<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>Jose Nazario &#45; CircleID</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Postings from Jose Nazario on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2008, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2008-04-23T09:16:00-08:00</dc:date>
		

		
		<item>
			<title> CNN.Com, Politically Motivated DDoS, and Asymmetric Warfare (Featured Blog)</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/84239_cnn_politically_motivated_ddos_warfare</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/84239_cnn_politically_motivated_ddos_warfare</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Once again I find myself thinking about the nature of the asymmetric warfare threat posed by politically motivated DDoS (Estonia in 07, Korea in 02, and now China vs. CNN in 08). I keep thinking about it in terms of asymmetric warfare, a class of warfare where one side is a traditional, centrally managed military with superior uniformed numbers, weaponry, and skill. On the other we have smaller numbers, usually untrained fighters with meager weapons, and usually a smaller force. Historical examples include the North Vietnamese in the 20th century and even the American Revolution in the 18th century. Clearly this can be an effective strategy for a band of irregulars... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/84239_cnn_politically_motivated_ddos_warfare">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-04-23T09:16:00-08:00</dc:date>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>