There are some advantages and disadvantages of having these types of tools. However, in my own perspective, there are more disadvantages which make these types of tools not convenient in this type of community. Even though the military and the intelligence agencies are able to install many securities in their systems, it is still dangerous to share "Top Secret" Information.
The principal concern which I have is "Hackers". These people are experts in the computer field and are dedicated to steal and do illegal stuff in the computer. Those people can be located anywhere in the world and can be able to steal "Top Secret" information. It is very difficult to catch them because they can be very far away from United States and usually they are constantly moving. Top Secret information cannot be trusted in these types of community services. Even though there are many security barriers which protect that information, I would not share any important information.
One advantage is that the CIA or other intelligence agency can be able to mislead the hackers by publishing information which is totally opposite to the reality. For example, they can write that they have some powerful weapons in Italy, and the reality can be located in France. Also, they can mention that they will look for terrorist in Iran, and actually they will start looking in Afghanistan. This will help in misleading the terrorist and other criminals into the favor of United States.
I am not saying that Intelligence Agencies should not use Web 2.0 tools, but rather that confidential and "Top Secret" information should not be share at all in computer systems. Intelligence agencies can use these tools for other purposes such as talk with their families, post future meetings, communicate with each other (as a social tool), and many other ways which does not include any risk of sharing important information
Web 2.0 tools are very important tools which can be utilized, but the intelligence agencies should limit in the type of information it is placed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I did not read your post before I wrote mine, but we both have the same concern about the security of these tools. I think that any information that could jeopardize national security should be excluded from discussion while using these tools. Also that is a good idea that you mentioned to post misleading information to throw people off that might be trying to "hack" vital information. -Danabra
ReplyDeleteHackers are definitely my main concern as well. It looks like we are all basically in the same mindset as far as the government and Web 2.0 are concerned. I don't like the idea of our governments secrets being looked at by anyone who has a high level of computer hacking skills. Who knows who they would be willing to show their "hacked" information to...
ReplyDeleteI too brought up hackers and security in general. I also spoke about the possibilities that could come out of organized disinformation efforts. I am still worried by 2.0 in this context and wonder if we ought to wait for 3.2a or something. Of course, this may all be moot because the government may well already be utilizing all of these things covertly.
ReplyDeleteGood stuff in your post.
Security of web 2.0 is something that I think we can all agree on, but the use of wikipedia type sites and RSS feeds isn't really that drastic of a change in terms of security. The only reason I say that is because classified information has been in an online format for years and it's susceptibility to hacking and/or intrusion has always been a concern. There was a huge news story about a year ago in regards to the Chinese hacking into national intelligence assets, and it brought up the point that there are literally thousands of attacks on government networks each year. Pretty crazy...
ReplyDelete