|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
More on the Active Defense Certainty Act
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Bobby Chesney raised a number of issues regarding the Active Defense Certainty Act, and I’m just getting into it now. I think Bobby’s comments are spot on, but I want to amplify some of his concerns.
Meaning of persistent intrusion
Bobby calls out the terms “persistent” and “intrusion” (victim of a persistent unauthorized intrusion). He asks what defines a “persistent intrusion,” and suggests dwell time or a series of intrusions by the same actor as possible definitions.
Ed.: Self defense against intrusions in your computer network. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/25/2017)
|
Might as well be talking Chinese.
I not only don't understand it, I don't GAF. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
