Print 52 comment(s) - last by Magnus909.. on Mar 8 at 7:37 PM

Only 1 percent of laptops were encrypted, 48 laptops were stolen with a wealth of data

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has suffered in recent years from budget cuts.  Underpaid and understaffed, NASA's hopes of recruiting the best and have faded as a divided House has expressed disinterest in funding NASA.  Meanwhile President Barack Obama's administration completed George W. Bush's plan to scrap the Space Shuttle programprivatized cargo launches (which Congress then refused to fund), and dramatically scaled back NASA's targets, including ditching the return to the Moon proposed by George W. Bush.

I. NASA Seldom Patches Computers or Encrypts, Lost ISS Codes, 47 Other Laptops

The last thing NASA needs at this point is any bad news, which could make it look like the space agency's thinning house of cards is about collapse.  It would be pretty bad if you lost a $125M USD Mars orbiter due to mixing up metric units and English units (NASA and contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) did that in 1999).

An inspector general assigned to inspect and diagnosis the abysmal security at the space agency has just revealed [PDF] that NASA lost the control codes to the International Space Station, along with what sounds like a good portion of NASA's other secrets.

"Ahh... how do I say this. Er. I lost the keys to mankind's only active space station.  No, really."
[Image Source: NASA]

The only good news is that the station itself used secondary encryption meaning that whoever stole the control codes would be unable to gain full command, unless they also managed to get ahold of that code, as the station only accepts commands encoded with that day's encryption.  Still the data loss is an embarrassing highlight in a lengthy report detailing NASA's failing information technology efforts.

Thefts of NASA employees' laptops and mobile devices began in April 2009 and continued until April 2011.  In all about 48 devices were stolen, before NASA tightened security.  Or actually, says NASA Inspector General Paul K. Martin the number could be higher, as NASA relies on employees to report the theft of work devices.

Apparently information technology-wise, NASA is operating as if the year was 1969 -- the year NASA triumphantly landed on the moon.  A lot of things have changed since then in the world of computing, but NASA's IT department appears to be a little bit behind the times.  

Mr. Martin describes that as of February 1 only about 1 percent of NASA laptops are encrypted, despite carrying a host of state secrets – third-party contractors' intellectual property, spaceship designs, control codes, and even astronauts' personal information.  

More astoundingly, NASA reportedly seldom patches its aging computers.
Windows Update
Do you know how to patch your computer?  If so, you're a step ahead of the glowing minds in NASA's IT department.  [Image Source: Microsoft]

While the agency is mandated to patch its machines under national security guidelines, the agency's chief information officer apparently "has limited ability" to accomplish the process, as NASA appears to lack any sort of coherent device management.  And of course, NASA employees appear to be either not authorized to apply Windows Update/apt-get or are unaware of how to use these modern marvels.

II. Hostile Parties Revel in NASA's Incompetent Security

The net result is that everyone from amateurs up to seasoned foreign level actors appears to be victimizing NASA and its IT department.  The worst incident described was the theft of the space station control codes, which were on an unencrypted laptop.

The IG didn't say exactly where that laptop might be today, leaving it unclear whether it even knows.  Nor did it say what become of the other devices which contained employee (and astronaut) social security numbers, data on the Orion spacecraft design, data on the cancelled Constellation Program, "export-controlled, Personally Identifiable Information", and "third party intellectual property".

As for the ISS control codes, NASA engineers were forced to scrap parts of the station's software when they realized that security had been presumably completely compromised.  As Mr. Martin puts it, there was "loss of the algorithms."

U.S. intelligence agents recently succeeded in arresting Razvan Manole Cernainu, handle "TinKode", who was among the reportedly numerous independent hackers who penetrated NASA's networks for fun and bragging rights.  TinKode in 2011 hacked into Goddard Space Flight Center FTP server, posting screen grabs of confidential information from NASA's SERVIR disaster relief satellite effort.  He would hack into NASA and other U.S. government agencies several more times, allegedly before he was caught. But not all the parties hacking into NASA's servers were attention-seeking young adults.  Comments Mr. Martin, "These incidents spanned a wide continuum from individuals testing their skill to break into NASA systems, to well-organized criminal enterprises hacking for profit, to intrusions that may have been sponsored by foreign intelligence services seeking to further their countries' objectives."

The comment hint that China -- which is investing heavily in its own space effort -- may have been up to its usual game of stealing U.S. state secrets.  According to government security officials, including Pentagon officials, China has repeatedly victimized U.S. networks.  

China hackers
U.S. agencies have proved woefully incapable of protecting their data against Chinese hackers.
[Image Source: Asia Society]

This has led to the occasional hollow complaint from government talking heads, but ultimately the U.S. has exercised measured meekness in accepting that it ultimately has no way of retaliating against the attacks.  China holds a portion of the U.S. national debt, but more importantly, the majority of U.S. companies manufacture their products in China.  To alienate China would be economic suicide.

III. An Epic Failure

But even in terms of the typical security-deficient U.S. government and equally challenged contractors, NASA's computer administrators appear to be setting a new standard in inability.  Of course, as mentioned, part of this can be attributed to budget cuts and red tape placed upon the agency by Congress.  But much of it comes back to the staff, if Mr. Martin's testimony is to be believed.

NASA's IT dept. has veered dangerously down the lower road.
[Image Source: Maintenance Mode]

NASA officials had previously admitted that U.S. satellites were hacked in 2007 and 2008 by unknown, likely national-level players.  China was mentioned as a prime suspect.  But the loss of the codebook to controlling the ISS is a far more embarrassing low for the agency.

His comments seem to hint that it might be time for the CIO to go.  And he says that it's vital for NASA to adopt mass encryption.  He comments, "Until NASA fully implements an agency-wide data encryption solution, sensitive data on its mobile computing and portable data storage devices will remain at high risk for loss or theft."

Data encryption
The IG said NASA must encrypt or it will be embarassed again.
[Image Source: How Stuff Works]

That sounds like pretty sound logic.

Source: U.S. House

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By angryplayer on 3/1/2012 7:16:02 PM , Rating: 2
The space station just got a 100mbps LAN in 2008 ( )

I don't think NASA is quick on uptake.

RE: Uhm...
By JasonMick on 3/1/2012 7:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
The space station just got a 100mbps LAN in 2008 ( )

I don't think NASA is quick on uptake.
The not able to patch their systems part pains me... I mean... wow.

I worked IT for two summers as an intern and had to patch a ton of systems. I don't get how you could possibly not be able to do that... They're all sitting right there from Msft (and Linux boxes are also easy to update if you're an admin or sudoer)

"Just dahla the padges, yadummy! Fuhyahelf!" /Steve Brule

(I get there could be some sort of extra restrictions, but I mean it seems like you could justify just patching systems anyhow.)

RE: Uhm...
By angryplayer on 3/1/2012 7:53:04 PM , Rating: 4
For my company, we spend a week testing Microsoft patches before we release them on our WUS. There is no way in hell we could afford our inhouse systems going down because of an incompatible patch.

NASA probably needs to test things to death, and let the wide world do the same to make sure it doesn't take down satellite monitoring or whatnot.

RE: Uhm...
By JasonMick on 3/1/2012 8:48:29 PM , Rating: 2
For my company, we spend a week testing Microsoft patches before we release them on our WUS. There is no way in hell we could afford our inhouse systems going down because of an incompatible patch.

NASA probably needs to test things to death, and let the wide world do the same to make sure it doesn't take down satellite monitoring or whatnot.
I get that, but when you have such sensitive info on machines can't be patched they should be air-gapped, tagged with some sort of RFID alarm, and never allowed off-site.

Not every workstation at NASA is a mission critical one, clearly. That was my original point. Actually I'd guess there's at least as many non-mission critical devices (workstations, smartphones, laptops, etc.) @ NASA as there are misssion critical servers.

You should test general updates before deployment, sure, but on non-mission critical machines, like you said that should take a week, not "forever".

RE: Uhm...
By JediJeb on 3/1/2012 11:38:20 PM , Rating: 4
I get that, but when you have such sensitive info on machines can't be patched they should be air-gapped, tagged with some sort of RFID alarm, and never allowed off-site.

Exactly! How often have we been hearing about sensitive information being on a laptop that was stolen lately? You would think that most government agencies store the most sensitive data on laptops instead of servers and just hand them out to anyone to carry around out in public. I understand a need to work outside the office from time to time, but why do those working outside the office need to be carrying around information like their employee's Social Security Numbers or state secrets?

By comparison, I once mentioned to our IT guy why not use Open Office on some of our non critical computers to save money, the next day I could not even access the Open Office website since he had blocked it in case anyone got the idea to try it out. Pardon the pun but it shouldn't be rocket science to secure your computers!

RE: Uhm...
By TSS on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
RE: Uhm...
By Labotomizer on 3/2/2012 12:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think he was complaining about it being blocked. I think he was simploy pointing out how simple it was for them to block something they deemed a problem.

As for totally securing a network, it's pretty much impossible. The problem being that you will always allow SSL out and users can just proxy everything out of SSL. In fact forcing them to seek alternative methods can be bad as you can no longer tracking what they're doing.

Plus, most IT departments seem to forget what their true job is and believe they are more important than they really are. IT is there to make the company more efficient and more productive and often reduce overall cost for the business. Anything that detracts from that goal or makes life more difficult for users is a waste and self defeating.

RE: Uhm...
By JediJeb on 3/2/2012 1:56:34 PM , Rating: 2
As the other response says I was pointing out how even the one IT guy our small company of 50 employees(only about 30 of which even use computers) was able to control what is going on.

Also if he had brought in Open Office (which a few computers do have now ) it wouldn't be a nightmare to upkeep since even our MS Office is only updated maybe once ever 5 years or more. The computers needing Open Office are ones where we need to do a simple spreadsheet to keep track of a few numbers and assist in some calculations we do, these are computers we normally can get by with using Notepad for our word processing needs. As for interoperability, the ones that do have Open Office the spreadsheets we have made there are so simple they work well if you need to send them over to someone with MS Office since even there we still save most of our files to the older .xls format so that all of our computers can read them. (We still have WinNT on some computers attached to our equipment, finally got rid of the last Win95 box last year)

Not even all of our computers have MS Office simply because the cost to license it for all of them would cost us too much. Now if we had huge deployments of in house programs to worry about then yes, we would have problems mixing untested software. Thing is we don't even have to test IE or FF since the only thing we need to look at with those are the in house message board that lists our Standard Operating Procedures, and that is a whole different issue with me since the IT guy only knows how to write stuff for that using ActiveX so only IE will display the .pdfs.

RE: Uhm...
By mitchrj on 3/1/2012 10:32:07 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that pretty much everything at NASA is proprietary tech. These guys have had to deal with increasing budgetary restrictions for so very long that they've had to MacGyver the hell out of their equipment.

It's still not ok, or excusable in any way...but I guess you gotta give 'em at least a little slack.

I mean, we can't send up Astronauts ourselves anymore because it's too pricey, but we can keep pushing tax money into a bloated and massively broken welfare system.
Can you buy that $200 birthday cake or iced coffee with your EBT card? You sure can! /facepalm

RE: Uhm...
By Mitch101 on 3/2/2012 3:22:15 PM , Rating: 2
On the plus side the latest space shuttle looks to be biodegradable and recyclable.

RE: Uhm...
By WalksTheWalk on 3/5/2012 10:17:17 AM , Rating: 2
All it takes is a homemade crisis to get more funding allocated.

I can here NASA now: But we're underfunded and can't afford to keep our systems patched. It's the legislature's fault!

NASA = Wankers

RE: Uhm...
By nafhan on 3/2/2012 9:46:36 AM , Rating: 2
It's actually somewhat typical for sensitive non-connected systems to NEVER get patched. Why try to "fix" something that isn't broken when updating would just introduce a possibility of breaking?

That said... if they are connected systems (especially Windows workstations), they absolutely should be getting patched regularly.

RE: Uhm...
By JasonMick on 3/2/2012 12:05:32 PM , Rating: 2
It's actually somewhat typical for sensitive non-connected systems to NEVER get patched. Why try to "fix" something that isn't broken when updating would just introduce a possibility of breaking?

That said... if they are connected systems (especially Windows workstations), they absolutely should be getting patched regularly.

To be clear my comment was directed (as I state in my followup) at NASA's numerous internet-connected Windows and Linux non-critical systems.

I would be shocked if such systems do not outnumber mission critical ones @ NASA. NASA employs 18,800 individuals. Most of them have an internet-connected workstation, many of them have a laptop.

Assuming 1.5 machines per person (1 desktop per person, one smartphone or laptop per two people, on average), that's over 27K machines.

That's a lot of systems that CAN and SHOULD be patched. Of course patching isn't instant. But everything you need is available direct from MSFT, whether you're running Windows XP or Windows Vista or Windows 7 -- likewise for Linux via public repositories.

Grab the updates, then test them on a small set of applicable machines, then put the update on your server and roll it out. Deal with the consequences if it breaks stuffs.

That IS WHAT the IT dept. is paid for. NASA IT isn't building rockets or mission critical electronics (or they shouldn't be!) -- that's a job for electrical and computer engineers.

IT should be administering the systems. That's their whole job. Period. If you're IT chief and your dept. is not patching internet-connected workstations, your department is a failure and you should be canned. No ifs and or buts.

NASA has done some great things and I think it deserves more funding. But it sounds like Congress and DHS need to come down on NASA's IT department, as it risks sinking the whole ship if they don't get their acts together. Start by firing the leader as an example of consequences of incompetence.

RE: Uhm...
By nafhan on 3/2/2012 4:49:19 PM , Rating: 2
Without knowing more details, it's also possible that this could be a case "working with what you've got". The guy in charge of IT may be working with an insufficient budget and a system that makes it difficult/impossible to fire under performing employees (for instance). You're probably right, though, I'd find it hard to believe that "the guy at the top" is not at least partially responsible.

RE: Uhm...
By rs2 on 3/1/2012 8:40:29 PM , Rating: 2
I see, and what speed of NIC have you placed into low-earth orbit? Gigabit, I take it?

RE: Uhm...
By EricMartello on 3/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Uhm...
By sprockkets on 3/1/2012 10:01:33 PM , Rating: 2
Wasn't until 2002 that they upgraded their phone system from the 60s 25 pair relay driven system. When I was there back then, I think they had 18,000 lines there.

RE: Uhm...
By BZDTemp on 3/2/2012 6:35:50 AM , Rating: 2
NASA is wise to take their time. If anyone can talk about mission critical stuff then it's NASA.

The problem is that they are keeping info on mission critical systems in the more worldly and not keeping those secure enough, but singly out NASA for that is rather silly. For starters the politicians should look in the mirror because what goes on Washington is so much worse and in many ways much more critical.

RE: Uhm...
By FaaR on 3/2/2012 11:35:52 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think NASA is quick on uptake.

Wether they're quick on the uptake or not is rather beside the point, when you shoot stuff up into outer space you don't want it to neccessarily be bleeding edge; you want it to be RELIABLE.

Increasing complexity in silicon chips can be problematic, as cosmic rays can easily flip bits in transit along internal buses or in buffers and registers, leading to either data errors or direct malfunction of the equipment. Smaller silicon processes are more prone to this behavior.

Besides, I doubt there's very many internet-connected cloud file servers aboard the ISS, so there's likely not a very pressing need for faster networking than 100Mbit/s.

RE: Uhm...
By HrilL on 3/2/2012 12:24:10 PM , Rating: 2
The fact they were using a 10mbps hub before that is even worse. Thats 10Mbps shared with every device and only 1 device can send data at time.

Come on Jason...
By maven81 on 3/1/12, Rating: 0
RE: Come on Jason...
By Ringold on 3/1/2012 10:31:46 PM , Rating: 5
Just to the 5 to 10 year thing, we went from crude, German-copied rockets to the most powerful launcher yet devised by man, the Saturn V, in 9 years (1958 Redstone entered service, 1967 Saturn V), and landed men on the moon with technology less advanced then what can be found in a common digital watch these days.

If we wanted to set foot on Mars within 10 years, it'd be primarily a matter of will, not technology nor money. The trip requires either insane amounts of provisions, or nuclear thermal rockets. Those we've had operational since the 60s. Definitely not a money issue; NASA is a rounding error in the federal budget compared to social spending outlays. So really, it just comes down to this: America has no balls any more. We traded them to China, in return for them buying our debt, so we can fund our ponzi scheme a little bit longer.

RE: Come on Jason...
By Goty on 3/1/2012 10:59:19 PM , Rating: 2
The cost issue is even more ridiculous when you consider we completed the entire Apollo program for something under $200 billion in 2010 dollars.

RE: Come on Jason...
By Lugaidster on 3/2/2012 8:21:04 AM , Rating: 2
We know a lot more today than we did back then. It's not that easy to send someone to mars. For example, you need protection from solar radiation even when going to the Moon, imagine Mars. There are things that we still haven't figured out how to do before going to Mars. Besides, sending someone there implies they need to get back somehow (Though I'd venture that anyone going there is probably staying to colonize if that's at all possible).


RE: Come on Jason...
By Ringold on 3/2/2012 10:55:56 AM , Rating: 1
That's true about solar radiation, partly why nuclear thermal rockets are such a good idea. The entire trip is done in a matter of weeks compared to months. That's much less time to be in the line of solar fire. If it weren't for radiation, we could use the same tech to mount longer trips even further afield. With some warning, they could use a shielded compartment, at least briefly.. But, just like the Apollo era astronauts, they'd need to know they may not make it back. I'd roll that dice.

Not sure what else there is, though. We've landed men on other large bodies before, had them walk around, take back off again, return to an orbiting partner vehicle, then return to Earth. It's the moon, writ large, with an atmosphere to also enter and exit.

Give them the money, license to hire who I need and license to tell environmentalists to STFU and 10 years. It'd get done.

RE: Come on Jason...
By Dorkyman on 3/2/2012 10:22:12 AM , Rating: 2

Patch What?
By wind79 on 3/1/2012 10:01:00 PM , Rating: 4
Maybe NASA is using Windows 95? There is nothing for them to patch...

RE: Patch What?
By JediJeb on 3/1/2012 11:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 95, I figured maybe CP-M or DOS at best. ;)

RE: Patch What?
By kattanna on 3/2/2012 10:43:38 AM , Rating: 2
If i am remembering right, the station is running windows NT 4, using a made for NASA service pack 7

that was a few years back, but I dont see them upgrading key systems just because.

RE: Patch What?
By JediJeb on 3/2/2012 2:03:45 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, they need the stability and don't need to worry about the system having to interface with every type of device on the planet made by a thousand different companies. I know in our lab we usually have to reboot our XP machines more often than our W2K machines more often than our WinNT4 machines. Each iteration may fix problems with security holes and such(which shouldn't be that big of a problem with the ISS unless they are allowed to surf porn up there)but each newer version wants to do more things for you and that seems to cause a little more instability for a box that is just supposed to sit there crunching numbers all day.

Working for NASA
By Ringold on 3/1/2012 10:38:50 PM , Rating: 3
My intended career got .. derailed, like many peoples, by the recession. I'm doing good, just outside my field.

I don't give a crap how poorly they paid me, if they wanted me to do anything for them, in a professional capacity, I'd do it. The non-monetary benefits, namely pride in working for an agency with noble goals and an illustrious past and a future that always has potential, would make up for my wallet feeling lighter compared to if I were doing the same thing for a private firm.

I'd be surprised, and deeply disappointed, if NASA couldn't hire the best and brightest still thanks to those same feelings.

Heck, I'd do it for peanuts. Hear that, NASA? Hook me up with a little health care and some peanuts and I'll do whatever ya need.

RE: Working for NASA
By mars3d4f on 3/2/2012 12:17:47 PM , Rating: 2
I'm on the same boat with you on this one.

If they want to try sending someone to Mars, I'd do it even if it's one-way trip.

RE: Working for NASA
By chessmaster42 on 3/2/2012 5:50:32 PM , Rating: 2
Regretfully, my career at NASA got derailed so it's not a beaming beacon of hope in this recession. There are greener pastures somewhere else, I managed to find one in the chemical industry.

Hopefully, the commercial guys get it right and we can make that trip to Mars or the moon and colonize. That is the true path to making space travel common.!

Par for the course...
By gfxBill on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
RE: Par for the course...
By FaaR on 3/2/2012 11:51:58 AM , Rating: 4
Seriously, it's time to stop harping on and on about this. It's Dailytech; there will be errors. The site has been this way since time immemorial for chrissakes, and the only constant apart from the badly edited articles has been people like you complaining over it.

If you don't like it, why don't you go someplace else for your free news?

RE: Par for the course...
By gfxBill on 3/3/12, Rating: 0
RE: Par for the course...
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 3/2/2012 12:37:46 PM , Rating: 2
At the risk of being downrated, let's hear it for another appallingly badly proofread article on Dailytech.

I think you mean: "down-rated" and "appallingly bad."


RE: Par for the course...
By gfxBill on 3/3/2012 1:53:26 AM , Rating: 1
Give that you're wrong on both, I'm gonna presume you were translating for regular readers' benefit :)

That's Stupid
By Thomaselite14 on 3/1/2012 8:32:45 PM , Rating: 2
I get it, since NASA hasn't been up to date on Adobe Flash and iTunes, their achievements in space exploration are invalid. Considering it's actual "rocket science" we're talking about, I'd re-examine the position that they're stupid.

Saw this coming
By lostandconfused on 3/1/2012 8:36:02 PM , Rating: 2
It was best stated by Gary Warren in 1995

``This is like being on the Titanic going down,'' says Warren, who has worked at NASA for 14 years. ``I don't want to leave NASA, but it's the Titanic and there are only so many lifeboats.''

Crazy enough Mr. Warren left NASA and started a software security company that was later bought by Symantec.

By rburnham on 3/2/2012 10:02:21 AM , Rating: 2
Yesterday, the IT department called me to ask them how to find some settings on OSX, since some of use iMacs. Mind you, my job is Senior Graphics Technician, not IT, and yet they called me for help. Clearly NASA has the same dopes working for them who work here.

Heck, NASA should hire me. I love running updates.

missing laptops
By rich876 on 3/2/2012 11:48:11 AM , Rating: 2
Whoever is responsible for the security of those missing laptops should be fired, like yesterday. But, that person might get promoted instead if history proves me correct.

By thurston2 on 3/3/2012 9:47:32 PM , Rating: 2
Is there a picture of the President and Vice President at the top of this article?

By Amiga500 on 3/4/2012 8:08:33 AM , Rating: 2
IMO NASA should be collaborating with the likes of CERN and EDF.

CAELinux and/or Scientific Linux should be the standards used throughout the organisation.

With several companies who possess some of the brightest people on earth coding the same software, (1) costs to each organisation drops, (2) collaboration effectiveness improves through common IT infrastructures, (3) patching is easier due to single software, (4) linux applications improve through superb engineers building programs they need.

What is not to like?

By Amiga500 on 3/4/2012 8:09:39 AM , Rating: 2
IMO NASA should be collaborating with the likes of CERN and EDF.

CAELinux and/or Scientific Linux should be the standards used throughout the organisation.

With several companies who possess some of the brightest people on earth coding the same software, (1) costs to each organisation drops, (2) collaboration effectiveness improves through common IT infrastructures, (3) patching is easier due to single software, (4) linux applications improve through superb engineers building programs they need.

What is not to like?

Americans are idiots
By Ziggizag on 3/4/2012 6:35:51 PM , Rating: 1
Stupid Americans believe it's all about technical skills/abilities of the NASA's IT department's staff while the whole story is about how much money NASA's IT management got from alien intelligence to keep NASA computers permanently insecure.

By AssBall on 3/2/12, Rating: 0
The last straw
By stugatz on 3/1/12, Rating: -1
RE: The last straw
By Amedean on 3/1/2012 8:59:26 PM , Rating: 3
Hey, hey, dude, hate is a strong word. Everything else about the injected sound bites I agree but being so hateful makes you become one just like the pot and kettle. Ask Olympia Snow why she will retire and she will say along similar lines how divided this nation has become because of a few bigoted individuals.

RE: The last straw
By maveric7911 on 3/2/2012 9:50:37 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like someone was in charge of NASA patching ^

RE: The last straw
By RedemptionAD on 3/2/2012 10:45:18 AM , Rating: 1
Welcome the mass market media. Sensationalism sells. All journalism has a bias, some are just more subtle than others. Often times omitting facts that do not hold up to their bias, baseless add ons to otherwise cited correct story, etc... It is the job of a responsible reader to understand this and filter the frosting from the cake of jounalism and if it is really that important to you look at the same thing from another source reconcile the differences and form your own opinion based on that. I am sorry it was not Jason Mick that failed it is you, the reader. Reader Comprehension FAIL, ID10T error...etc

RE: The last straw
By Magnus909 on 3/8/2012 7:37:00 PM , Rating: 1

You must be some kind of Nasa employee. I mean, what particular thing in this article has made you so angry otherwise?

"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki