So, this book that I have in my hand is a directory of everybody who had an email address in 1982. (Laughter) Actually, it's deceptively large. There's actually only about 20 people on each page, because we have the name, address and telephone number of every single person. And, in fact, everybody's listed twice, because it's sorted once by name and once by email address. Obviously a very small community. There were only two other Dannys on the Internet then. I knew them both. We didn't all know each other, but we all kind of trusted each other, and that basic feeling of trust permeated the whole network, and there was a real sense that we could depend on each other to do things.
Ova knjiga koju držim u ruci je imenik svih ljudi koji su imali e-mail adrese 1982. (Smeh) On je u stvari samo naizgled velik. Postoji otprilike samo 20-ak ljudi na svakoj strani jer je tu ime, adresa i broj telefona svakog od njih. U stvari, svako je naveden dva puta, jednom poređan po imenu i jednom po e-mail adresi. Očigledno je u pitanju veoma mala zajednica. Tada su postojala samo još dva Denija na internetu. Poznavao sam obojicu. Nismo svi znali jedni druge, ali smo na neki način verovali jedni drugima i taj osećaj poverenja je prožimao čitavu mrežu i osećali smo se kao da se možemo osloniti jedni na druge za razne stvari.
So just to give you an idea of the level of trust in this community, let me tell you what it was like to register a domain name in the early days. Now, it just so happened that I got to register the third domain name on the Internet. So I could have anything I wanted other than bbn.com and symbolics.com. So I picked think.com, but then I thought, you know, there's a lot of really interesting names out there. Maybe I should register a few extras just in case. And then I thought, "Nah, that wouldn't be very nice."
Kako bih vam približio nivo poverenja u ovoj zajednici, dozvolite mi da vam ispričam kako je izgledala registracija internet domena na početku. Igrom slučaja, imao sam priliku da registrujem treći domen na internetu. Mogao sam da odaberem bilo šta sem bbn.com i symbolics.com. Odabrao sam think.com, ali sam onda pomislio da postoji mnogo poprilično interesantnih imena. Možda bih trebao da registrujem još koje za svaki slučaj. Ali sam onda pomislio: "Ne, to ne bi bilo lepo od mene."
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
That attitude of only taking what you need was really what everybody had on the network in those days, and in fact, it wasn't just the people on the network, but it was actually kind of built into the protocols of the Internet itself. So the basic idea of I.P., or Internet protocol, and the way that the -- the routing algorithm that used it, were fundamentally "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need." And so, if you had some extra bandwidth, you'd deliver a message for someone. If they had some extra bandwidth, they would deliver a message for you. You'd kind of depend on people to do that, and that was the building block. It was actually interesting that such a communist principle was the basis of a system developed during the Cold War by the Defense Department, but it obviously worked really well, and we all saw what happened with the Internet. It was incredibly successful.
U to vreme svi su na mreži uzimali samo ono što im je potrebno i u stvari to nije bilo samo do ljudi na mreži, već je to na neki način bilo ugrađeno u protokole samog interneta. Osnovna ideja IP-ja ili internet protokola i načina na koji ga je algoritam preusmeravanja koristio, bila je u osnovi: "od svakoga prema njihovim mogućnostima, svakome prema njihovoj potrebi." Tako da, ako ste imali višak protoka, preneli biste nečiju poruku umesto njih. Ako je neko imao višak protoka, oni bi preneli poruku za vas. Na neki način smo se oslanjali na ljude da to rade i to je bio kamen temeljac. U stvari je interesantno kako je takav komunistički princip bio osnova sistema koji je, tokom Hladnog rata razvilo Ministarstvo odbrane, ali je radio veoma dobro i svi smo videli šta se desilo s internetom. Postao je veoma uspešan.
In fact, it was so successful that there's no way that these days you could make a book like this. My rough calculation is it would be about 25 miles thick. But, of course, you couldn't do it, because we don't know the names of all the people with Internet or email addresses, and even if we did know their names, I'm pretty sure that they would not want their name, address and telephone number published to everyone.
U stvari, postao je toliko uspešan da ne postoji način da danas napravite knjigu kao što je ova. Procenjujem da bi bila debela oko 40 kilometara. Ali, naravno, ne možemo da to uradimo jer ne znamo imena svih ljudi sa pristupom internetu ili sa e-mail adresama. Čak i da znamo njihova imena, poprilično sam siguran da oni ne bi želeli da njihova imena, adrese i brojevi telefona budu dostupni svima.
So the fact is that there's a lot of bad guys on the Internet these days, and so we dealt with that by making walled communities, secure subnetworks, VPNs, little things that aren't really the Internet but are made out of the same building blocks, but we're still basically building it out of those same building blocks with those same assumptions of trust. And that means that it's vulnerable to certain kinds of mistakes that can happen, or certain kinds of deliberate attacks, but even the mistakes can be bad.
Činjenica je da postoji mnogo loših ljudi na internetu danas i borimo se protiv toga stvaranjem zaštićenih zajednica, bezbednih podmreža, virtuelnih privatnih mreža, malih stvari koje nisu baš internet, ali su sastavljene od istih delova, u osnovi ih gradimo iz istih onih delova i sa istim onim pretpostavkama o poverenju. To znači da su oni podložni određenim greškama koje se mogu desiti ili nekim namernim napadima, ali čak i same greške mogu biti loše.
So, for instance, in all of Asia recently, it was impossible to get YouTube for a little while because Pakistan made some mistakes in how it was censoring YouTube in its internal network. They didn't intend to screw up Asia, but they did because of the way that the protocols work. Another example that may have affected many of you in this audience is, you may remember a couple of years ago, all the planes west of the Mississippi were grounded because a single routing card in Salt Lake City had a bug in it. Now, you don't really think that our airplane system depends on the Internet, and in some sense it doesn't. I'll come back to that later. But the fact is that people couldn't take off because something was going wrong on the Internet, and the router card was down.
Na primer, nedavno je u čitavoj Aziji bilo nemoguće pristupiti Jutjubu neko vreme jer je Pakistan načinio neke greške u cenzuri Jutjuba u svojoj unutrašnjoj mreži. Nisu nameravali da zabrljaju u čitavoj Aziji, ali jesu zbog načina na koji protokoli funkcionišu. Još jedan primer koji je možda uticao na mnoge od vas u publici, možda se sećate pre nekoliko godina, svi avioni u Misisipiju su prinudno sleteli, jer je jedna jedina kartica za usmeravanje u Solt Lejk Sitiju imala grešku. Nikada ne pomislimo na to da naši avionski sistemi zavise od interneta i na neki način oni ni ne zavise. Vratiću se na to kasnije. Ali je činjenica da ljudi nisu mogli da polete jer nešto nije bilo u redu s internetom i kartica za usmeravanje nije radila.
And so, there are many of those things that start to happen. Now, there was an interesting thing that happened last April. All of a sudden, a very large percentage of the traffic on the whole Internet, including a lot of the traffic between U.S. military installations, started getting re-routed through China. So for a few hours, it all passed through China. Now, China Telecom says it was just an honest mistake, and it is actually possible that it was, the way things work, but certainly somebody could make a dishonest mistake of that sort if they wanted to, and it shows you how vulnerable the system is even to mistakes. Imagine how vulnerable the system is to deliberate attacks.
I tako razne stvari počinju da se dešavaju. Interesantna svar se desila prošlog aprila. Iznenada veliki procenat prometa na internetu uključujući i onaj između postrojenja vojske SAD bio je preusmeravan kroz Kinu. Nekoliko sati, sve je prolazilo kroz Kinu. Kineski Telekom tvrdi da je to bila nenamerna greška i moguće je da jeste, zbog načina na koji stvari funkcionišu, ali bi neko zasigurno mogao da napravi i namernu grešku tog tipa ukoliko bi želeo i to nam pokazuje koliko je sistem ranjiv, čak i kada su u pitanju greške. Zamislite koliko je sistem podložan namernim napadima.
So if somebody really wanted to attack the United States or Western civilization these days, they're not going to do it with tanks. That will not succeed. What they'll probably do is something very much like the attack that happened on the Iranian nuclear facility. Nobody has claimed credit for that. There was basically a factory of industrial machines. It didn't think of itself as being on the Internet. It thought of itself as being disconnected from the Internet, but it was possible for somebody to smuggle a USB drive in there, or something like that, and software got in there that causes the centrifuges, in that case, to actually destroy themselves. Now that same kind of software could destroy an oil refinery or a pharmaceutical factory or a semiconductor plant. And so there's a lot of -- I'm sure you've read a lot in papers, about worries about cyberattacks and defenses against those.
Ukoliko bi neko zaista želeo da napadne SAD ili Zapadnu civilizaciju danas, ne bi to uradili tenkovima. To ne bi uspelo. Ono što će najverovatnije uraditi je nešto veoma slično onome što se desilo u nuklearnom postrojenju u Iranu. Niko nije preuzeo odgovornost za to. Bila je to fabrika industrijske mašinerije. Oni nisu smatrali da su prikačeni na internet. Mislili su da su odvojeni od interneta, ali je neko uspeo da prokrijumčari USB memoriju ili nešto nalik tome i putem softvera natera centrifuge da unište same sebe. Softver kao ovaj bi mogao da uništi rafineriju ulja ili fabriku lekova ili postrojenje poluprovodnika. Siguran sam da ste čitali o tome u novinama, o brizi zbog sajber napada i o odbrani protiv njih.
But the fact is, people are mostly focused on defending the computers on the Internet, and there's been surprisingly little attention to defending the Internet itself as a communications medium. And I think we probably do need to pay some more attention to that, because it's actually kind of fragile. So actually, in the early days, back when it was the ARPANET, there were actually times -- there was a particular time it failed completely because one single message processor actually got a bug in it. And the way the Internet works is the routers are basically exchanging information about how they can get messages to places, and this one processor, because of a broken card, decided it could actually get a message to some place in negative time. So, in other words, it claimed it could deliver a message before you sent it. So of course, the fastest way to get a message anywhere was to send it to this guy, who would send it back in time and get it there super early, so every message in the Internet started getting switched through this one node, and of course that clogged everything up. Everything started breaking. The interesting thing was, though, that the sysadmins were able to fix it, but they had to basically turn every single thing on the Internet off. Now, of course you couldn't do that today. I mean, everything off, it's like the service call you get from the cable company, except for the whole world.
Ali je činjenica da su ljudi uglavnom usmereni na odbranu računara na internetu i iznenađujuće malo pažnje se posvećuje odbrani samog interneta kao medija za komunikaciju. Smatram da bi trebalo da obratimo malo više pažnje na to jer je on u stvari veoma ranjiv. U ranim danima, kada je postojao ARPANET, bilo je perioda kada - jednom prilikom je on u potpunosti otkazao, zato što je jedan jedini procesor za poruke imao grešku u sebi. Način na koji internet funkcioniše je da ruteri u suštini razmenjuju informacije o tome kako mogu da prenesu poruke na razna mesta i ovaj jedan procesor je, zbog pokvarene kartice, odlučio da može da dostavi poruku na neko mesto u prošlosti. Drugim rečima, smatrao je da može da dostavi poruku pre nego što ste je poslali. Naravno, najbrži način da pošaljete poruku bilo gde je bila da je pošaljete ovom čoveku koji bi je poslao nazad u vreme i tako bi ona stigla pre vremena. Zbog toga je svaka poruka na internetu počela da prolazi kroz ovaj čvor i naravno to je začepilo sistem. Sve je počelo da se raspada. Interesantna svar je bila da su administratori sistema uspeli da to isprave, ali su u suštini morali da isključe svaku pojedinačnu stvar na internetu. To danas ne biste mogli da uradite. Da se sve isključi, to bi bilo kao kada vas neko nazove da ne radi kablovska, samo u celom svetu.
Now, in fact, they couldn't do it for a lot of reasons today. One of the reasons is a lot of their telephones use IP protocol and use things like Skype and so on that go through the Internet right now, and so in fact we're becoming dependent on it for more and more different things, like when you take off from LAX, you're really not thinking you're using the Internet. When you pump gas, you really don't think you're using the Internet. What's happening increasingly, though, is these systems are beginning to use the Internet. Most of them aren't based on the Internet yet, but they're starting to use the Internet for service functions, for administrative functions, and so if you take something like the cell phone system, which is still relatively independent of the Internet for the most part, Internet pieces are beginning to sneak into it in terms of some of the control and administrative functions, and it's so tempting to use these same building blocks because they work so well, they're cheap, they're repeated, and so on. So all of our systems, more and more, are starting to use the same technology and starting to depend on this technology. And so even a modern rocket ship these days actually uses Internet protocol to talk from one end of the rocket ship to the other. That's crazy. It was never designed to do things like that.
To danas ne bi bilo moguće zbog nekoliko razloga. Jedan od njih je to što većina njihovih telefona koristi IP protokole i stvari kao što su Skajp i tako dalje, stvari koje rade preko interneta i tako mi postajemo zavisni od njega za sve više i više različitih stvari, kada uzlećete sa aerodroma, ni ne pomišljate da koristite internet. Dok točite gorivo, ni ne znate da koristite internet. Ono što se sve više i više dešava jeste da ovi sistemi počinju da koriste internet. Većina njih još nije bazirana na internetu, ali počinju da koriste internet kao servis, za administraciju i kada pogledate nešto kao što je fiksna telefonija, koja je relativno nezavisna od interneta, delovi interneta se polako uvlače u nju, delom kao kontrola ili za administraciju i veoma je primamljivo koristiti ove delove jer rade veoma dobro i jeftini su, mogu se ponavljati i tako dalje. Svi naši sistemi, sve više i više počinju da upotrebljavaju istu tehnologiju i počinju da zavise od nje. Čak i savremene rakete danas koriste internet protokol za komunikaciju jednog dela rakete s drugim. To je suludo. Internet nije osmišljen da radi takve stvari.
So we've built this system where we understand all the parts of it, but we're using it in a very, very different way than we expected to use it, and it's gotten a very, very different scale than it was designed for. And in fact, nobody really exactly understands all the things it's being used for right now. It's turning into one of these big emergent systems like the financial system, where we've designed all the parts but nobody really exactly understands how it operates and all the little details of it and what kinds of emergent behaviors it can have. And so if you hear an expert talking about the Internet and saying it can do this, or it does do this, or it will do that, you should treat it with the same skepticism that you might treat the comments of an economist about the economy or a weatherman about the weather, or something like that. They have an informed opinion, but it's changing so quickly that even the experts don't know exactly what's going on. So if you see one of these maps of the Internet, it's just somebody's guess. Nobody really knows what the Internet is right now because it's different than it was an hour ago. It's constantly changing. It's constantly reconfiguring.
Sagradili smo sistem čije delove razumemo, ali ga koristimo na veoma drugačiji način nego što se očekuje i on je prerastao svrhu za koju je osmišljen. U stvari niko više ne razume sve stvari za koje se on sada koristi. Postao je jedan od onih velikih rastućih sistema, kao finansijski sistem, gde smo osmislili sve delove, ali niko u stvari ne razume kako oni rade i sve njegove detalje i kakve još stvari može da radi. Kada čujete stručnjaka kako govori o internetu i kaže da on može da radi ovo ili radi ono ili će raditi to, treba da budete skeptični kao kada slušate komentare ekonomiste o ekonomiji ili meteorologa o vremenu ili nešto nalik tome. Oni imaju svoje stručno mišljenje, ali se stvari toliko brzo menjaju da čak ni stručnjaci nisu sigurni šta se dešava. Kada vidite jednu od onih mapa interneta, to je samo nečije nagađanje. Niko trenutno ne zna šta je internet jer je bio drugačiji pre sat vremena. On se stalno menja, stalno se ponovno konfiguriše.
And the problem with it is, I think we are setting ourselves up for a kind of disaster like the disaster we had in the financial system, where we take a system that's basically built on trust, was basically built for a smaller-scale system, and we've kind of expanded it way beyond the limits of how it was meant to operate. And so right now, I think it's literally true that we don't know what the consequences of an effective denial-of-service attack on the Internet would be, and whatever it would be is going to be worse next year, and worse next year, and so on.
Smatram da je problem u tome što smo se predodredili za jednu katastrofu, kao što je bila finansijska katastrofa, gde je sistem izgrađen na poverenju, u osnovi izgrađen za manje sisteme i proširili smo ga izvan njegovih granica i onoga za šta je namenjen. Smatram da ne znamo kakve posledice jedan uspešan napad zabrane pristupa na internetu može da ima i kakav god da je, biće gori za godinu dana i još gori sledeće godine i tako dalje.
But so what we need is a plan B. There is no plan B right now. There's no clear backup system that we've very carefully kept to be independent of the Internet, made out of completely different sets of building blocks. So what we need is something that doesn't necessarily have to have the performance of the Internet, but the police department has to be able to call up the fire department even without the Internet, or the hospitals have to order fuel oil. This doesn't need to be a multi-billion-dollar government project. It's actually relatively simple to do, technically, because it can use existing fibers that are in the ground, existing wireless infrastructure. It's basically a matter of deciding to do it.
Ono što nam je potrebno je plan B. Trenutno ne postoji plan B. Ne postoji jasan rezervni sitem koji se čuva da bude nezavistan od interneta sastavljen od drugačijih elemenata. Ono što nam je potrebno je nešto što nije vezano za internet, ali policija mora da bude sposobna da pozove vatrogasce čak i bez interneta ili bolnice moraju da naruče gorivo. Ovo ne mora da bude vladin projekat vredan više milijardi dolara. To je u stvari relativno jednostavno s tehničke strane jer se mogu koristiti postojeće uzemljene mreže, postojeća bežična infrastruktura. Stvar je u opredeljivanju na taj korak.
But people won't decide to do it until they recognize the need for it, and that's the problem that we have right now. So there's been plenty of people, plenty of us have been quietly arguing that we should have this independent system for years, but it's very hard to get people focused on plan B when plan A seems to be working so well.
Ali ljudi se neće odlučiti na to, dok ne prepoznaju potrebu za tim i to je problem koji trenutno imamo. Ima mnogo ljudi, mnogi od nas u tišini raspravljamo o potrebi za nezavisnim sistemom već godinama, ali je veoma teško usmeriti pažnju ljudi na plan B kada plan A naizgled veoma dobro funkcioniše.
So I think that, if people understand how much we're starting to depend on the Internet, and how vulnerable it is, we could get focused on just wanting this other system to exist, and I think if enough people say, "Yeah, I would like to use it, I'd like to have such a system," then it will get built. It's not that hard a problem. It could definitely be done by people in this room.
Mislim da ukoliko ljudi budu razumeli koliko počinjemo da zavisimo od interneta i koliko je on ranjiv, da bismo onda mogli da se usmerimo na želju za postojanjem ovog drugog sistema i mislim da ako dovoljno ljudi kaže: "Da, voleo bih da ga koristim, voleo bih da imam takav sistem", da bi onda on bio sagrađen. To nije toliki problem. Ljudi u ovoj prostoriji bi mogli da to urade.
And so I think that this is actually, of all the problems you're going to hear about at the conference, this is probably one of the very easiest to fix. So I'm happy to get a chance to tell you about it.
Mislim da je u stvari od svih problema o kojima ćete slušati na ovoj konferenciji ovaj najverovatnije najlakše rešiti. Drago mi je što sam dobio priliku da vam govorim o tome.
Thank you very much.
Hvala vam puno.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)