<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tampering with Transportainers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://philosecurity.org/2008/08/25/tampering-with-transportainers/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://philosecurity.org/2008/08/25/tampering-with-transportainers</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:41:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Carpenter</title>
		<link>http://philosecurity.org/2008/08/25/tampering-with-transportainers/comment-page-1#comment-4470</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Carpenter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:49:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://philosecurity.org/?p=123#comment-4470</guid>
		<description>&gt; I studied the bolt, intrigued that the security of our global 
&gt; supply chain rests on such an innocuous object.

I am not. Not at all actually. I think the security of our global supply chain rests in numbers. There is simply too much supply moving to too many places for the &quot;global supply chain&quot;. Nothing you could do would be more than a blip. Things are stolen, and smuggled every day of the week. Generally speaking, it doesn&#039;t matter.

Truely terrible things, like contaminating food, have very little use, and very little benefit. Most people can be coerced or convinced into doing bad things, like the adware author you interviewed, but.... very very very few can be convinced to actually directly hurt people in an undeniable way. 

Those that can are too few in number and means to do anything of signifigance, as shown by the fact that they never have done anything of signifigance. 

So far they have killed a laughably small number of people, destroyed a ridiculously tiny number of buildings and planes, and generally, not much else other than making &quot;statements&quot;.

You found a few  mole hills, not a mountain chain. 

I think Lawrence Lessig&#039;s Essay on &quot;Insanely Destructive Devices&quot; pretty much says it all: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.04/view.html?pg=5

-Steve</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; I studied the bolt, intrigued that the security of our global<br />
&gt; supply chain rests on such an innocuous object.</p>
<p>I am not. Not at all actually. I think the security of our global supply chain rests in numbers. There is simply too much supply moving to too many places for the &#8220;global supply chain&#8221;. Nothing you could do would be more than a blip. Things are stolen, and smuggled every day of the week. Generally speaking, it doesn&#8217;t matter.</p>
<p>Truely terrible things, like contaminating food, have very little use, and very little benefit. Most people can be coerced or convinced into doing bad things, like the adware author you interviewed, but&#8230;. very very very few can be convinced to actually directly hurt people in an undeniable way. </p>
<p>Those that can are too few in number and means to do anything of signifigance, as shown by the fact that they never have done anything of signifigance. </p>
<p>So far they have killed a laughably small number of people, destroyed a ridiculously tiny number of buildings and planes, and generally, not much else other than making &#8220;statements&#8221;.</p>
<p>You found a few  mole hills, not a mountain chain. </p>
<p>I think Lawrence Lessig&#8217;s Essay on &#8220;Insanely Destructive Devices&#8221; pretty much says it all: <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.04/view.html?pg=5" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.04/view.html?pg=5</a></p>
<p>-Steve</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
