Why are the Govt. officials like this ?

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politi...-2613285c.html

Quote:

---

Audit slams Oracle pact
Database software deal could cost state $41 million more.

Naive state officials signed an unprecedented $95 million software contract with Oracle Corp. despite little need for the software and claims of savings that turned out to be wildly overblown, state Auditor Elaine Howle said in a scathing report released Tuesday.

Instead of saving $16 million, the state could spend as much as $41 million more on the database software than it would have without the six-year licensing agreement.

---

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...assport18.html

Quote:

---

Feds might use Microsoft product for online ID

Forget about a national ID card. Instead, the federal government might use Microsoft's Passport technology to verify the online identity of America's citizens, federal employees and businesses, according to the White House technology czar.

---

Now, Passport is not a secure system at all.
I am not saying this because of the anti-microsoft hype, but the authentication system is insecure because the underlying technology that forms the backbone of it are insecure and pretty much limits the entire system.

A report on Passport by an AT & T Research team concluded....

"As e-commerce proliferates, the need for a tool to help users manage authentication and personal information across a variety of sites becomes increasingly critical. Passport is an ambitious attempt to meet this need while requiring no changes to existing browsers and servers. However, the system carries significant risks to users that are not made adequately clear in the technical documentation available.

The bulk of Passport's flaws arise directly from its reliance on systems that are either not trustworthy (such as HTTP referrals and the DNS) or assume too much about user awareness (such as SSL). Another flaw arises out of interactions with a particular browser (Netscape). Passport's attempt to retrofit the complex process of single sign-on to fit the limitations of existing browser technology leads to compromises that create real risks. "

http://avirubin.com/passport.html

Gov't officials are like this because on a good day, the senior
(55+ years old crowd) can find the on switch 3 times out of 5.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by thinktank2
Feds might use Microsoft product for online ID

---

If you tell me what Microsoft's contribution to GW's campaign funds was I'll tell you why the Feds might tie all future online identity of America's citizens to his technology regardless of suitablity:D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
Just two words:

Vested Interests.

Whenever the government makes a wrong move, it's just because the people in the government want to fill up their pockets. After all with all those highly educated bureaucrats sitting there with all the required information, you wouldn't expect them to make a blunder like this for nothing.

.

---

Honeybee - in some ways its probably even worse than that. The only way to get into office in the US is to get significant campaign donations and these generate commitments of this sort. So even if you have completely honest intension and don't want any filthy lucre yourself you still find your position distorted.

I think in the UK in the past because a lot of the decision making process was vested in the civil service with secure but unaccountable career bureaucrats whose incomes could be easily monitored (and were published) so financial distortions (bribes or money needed to get into office) were not a big problem - the problem there was accountability.