Separating Cyber-Warfare Fact From Fantasy 111
smellsofbikes writes "This week's New Yorker magazine has an investigative essay by Seymour Hersh about the US and its part in cyber-warfare that makes for interesting reading. Hersh talks about the financial incentives behind many of the people currently pushing for increased US spending on supposed solutions to network vulnerabilities and the fine and largely ignored distinction between espionage and warfare. Two quotes in particular stood out: one interviewee said, 'Current Chinese officials have told me that [they're] not going to attack Wall street, because [they] basically own it,' and Whitfield Diffie, on encryption, 'I'm not convinced that lack of encryption is the primary problem [of vulnerability to network attack]. The problem with the Internet is that it's meant for communication among non-friends.' The article also has some interesting details on the Chinese disassembly and reverse-engineering of a Lockheed P-3 Orion filled with espionage and eavesdropping hardware that was forced to land in China after a midair collision."
Re:Warfare? (Score:5, Interesting)
You've already had examples of how things break down when the power goes out during the previous major blackouts... imagine it being nationwide and more than 48 hours in duration... you cannot cope with that... people WILL be fighting for food and water...
There were fights in supermarkets in Gloucestershire over bread and water when the floods hit in 2007...
They were minutes away from having to order the evacuation of most of the county if the flood defences had failed to protect the major electricity substation supplying a large part of the county including the city of Gloucester... the main water treatment plant was taken out by the floods and we were having to use water trucked in and distributed via water bowsers for several weeks until the plant was repaired and the water mains had been flushed out and treated
Nevermind then! (Score:2, Interesting)
Schmidt told me that he supports mandated encryption for the nation’s power and electrical infrastructure, though not beyond that. But, early last year, President Obama declined to support such a mandate, in part, Schmidt said, because of the costs it would entail for corporations.
Oh, well then if it costs corporate America too much then it's a bad idea. But if it costs the taxpayers money, blank checks for everyone!
Yes, I am well aware that corporations pay taxes. But my point is the double standard applied whenever government mandates something. It's the same with any law. We have water restrictions in the SE - except for businesses. I can't wash my car with my little bucket and hose, but I can go to a car wash and they can use hundreds of gallons of water to wash my car - all because the legislature didn't want to dig into profits of business.
Re:How to deal with network security? (Score:2, Interesting)
*don't enumerate badness
*forget about user education
This sounds really familiar. Are you the author of this article [ranum.com]?
Re:Nevermind then! (Score:3, Interesting)
The car wash recycles and filters the water for reuse, do you?
here is the really scary paragraph... (Score:1, Interesting)
..the one that shows idiocy of before unheard proportions, and which makes me wonder how some people can attain such a high position anywhere..
Lynn also alluded to a previously classified incident, in 2008, in which some N.S.A. unit commanders, facing penetration of their bases’ secure networks, concluded that the break-in was caused by a disabling thumb drive; Lynn said that it had been corrupted by “a foreign intelligence agency.” (According to press reports, the program was just as likely to be the product of hackers as that of a government.) Lynn termed it a “wakeup call” and a “turning point in U.S. cyber defense strategy.” He compared the present moment to the day in 1939 when President Franklin D. Roosevelt got a letter from Albert Einstein about the possibility of atomic warfare.
But Lynn didn’t mention one key element in the commanders’ response: they ordered all ports on the computers on their bases to be sealed with liquid cement. Such a demand would be a tough sell in the civilian realm. (And a Pentagon adviser suggested that many military computer operators had simply ignored the order.)
Insane... simply insane... and they want to protect us... with liquid cement
WTF
my words fail to describe this
Re:Warfare? (Score:3, Interesting)
China is looking for dominance on every level. I'm convinced they want to be the next superpower. Certainly, focusing on economic might is at the forefront. China isn't shoveling an ever increasing amount of money into military spending for fun. In pretty much every area you can think of technology, space, banking or infrastructure they're heavily invested. If they were interested in only economic might they would be taking Japan's approach, but obviously that's not their intent.
China is likely not intending to invade at some point. But they're very pragmatic and extremely ambitious. And like it or not, a strong China is not necessarily a good thing for America because obviously they're only looking out for themselves.
Re:Warfare? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Warfare? (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously, a couple thousand dead from this is zilch. You want real scary? Use that "technological prowess" to screw up food transport from rural areas to cities for a month. Or just use the trillion dollars we owe them to corner the agricultural futures market for a month.
Something like 200 million Americans live in cities and after a month of no or little supply most would either be dead or cannibals.
That's scary.