Trump Administration Begins Shifting Cyberattack Response to States | Hacker News Reader

Trump Administration Begins Shifting Cyberattack Response to States

wsj.com

11 pointskrunck10 comments

Although my company is a small, private firm, we maintain systems that are considered important public infrastructure and as such we are eligible to work with CISA. They have provided red team pen-testing for us in the past, though my understanding is that that team has now been let go by DOGE. They also provide weekly vulnerability scans and reports as well as supplemental scans when new threats are found. We literally got a notice from them today about a PHP vulnerability and rectified it within a few hours of the alert. They been a good resource for us and I hope that they are able to continue.

Relevant context from 2024:

“State and Local Courts Struggle to Fight Increasing Cyberattacks”

https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/state...

https://archive.is/aTBYD

This proves Trump has never run a large enterprise. Imagine the Federal Government were an enterprise, and the States were the departments of that enterprise. What is the most effective way to secure all the departments? Have each department take care of it themselves, with a mishmash of standards, vendors, and an extremely increased attack surface area? Or do it at the enterprise level and benefit from economies of scale, centralized management, and centralized expertise?

I'm sure every single HN reader got this question correct: you secure at the enterprise level. Yet our Chief Executive, the CEO of the United States, got it wrong. That's embarrassing.

I wonder how many states will subcontract security to the next CloudStrike?

More like: the seven swing states which decide elections have chosen a generous package deal with X Cybersecurity.

Donald Trump managed to own casinos and lose money.

I don't know where the myth that he's a particularly brilliant businessman even comes from. His career is a string of failures, lawsuits and bankruptcies. I think the only thing keeping him afloat is his connections to the Russian mafia. Which for some reason has never been an issue.

He played a caricature of a businessman on TV. I bet you've never watched a minute of that. Neither have I. Reality TV is Soma for boomers.

For young men, it's Joe Rogan. I don't understand how people can listen to that for hours. And video games.

The gap between men's and women's worldview is wider than ever because the men, especially young men, are vastly more addicted to the Soma of their generation.

It's not money it's not religion. It's not lacking the body of an athlete. It's not education. It's not some mythical positive masculinity. People old and young did it to themselves.

This is absolutely true. There is another issue as well. The way the US (and other sovereign currency issuers) spend is fundamentally different from the way the states spend. Unlike the states (or people, or a corporation)--and despite the misapprehension of all too many people--the federal government doesn't go into debt when it spends, and doesn't save anything when it doesn't. States, however, must raise money to spend. They don't issue currency. So what is going to happen here? States simply won't prioritize this. My state is busy cutting taxes for the rich. Do you think they'll cancel that to prioritize this? Think again. So what is the ultimate goal here?

Oh, and this: "“Human-to-human partnership is free. That’s coffee and bagels” (Gustavo Rodriguez, CEO of Digital First Responders). People's time and expertise is free, apparently.

Does economic doctrine exclude economies of scale these days?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com