Army Times article, second below, reports what the beginning of what I expect will be a major decline in functionality of Army computer systems. While some sort of institutional response to the alleged Wikileaks traitor, Specialist Bradley Manning, is appropriate, I don't think this is it. This is a simplistic approach, the sort of thing the KGB did and presumably the sort of the SVR continues to do.
By the way, IMHO, 91K classified documents on the Internet is not some sort of an inadvertent security violation. It's almost certainly one of the national security crimes; I think it's treason. Better to concentrate on the perpetrator — try him, convict him, and then, maybe, violate in some significant ways his Constitutional protection against “cruel and unusual punishment” as a highly visible deterrent against espionage.
NOTE: Image links to source generally as persistent link not available.
Below the line: PBI comment and cyber-security recap (34).
Phi Beta Iota: Treason inspires strong feels among patriots. Unfortunately, we spend too much time focusing on micro-treason (leaking documents for whatever reason) and not enough time on macro-treason (betrayal of the public trust by elected and appointed officials). Beyond that is the matter of C4I complexity and integrity. Since 1994 the US Army has been on the wrong track, and the DoD Grid is dead on arrival. A commercial multinational grid is evolving that is vastly superior to what the US Army persists on using–unaffordable, non-interoperable, easily jammed or confused spectrum, etcetera. Top-down security is an oxymoron. Security in the 21st century is not about stopping leaks–it is about acting honorably and intelligently in the first place, making leaks both less likely and largely irrelevant. IOHO.