Slashdot Mirror
Ask the Air Force Cyber Command General About War in Cyberspace
We ran an article about the new Air Force Cyber Command and its recruiting efforts on February 13, 2008. Now Major General William Lord, who is in charge of this effort, has agreed to answer Slashdot users' questions. If you're thinking about joining up -- or just curious -- this is a golden opportunity to learn how our military is changing its command structure and recruiting efforts to deal with "cyberspace as a warfighting domain." Usual Slashdot interview rules apply.
It appears that the military is increasingly involved in areas who's jurisdiction was once considered to be wholly in the civil domain. Use of jargon like "cyberspace" seems only to obfuscate and distract from the core issue. This appears an effort to recruit public opinion and defuse the deeper questions that strike at the heart of a free and civil society. I think that if we had a statement that "The private mails are a warfighting domain" would generate a fair amount of debate on the role of the military as opposed to the police, the function of constitutional protection of liberties, and the question of what actually constitutes a state of war.
What are the limits on this jurisdiction? Who enforces these limits, and how is the public informed of that status? How are efforts to extend being safeguarded from creating mission creep that threatens all civil discourse in the United States and abroad form targeting, suppression, propaganda and extra-legal surbeillance?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
There have been several recent news reports that China has and is engaging in a nationally funded effort to hack into and attack US government computer systems. The German government recently announced that they traced recent aggressive cyber-attacks back to the Chinese government. What, if anything, is being done against this type of cyber-terrorism against us and our allies? Why do we still confer most-favored nation trading status onto a Nation who is actively engaged in efforts to spy on and attack our government and corporate computer systems?
Major, it seems to me (and others at /.) that the cultures that most geeks espouse run counter to the perceptions of the military. This being, for example, showing up at a consistent designated hour, opposition to wearing a standard uniform, having an overly strict form of discipline, etc.
How do you propose to reconcile those conflicts and establish your organization with any semblance of 'geek cred' to get the real talent you sound interested in attracting? What sorts of 'carrots' will you wave to attract people?
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
Is it possible that rules would be relaxed to allow the types of people that can do the job already but may not be "fit" or a "good fit" for/in military service, or is the plan to take airmen and train them to do what you want them to be able to do? Would a civilian with the proper skillset be able to act as a contractor without enlisting, etc?
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
It seems that in the military traditionally it was always looking for people fresh out of highschool for EMs and if you wanted to get anywhere in the military you had to be either college educated or, to really have a high end military career, start really young in something like the Valley Forge Military Academy and work from there.
In a traditional branch of the army/navy/airforce that is probably as it should be.
But in this area people have to be trained for years, still not know as much as the older hands in the private industry, and before they really know enough their enlistment would be over. Also, it would be unacceptable for an older IT person to join but take a pay cut to a Private's level or perhaps even a Lieutenant's -- so I imagine this branch would have to be somewhat different.
Is the military going to do to reach out toward the older folks who have extensive experience and knowledge outside the military?
War is never clean.
In conventional warfare, certain actions such as hiding among civilian populations are forbidden. These actions are considered war crimes because of the collateral damage they are likely to cause. What actions in cyberspace do you think should be outlawed? How about intentionally bringing down hospital IT systems, or destroying undersea cables without regard to the effects on civilian populations?
Don't mess with The Phone Company. Piss them off and you'll be using two tin cans and a piece of string.
- Space Rogue
Security professionals thrive in an environment where authority is questioned, basic assumptions are always challenged and diversity of thought is critical. Even the idea of uniforms is going to drive away the professionals you need to set up this type of institution. Do you believe that setting up this type of institution within the military is even a good idea? Do you think that perhaps there's a more appropriate environment for it? Are you entirely aware of what kinds of challenges you face in recruiting top-notch people for this type of thing? Would you even know a top-notch security professional if you saw one? They're not easy to identity unless you're another security professional. Are you? Do you really have what it takes to try and lead this type of organization?
If so, can you tell me why you chose ASP to run your website? Won't you have enough trouble recruiting as is without alienating some open-source loving folks right off the bat?
So far everything I've seen about this organization is riddled with basic mistakes. I wish you the best of luck but I'm just not convinced you have any idea what you're getting yourself into with this initiative.
I touch computers in naughty places
I wise man once said "It is good that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it". If cyberwarfare ever becomes a reality, how do we respond to the fact that is isn't "terrible"?
The direct damage from such warfare would be primarily economic or data security related (rather than a cost in human lives) how do you feel we can prevent it from becoming a monthly, yearly, or daily occurance?
General Lord,
Does the AFCC have a mandate to pursue criminals that use information infrastructure to commit crimes, or is your group intended to defend against warlike attacks only?
If the latter is true, how would you distinguish between criminal activity and warlike activity in cyberspace?
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
Just post a list of the stuff you want hacked and the more patriotic hackers will enjoy doing it for free.
Due to the nature of hacking and what many people do to acquire such skills, they may not want to 'join up' and all that.
But if you post a list of IP's that are okay to bring down, and networks you want information stolen from, with the understanding that the US will not condemn any attacks, and I'm sure more than enough people would do it for free.
Is there anything like this already in place? Cause I got nothing better to do this weekend. Or most any weekend.
General Lord,
I'm curious to know if you have have any criteria that would enable you do decide when a cyber attack is an act of war. Would it be possible for some kind of action inside a network to lead to a shooting war without some kind of overt physical threat occurring first?
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
Why should the US Air Force be tasked with this, instead of DISA or NSA, neither of which is tied to a specific branch of the military?
General Lord, I currently work as the exact type of 'cyber warrior' you intend to recruit. But I already have a Top Secret clearance, already familiar with DoD systems, etc. The dynamic with what we call 'Information Assurance' is that of a constant struggle with our contractor management (stay within the contract, the budget, etc) and with our 'warfighter' higher ups (educating them on why they can't have full access from their home in the spirit of "operations are a priority, to hell with security"). So assuming you can get the type of expertise that are eligible for clearances, and that are willing to relocate to Offutt/etc, how are you going to address the core issue of security in the DoD: Operations/budget/schedule will always trump security. Or alternatively, security will always be back burner to 'hot' issues. Thank you for your time.