The internet kill switch and other lies the internet told you
By Laura June 
posted June 24th 2010 11:43AM
posted June 24th 2010 11:43AM
So what are Lieberman's evil plans for the 'net? His proposal, S. 3480, is a far more subtle document than the original act, which essentially says "hey, do whatever you have to do, man," and calls for the designation of cyberspace as a 'national asset.' It asks for the private owners of critical infrastructure to develop risk assessment plans, and plans to mitigate that risk, in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security. There are also several recommended procedures called for in the event of an emergency, but none of them have anything to do with a mechanism to shut anything down, and the director would be expressly prohibited from requiring owners to use any specific mechanism. So... the exact opposite of a kill switch. Also, it's worthwhile to note that the entire proposition calls for these changes to be developed by the private sector itself, rather than imposed on it. Kind of makes the story a little less interesting, that's for sure. Hit up the source -- Talking Points Memo -- for a far more detailed, insightful account of what's actually going down.
"We're Sorry. The Internet is not currently available right now, we're all screwed"
KTHXBAI Love Obama.
@geekthree
"Internet Justic League: Steve Jobs, Bill Balmer, and Google Dev Team...will save us all from the radical government."
@geekthree
I'm still waiting for the Chinese attack where every single .com address redirects to a rick roll.
@geekthree
KILLSWITCH ENGAGE FTW!
That band is AWESOME!
Sorry to hijack ^.^
@DeFlanko
You kidding me right?
Steve himself LOVES cutting people off!
Google itself is becoming the Government when it comes to internet.
And who the fuc* is Bill Ballmer...
If you were referring to the Nerdy guy donning nerdy glasses... he's busy in Africa swatting flies and mosquitoes.
And if you were referring to the bald idiot... he's off soaking in champagne celebrating the sales figures.
So basically, you are out of luck if you are relying on them.
@geekthree
people just read the headlines on huffington post and overreact. its really sad and pathetic that people dont even research anything anymore and go online and complain on comments.
@uckApple
Pfff metal for teens and emos
Internet is just a series of tubes anyways.
@uckApple Wouldn't the exact opposite of a killswitch be more like a defibrillator rather than an inability to force private owners to act?
I hijacked also, and also have been fond of some Killswitch (I actually subconsciously capitalized my first use of "killswitch").
Anything that happens "in conjunction" with Homeland Security is bound to hit the fan eventually, and those bits usually end up on the people of the country...
@geekthree
Mistake in the post. The president does not currently have the power to shut down the internet. Not even the tc act of 34 would cover it. It is not now considered a "telecommunication" under current law. The new proposal would change that. Does anyone actually do any research anymore?
@DoctarPeppar I think its a combination of bill gates and Steve balmer
@uckApple
Are you a 12 year old girl?
Can't stop the signal, Mal.
@thisisit
If it's just a series of tubes then maybe we can kill it by stuffing it with golf balls and garbage.
So, you guys still want Net Neutrality, and the FCC declaring the internet as a public utility? 'cause this is exactly why they want to put those legislations in place.
@James T Kirk Rhats a Wick Woll?
@geekthree
They would deny us our pr0n in our moment of greatest need?
@Soletaken I dunno, I think if they kept porn and lol cats up.. that'd be enough for 70% of the population.
Oh, and farmville... but why not take the opportunity to kill that while the internets down?
@coolicer Ah, shut up. Go listen to some grindcore/mathcore/buttcore or whatever flavor makes you feel cooler than the next iPod owner. I'm so cool I just listen to static - how underground is that?
@Slowrollin What the hell. Somehow my post got deleted. Anyway Firefly reference = yes.
@kid300 Just admit androids ugly Especially when it comes to Israel.. I"m not saying everything Israel does is right but the (Liberal) Media does everything to make the country look evil without even considering the other people involved.
@kid300 Just admit androids ugly Especially when it comes to Israel.
I like the homage to some heavy metal greats. Nicely done Engadget.
Nerds love to head bang!
@FrankieV
I hope they would never use that Killswitch(Engage)... I would hate to give it "My Last Serenade"...
@FrankieV New Killswitch album is meh. But the fact that the geeks that write for Engadget actually know who they are is a step in the right direction.
@BuryTheCastle
to think they'd do such a thing "when darkness falls".
i make joke :) :)
It's not possible to shut internet down everywhere in the world right? Unless every country cooperates?
@MoonWalkerCTE
How can one shut down that which does not exist?
@GeneralThade
They can still EMP the hell out of the servers.
@Aguiluz
You could probably just shut down few key datacenters and most importantly a few key Routers (no not a small box in your house, but a huge (small) room filling behemoth routing main servers on the Internet)
which are on the American soil and that would pretty much fuck most of the Internet up...
@coolicer wut if i kill google in teh face. lol
@MoonWalkerCTE Technically no. Its impossible.It is a network of networks. So in order for them to "shutdown the internet" They would have to destroy or turn off every LAN that is interconnected. So school systems... etc
@MoonWalkerCTE
Seems like shutting down access would be easier...
@MoonWalkerCTE The Internet was designed to withstand single-point failures by being able to reroute communication packets around dead nodes. It would be a major effort to essentially "turn off the Internet". But they could certainly knock out major web sites, but they would have a hard time "killing" point-to-point communication without some major shifts in the architecture of the 'net.
@meshack
All they would have to do is shut down all of the service providers. It's not that complicated. If you don't have access to the sites then they might as well not exist.
@MoonWalkerCTE: Nepal has it, and it was used once by the now deposed King during the revolution. The state runs the main telecom and has it's finger on the button. China has it too obviously. No surprises here in Asia:)
@GeneralThade Why Engadget... Why does G-d make so many stupid stupid people.
Engadget metal column please.
i could only imangine Obama covering his eyes with one hand and the other hovering over a big red button labeled "kill interweb tubes!".
Yes, because the Internet needs the kind of oversight, procedures, and plans that resulted in the BP spill. Lots of CYA, so when sh*t goes bad, the President can look tough and find someone's arse to kick.
I trust the people actually doing the job of making the Internet work a lot more than those trying to coordinate it all. Planners suck.
@Bosco
yeah, the BP oil spill was solely caused by the presence of any regulation at all.
@ObieWanKenobie Well then its good thing the internet has standards like TCP/IP LOL
@Bosco So your argument is inadequate regulation forced Horizon and BP to construct and operate oil rigs incapable of handling blowout contingencies? Seriously? Horizon & BP instituted cost savings and cut back on corporate operations oversight in order to save money. Then they disregarded their own people's concerns onsite and the information coming back in order to save money.
By declaring cyberspace a 'national asset,' they are staking their territory. Who has control over national assets? The government, of course, as they should. However, the argument still remains as to whether the government should have (more) control over cyberspace...
Also, in saying that "...the entire proposition calls for these changes to be developed by the private sector itself..." I think they are really saying, "If you don't do this how and within the timeframe we want you to, we will take other measures." Like, making critical infrastructure owners adopt the emergency protocols that they deem appropriate.
As for shutting down the internet, I do think that would be pretty difficult. Does anyone know if the government in Iran tried that during the protests? And if they did try it, how did it go? However, I'm not worried that the government will shut it all down at once and shove us into a 1984 scenario. It would start by shutting down "undesirable" sites, like 'hate' sites (which could be anything), or pornography, or sites that leak sensitive info (wikileaks, perhaps). I just don't really trust anyone to have that kind of control, because it will inevitably go too far.
At least the internet kill switch will kill my facebook addiction too...
@walter164 *sigh* same here, I guess that is the only upside to this whole thing.
Makes sense for a killswitch to be set up already.
Soooo do they just unplug that big Linksys router in Cal-i-forn-i-way?
@Uncompliant
All Hail the Giant Linksys Router!
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/17/screen-grabs-giant-linksys-wifi-router-is-the-internet/