个目的:“开发比化石燃料更便宜的可再生能源。”几位作者认为,要做到这一点,应把研究重点放在发电、存储和智能电网方面。所提议的计划每年需花费资金150亿美元,这样也仅占全球产出的0.02%。考虑到该目标的重要性,这是一个最低限度的数额。Any country that decided to join would commit to spending this proportion of its national income. While the money would be spent at each country’s discretion, the programme would generate an annually updated road-map of the breakthroughs needed to maintain the pace of cost reduction. The suggestion is that heads of government agree such a programme of accelerated and targeted research by the time of the Paris climate conference later this year.任何决定加入该计划的国家都要承诺将占国民收入0.02%的资金投入可再生能源研发。虽然各国可自行决定如何使用这些资金,该计划每年都将发布一份新的科技突破路线图,这些突破是维持成本削减步伐所需要取得的。该报告建议各国政府首脑在今年晚些时候巴黎气候会议召开之前,一致通过这一关于加快和有针对性地进行研究的计划。Improved technology might end our dependence on the burning of fossil fuels. It might also reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide that accompany that burning. But Climate Shock by Gernot Wagner and Martin Weitzman, notes that new technology might also break the final link — that between emissions and climate. This then raises the seductive, but dangerous, possibility of geo-engineering — seductive because it may seem cheap, and dangerous because its results are so uncertain.技术水平提高或许会结束我们对燃烧化石燃料的依赖。它或许也会减少伴随燃烧过程的二氧化碳排放。赫尔诺特#8226;瓦格纳(Gernot Wagner)与马丁#8226;威茨曼(Martin Weitzman)合著的《气候冲击》(Climate Shock)指出,新技术也可能打破最后一个联系——排放与气候之间的联系。这就引出了实施诱人但危险的“地球工程”(geo-engineering)的可能性——诱人,是因为它可能看起来便宜;危险,是因为其后果非常不确定。Some ideas for geo-engineering are close to carbon capture and storage, which is aimed at eliminating emissions from specific facilities. Carbon-dioxide removal might be applied to the atmosphere: this is what plants do. Another idea is “ocean fertilisation”, to accelerate natural absorption of carbon dioxide.地球工程方面的一些构想接近于碳捕获和储存,旨在消除特定设施的排放。去除二氧化碳的做法可能适用于大气:植物就起到这样的作用。另一种想法是“海洋施肥”(ocean fertilisation),加速对二氧化碳的自然吸收。Replication of the atmospheric impact of a volcanic eruption would directly offset the impact of greenhouse gases. The matter emitted by the eruption at Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991 lowered global temperatures by 0.5C. The 20m tonnes of sulphur dioxide emitted dimmed the amount of radiation from the sun by 2 to 3 per cent in the following year. If we continue on our present path, that is the sort of measure people might well try to replicate.再现火山爆发对气候的影响将直接抵消温室气体的影响。1991年菲律宾的皮纳图火山(Mount Pinatubo)爆发所产生的物质使全球气温下降了0.5摄氏度。喷发出的2000万吨二氧化硫在随后一年里削弱了来自太阳的2%至3%的辐射。如果我们继续现在的道路,将来人们很可能会尝试这类措施。It is not hard to envisage the dangers of such an intervention. It could not be a one-off, since particles put into the atmosphere would quickly fall out of it again. So the actions would have to be repeated on an ever-larger scale, as concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere increased.不难想象此种干预带来的危险。它不可能是一次性的,因为排放到大气中的微粒很快会再次掉下来。所以,随着大气中温室气体浓度的增加,这样的行动将不得不以越来越大的规模反复进行。Such a programme of deliberate pollution of the global atmosphere might well be viewed as an act of war. The consequences of repeated large-scale planetary engineering of this kind would also be highly unpredictable. This must be a very last resort.这样一个故意污染全球大气的计划很可能被视为一种战争行为。反复进行这种大规模行星工程的后果也极难预测。这只能作为最后的手段。The best way of responding to the challenge of climate change is through changed incentives and accelerated innovation aimed at making carbon-free technologies competitive with fossil fuels. Both demand more active public policies. The proposed Apollo programme would be an essential element. Its proposed costs are modest; its potential upsides are enormous. Success would be transformative. It would be far better to try and fail than not to try at all.应对气候变化挑战,最好的方法是改革激励机制,同时加快创新步伐,使无碳技术能够与化石燃料竞争。这两方面都需要更积极的公共政策。拟议的阿波罗计划将是至关重要的一环。其实施的成本并不大,而潜在的好处是巨大的。成功在于变革。试错要远胜于根本不去尝试。 /201507/384382沂源县男科电话 淄博去哪里治疗前列腺

淄博无痛包皮手术费用Will a magnet really destroy your smartphone?磁铁真的会毁了你的智能手机吗?Do magnets actually pose a terrifying risk to our gadgets, and where did we get the idea that they’re dangerous in the first place?磁铁真的会对我们的智能工具造成威胁吗?我们又是为什么会认为它们是危险的?Let’s find out.现在我们就来揭晓。This more than likely stems from old electronic devices, such as CRT monitors and televisions, which were susceptible to magnetic fields, explains Matt Newby from first4magnets, ;When placing a strong magnet near one of these you could distort the picture. Thankfully, modern televisions and monitors aren’t susceptible in this way.;“老式电子设备如 CRT 显示器和电视机易受磁场影响,”first4magnets公司的马特·纽比解释道,“当你在这些设备附件放置强力磁铁时,画面可能会变形。不过值得庆幸的是,现代电视机和显示器不易受到此种影响。”Most modern electronics, like our smartphones, are not going to be adversely affected by small magnets; but is that all there is to it?大多数现代电子产品,比如我们的智能手机,不太会受到小型磁铁的不利影响,不过事情真是如此吗?How do magnets affect smartphones?磁铁是如何影响智能手机的?The vast majority of magnets that you come across day to day, even many of the super-strong ones on the market, will have no adverse effect on your smartphone, says Matt, ;In fact, within the device there will be a number of very small magnets which perform important functions.For example, the new Apple Watch uses a magnetic inductive wireless charging system.;马特表示“我们在日常生活中见到的绝大多数的磁铁,甚至市面上那种超强磁铁都不会对指智能手机造成伤害”,“事实上,在一些装置内会有若干非常小但却发挥重要作用的磁铁。例如,最新一代的苹果手表就使用了磁性感应无线充电系统。”However, before you get carried away and start rubbing magnets all over your smartphone, there is something else to consider.不过,在你大松一口气,开始用磁铁在你的智能手机上划来划去之前,还要了解一些事情。Matt warned that magnetic fields can temporarily interfere with the digital compass and magnetometer inside your smartphone, and that’s more serious than you may think.马特警告说,磁场可能暂时干扰智能手机里的数字罗盘和磁强计,而其后果远比你想象的严重。The engineers over at Kamp;J Magnetics actually experimented with an iPhone to show how the sensors inside can be affected by a magnet.其实,Kamp;J Magnetics工程师已经用iPhone进行了实验,来检测磁铁会如何影响iPhone内部的传感器。The problem we found is that a nearby magnet will affect the internal magnetic sensors inside the phone. The compass won’t correctly, explained Michael Paul, an engineer at Kamp;J, ;What’s worse, if you stick a strong magnet to the phone, you could slightly magnetize some steel components inside, making them act like weak magnets. This can make it difficult to properly calibrate the compass.;“我们发现附近的磁铁会影响手机内部的磁性传感器。造成指南针失常,”Kamp;J Magnetics的工程师Michael Paul解释道,“更糟糕的如果你在手机旁放置强力磁铁,里面的一些钢构件会稍稍磁化,他们会变成弱磁铁。这样指南针便难以正确校对。”You might think it’s unimportant because you never use the compass app, but that doesn’t mean other apps aren’t relying on the same sensor.你可能认为这不重要,因为你从来不使用指南针这个应用程序,但这并不意味着其他应用程序不依赖于相同的传感器。Google (GOOGL, Tech30) Maps, for example, uses the sensor to detect which way the phone is facing, and a number of games also rely on it to work out your orientation.例如,谷歌公司(GOOGLTech30)的谷歌地图就使用传感器来检测你的朝向,而且很多游戏也依靠它来判断你的方向。It seems as though magnets aren’t likely to kill your smartphone, but there’s definitely a possibility they’ll mess some pretty important aspects up, so why take the risk?虽然磁铁不会让你的智能手机报废,但它极有可能扰乱一些重要的原件,因此我们完全不必冒这样的险。 /201506/378577 Another week, another wave of cyber alarm in America. On Wednesday both the New York Stock Exchange and ed Airlines suspended activity for several hours due to mysterious computing problems, while the Wall Street Journal’s website briefly went down. All three insisted that the outages reflected technical hitches, not malicious attack. But many are anxious after past assaults on mighty American companies and agencies.上周,美国拉响了又一波网络警报。上周三,纽约交所(NYSE)和美国联合航空(ed Airlines)都因为神秘的计算机故障暂停运转数小时,《华尔街日报》(WSJ)网站也短暂出现无法打开的问题。以上三家机构都坚称,务中断是因为技术故障,而非恶意攻击。但此前一些强大的美国企业和机构遭受的攻击让许多人对此感到焦虑。In February Anthem, an insurance company, revealed that cyber hackers had stolen information on 80m customers. The Washington-based Office of Personnel Management said cyber hackers had taken data on millions of federal employees. Companies ranging from retailers to banks have been attacked, too.今年2月,保险公司Anthem披露,网络黑客窃取了其8000万名客户的信息。位于华盛顿的美国人事(Office of Personnel Management)表示,网络黑客窃取了数百万联邦雇员的资料。从零售商到等各类企业也遭到了网络攻击。On Wednesday — just as the NYSE was frozen — Cambridge university and Lloyds insurance group released a report suggesting that if a cyber assault breached America’s electrical grid, this could create tn dollars of damage. A few minutes later, James Comey, the FBI director, told Congress that it is struggling to crack encryption tools used by jihadis. In May, Mr Comey said Islamic terrorists were “waking up” to the idea of using malware to attack critical infrastructure. It is scary stuff.上周三,就在纽交所因故障暂停交易的时候,剑桥大学(University of Cambridge)和保险集团劳合社(Lloyd#39;s)发布了一篇报告,称如果有一次网络攻击突破了美国的电网,将给美国带来1万亿美元的损失。几分钟后,美国联邦调查局(FBI)局长詹姆斯#8226;科米(James Comey)告诉国会,FBI很难破解圣战分子使用的加密工具。科米在5月份表示,伊斯兰恐怖分子使用恶意软件攻击关键基础设施的意识“正在觉醒”。真是可怕的事情。The key issue that investors, politicians and voters need to ponder is not simply who might be the next target, but whether Washington has the right system in place to handle these attacks. The answer is almost certainly No.关键问题是,投资者、政界人士和选民不仅需要考虑谁可能会是下一个目标,还需要考虑华盛顿是否已部署好能够应对这些攻击的合适机制。几乎毫无疑问是否定的。On paper, there is no shortage of resources; earlier this year, for example, President Barack Obama earmarked bn for the cyber fight. But the key problem now is not so much a lack of cash — but co-ordination: as fear sps, a bewildering alphabet soup of different agencies and task forces is leaping into cyber battle, often with little collaboration. The institution that is supposed to be in charge of security threats is the Department of Homeland Security. But its skills are viewed with scepticism by military officials. The Pentagon has its own cyber warriors, as do America’s intelligence agencies.名义上,资源并不短缺;比如,今年早些时候,美国总统巴拉克#8226;奥巴马(Barack Obama)指定了140亿美元作为为网络战专项资金。但现在的关键问题,与其说是缺乏资金,不如说是缺乏协作;随着恐惧扩散开来,让人眼花缭乱的众多不同机构和特别行动组纷纷投身网络战,而它们往往很少相互协作。理论上负责应对安全威胁的应是美国国土安全部(Department of Homeland Security)。但军方官员对国土安全部的技能持怀疑看法。五角大楼(Pentagon)有自己的网络战士,美国的情报机构也是如此。The White House has tried to force these bodies to work together. Separately, civilian agencies such as Nuclear Regulatory Commission started holding discreet meetings with each other last autumn on cyber issues too. But collaboration across sectors is patchy. “The level of iness in different agencies varies enormously,” admits a senior Washington figure at the centre of these efforts. Add in private sector bodies and the picture is even worse: not only is the Pentagon wary of sharing data with, say, the Chamber of Commerce, but companies are often terrified of revealing attacks to each other.白宫试图迫使这些机构合作。去年秋天,美国核管理委员会(NRC)等非军事机构之间已经开始低调地就网络攻击问题举行会议。但跨部门之间的协作情况参差不齐。“不同机构的意愿相差极大,”一名主持加强协作努力的华盛顿高级官员承认。如果再算上私营部门实体,情况就显得更糟了:不仅五角大楼对于与美国商会(U.S. Chamber of Commerce)分享数据保持警惕,企业之间通常也害怕互相透露受到网络攻击的情况。Is there a solution? One sensible response might be to create a new agency to provide a central focus for the cyber fight. There is precedent for that; most Washington regulators emerged in response to a new threat. The Securities and Exchange Commission, for example, was created after the 1929 stock market crash; the Food and Drug Administration appeared after scandals over dangerous medicines. A second option might be to relaunch the DHS to focus on the cyber fight. It could, for example, be named the Department of Cyber and Homeland Security.有解决方法吗?一种合理回应可能是成立一个重点应对网络战的新机构。这是有先例的:大多数华盛顿监管机构最初都是为了应对一种新威胁而成立的。 比如,美国交会(SEC)是在1929年股市崩盘后成立的;美国食品药品监督(FDA)是在曝出危险药品丑闻后成立的。第二个选项可能是将国土安全部改头换面,专注于网络战。比如,国土安全部可以被重新命名为网络和国土安全部。Either way, Washington needs to answer the question that Henry Kissinger once posed in relation to Europe: in a crisis: “Who do I call?” Some countries have found ways: Australia has impressive levels of co-ordination between the public and private sector over cyber defences. But as the sense of tribalism builds in Washington, the sad truth is that it may take something — like a really big crisis — before anyone can bang bureaucratic heads together in an effective way. Better just hope that this “something” will not be too devastating; such as a real attack on the transport sector and markets.无论采取哪种方式,华盛顿都需要回答亨利#8226;基辛格(Henry Kissinger)曾经对欧洲提出的那个问题:危急时刻,“我该打给谁”?一些国家已经找到了方法:澳大利亚的公共和私营部门在网络防御方面的协作程度令人印象深刻。但由于华盛顿内部的部落主义思想,令人悲哀的真相是,美国或许需要经历一些事情——比如一场真正严重的危机——才会有人将官僚体系的头头脑脑有效地联合起来。我们最好还是希望这件“事情”不会太具毁灭性;比如一次针对交通部门和市场的真正攻击。 /201507/385714淄博市市级机关医院泌尿外科淄博市妇保医院治疗性功能障碍多少钱



张店区高新区治疗睾丸炎多少钱 淄博治疗包皮的医院qq专栏 [详细]
淄博友谊门诊部上下班时间 淄博男科在线 [详细]
淄博治疗早泄比较比较好的医院 指导科技淄博做包皮需要多少钱wo沃报道 [详细]
淄博 阳痿早泄好的医院
预约挂号经验淄博那个医院治疗男科最好 淄博哪里治生殖器感染芒果口碑淄博市那家割包皮好又便宜 [详细]