Posted on 12/23/2011 8:07:48 PM PST by nuconvert
Iran has moved most of its government websites to local hosts to protect them from cyber attacks, the country's deputy communications minister said on Thursday.
Ali Hakim Javadi, who is also head of Iran's technology organisation, said more than 90 percent of the websites had already been transferred as "it was necessary to protect governmental information on the Internet."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Probably made them less secure.
Could one of you really smart Freepers tell us how “Moving a website to a local host” is going to protect the website from an outside attack? It would seem that if the website is on the internet, then it is available for an “attack.” What am I missing here?
You are missing nothing. As a commenter above stated, this probably made them LESS secure.
Which is just fine by me...
Not missing anything. If their 'local hosts' are connected to the outside then they can be hacked.
mark to read later.
Lets see. Local security vs. paid security.
Lets see. Local security vs. paid security.
Lets see. Local security vs. paid security.
They figure any remote site is in the pockets of the US or Isreal. If you bring it in house, you know where it is and who has access. But it’s like bringing your cash home from the bank. You know where it is...but is it really more secure than a bank vault?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.