Slashdot Mirror
Air Force To Rewrite the Rules of the Internet
meridiangod writes "The Air Force is fed up with a seemingly endless barrage of attacks on its computer networks from stealthy adversaries whose motives and even locations are unclear. So now the service is looking to restore its advantage on the virtual battlefield by doing nothing less than the rewriting the 'laws of cyberspace.'" I'm sure that'll work out really well for them.
If they were smart, they would disconnect their computers from the public internet. People can't access hardware they can't access.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
No the Air Force listed Twitter as a tool that terrorists use.
There is a distinction. But thanks for playing.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
actually there is a very simple measure ISPs can take to prevent many attacks.
and that is to prevent their customers from spoofing the source IP in their IP packets.
If governments (starting with the US) would pressure(force by law) ISPs to do this, it can be done with out much technological difficulties.
This anti-spoofing measure can be implemented on many levels, so that even if a certain ISP does not co-operate other ISPs could prevent its customers from spoofing any IP which does not belong to the problematic ISP. This in itself helps protect against IP spoofing.
Without IP spoofing attackers are more easily identified and blocked.
I would have more faith in this endeavor if it were the NSA implementing it rather than the air force, although the air force is the second most likely agency/group to pull it off. From what I've seen and heard, the air force has a lot of technically skilled people in programming and hardware that would be able to pull this off.
VPN?
How bout a private network.
Which is what all secret and above classifications use.
Physically disconnected from the internet.
Physically inaccessible by the plebes.
Code auditing, memory wiping, classification-based job scheduling (a machine works only on secret defense or only on top secret or only on top secret nuclear, or etc. jobs at a time, never mixing), secure attention keys, custom hardware, physical security, surveillance, custom hardware, etc.
I'd say that, for the shit that matters, they've got a pretty good setup. But let's listen to the internet nerds who think they know everything. They'll tell us how to fix it.
So they want to simultaneously change the underlying network fabric in order to make their systems unattackable, and also be able to successfully attack any other system at any time? Does no one there see a disconnect between these goals?
That doesn't work because the low bid always wins. What would be better would be if the government shifted from a bid system to a fixed bid system. ie: This job is for $50k, this is what we want, now tell us how you are better than the other guys. That would be 100x more effective, but also 100x more time consuming because then they would have to READ EVERY PROPOSAL, not just the two lowest ones.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
The Air Force excels at just about everything they do. But for the past decade or two, their Achilles Heel has been computing technology because it moves faster than anything else they're used to.
The Air Force is a very old organization and although they can generally respond to most anything quickly, overall change tends to happen very very slowly. Not long after I enlisted in 1998, there were rumors that the uniform was going to change from the classic camouflage pattern to a kind of pixellated-marble look. Based on what recent photos I can find, they're still only about halfway through getting the new uniform out to everyone.
Also, I know for a fact we're still flying some planes with vacuum tubes in the autopilot computer even though upgrades for all airframes have been around since at least the 80's. Most of the technical manuals that I used to repair avionics were between 25-40 years old and still had technical errors in them. (We weren't able to make corrections to technical manuals any more than you'd be allowed to make pen-and-ink corrections to a federal law.)
Computer use only became common in most squadrons about 10 years ago and even then, they were not really used for the correct purposes. Some captain would get the bright idea that somebody should use a spreadsheet program instead of a paper form for some menial task, force everybody to use it, ignore the pleas from his subordinates that it tripled the effort required to perform the task, and then make up some elaborate report for his commander about how he just saved the Air Force $358,000.
While I was in the service, the Air Force never really caught on that you had to hire and train smart people who know about computers if you wanted to make the most of them. Some squadrons took young administrative airman fresh out of tech school and sat them down in front of the admin console and said, "All right, it's your job now to make sure this doesn't break." This is very uncharacteristic of the Air Force as you normally need at least several weeks of training before you can be trusted to mop the floor correctly. But when a commander has something that needs to be done and he doesn't know how to do it, it's not at all uncommon for him to assign someone to it while implying that they should be rather quiet about it.
Others units farmed out network administration to government contractors like Lockheed Martin which wasn't any better because most of their employees are old military retirees who thought they were going to get paid more as a civilian for doing the same thing they did in the military and ended up being wrong on both counts. (Got seven stripes and an MSCE? Then they're hiring!)
I guess this long-winded point it that it doesn't surprise me that high-level Air Force officers are saying, "Hey, who says we can't control this thing? We're the Air Force, after all." They're used to having fine-grained control over everything in their view and a high degree of security surrounding it.
In other words, the Air Force is still nowhere near where they need to be in terms of network security. The only encouraging part of this is that they finally realize it.
The AF can deal with someone in a nearby van, but not easily deal with someone anonymously using a free wifi connection in Europe that is bounced through 5 different servers. Even if they were able to completely track an attacker, how do they deal with multiple international jurisdictions?
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
Yes, I'm sure every potential recruit would just love to have to install a VPN client to go check out af.mil.
I read the internet for the articles.
The headline here says 'rewrite the rules of the internet', whereas the Wired article talks about 'rewriting the rules of cyberspace.' Subtle difference here.
The internet exists as it is--fundamentally an IP-based network connected in all the ways we know about, routing, addressing, etc.
The thing is, there's no reason that the Air Force (or anyone else) couldn't create their own, entirely incompatible version. Start with something that has guaranteed QoS, hard-wired source addressing, encryption at the equivalent of the transport layer, content-metadata in the packets (or equivalent to packets--it doesn't have to be a packet protocol at all), etc..
If you need to connect it to the internet, create a tunneling protocol, or a translating switch. Make it different. Make it incompatible. Make it rigid in its requirements. You CAN create a secure network, but not if it's based on the same technology that makes up the existing internet.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
I'm not sure that means what you think it does....
The threats from the outside world can make their way into the physical spaces which are protected computer areas... via usb, camera, cell phone, and other yet to be named methods. So it is quite important that all military accessible computer networks are protected. It only takes ONE USB stick or MP3 player to plant what could turn out to be a very bad thing. Virus software has the patience and time to sit and wait, staying undetected. Antivirus programs only protect you against virus code that has been detected. Done correctly an undetectable virus can sit there for months waiting for access to other networks/computers. I would think DDoS is hardly the problem they lay awake at night thinking about. I'd think any kind of 3-10 minute disruption of NORAD data would be a nightmare for the USAF. That doesn't even mention or consider rogue flash message traffic on the communication network of the USA military. Imagine the damage of one seemingly authentic flash message to European based nuclear counterstrike commands. Even if it is detected as false in the first few minutes of it's life, those few minutes of confusion could be dramatically bad for the world. So I don't really think common network threats are what they are worried about.
Now they even have to worry that test equipment, laptops, test software packages, everything has the ability to import a nasty virus inside their network now. The more risks they can easily mitigate, the cheaper and easier the task of working on the others should be.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
that's still a pretty big IP address block for the attacker to choose from. and if they wanted to conceal their identity even further, they'd likely just use an anonymous proxy or tunnel through a zombie PC or other compromised hosts.
just as in real life, you cannot eliminate anonymity on the internet completely. you can tag & chip every individual from birth, but someone can still walk up to a wall with a can of spray paint and leave an anonymous message.
Thanks for the tip! Maybe there should be a formatting FAQ-link for new posters above every news post or at the floating slider.
I am a Liberal.
I believe in the Constitution which contains the right to bear arms and seperation of church and state.
I believe in the United States of America, not Jesusland.
When the American Right stops trying to destroy the First Amendment, which incidentally comes before the Second Amendment, I will consider it.
Until then, you're welcome to relocate to a country more amiable to your theocratic oligarchy: I think Iran would suit you nicely.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
No Nazis from the Nuremburg trials ever made it to South America or the US.
I couldn't have said it better.
Except I am neither liberal nor conservative. I am an American patriot and believe in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I also believe in capitalism and separation of church and state.
But, I will never again vote for any republican since they began their campaign to destroy the foundations of American democracy and switch the country to capitalistic dictatorship and the military industrial complex.
I have NO fear of Obama. And contrary to the neocon rhetoric, I have no doubt he will uphold the principals of democracy, unlike the last 2 douch bags he and Biden will be replacing shortly. I am also a gun owner and support the right for all Americans to form Militia to defend our land and freedoms.
Actually it's the neocon side of the isle that will seek to take our guns from us. Dictatorship is easier when the masses cannot shoot back.
Bush & Cheney have done more damage to the country and world than should have been allowed. I hold all republicans and their supporters guilty of high treason for this. Now they have 2 more whacked out fruit cakes, John McBush & Sarah McCheney they want in there to continue the destruction.
Isn't it obvious that McBush & McCheney, as people, are just as stupid as George W. Bush? Cheney is not stupid, he is just pure evil.
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." George W. Bush
"Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself." Mark Twain
I see far more first amendment attacks from the American Left than I do the American Right.
Internet boards, like this one, are filled to bursting with posters who bash on Religion, especially the Big C, with the heat of a thousand stars.
The reverse is not true. Most of the Atheist bashing I see is confined to odd little corners of the Internet, such as forums dedicated to fundamentalist worship of one flavor or another, or the 42nd page of the newspaper.
In general web surfing I'd say the religion bashing posts outnumber the Atheist bashing posts by a ratio of about 10,000:1. No I'm not exaggerating for dramatic effect.
When the American Left starts embracing the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution as strongly as the 1st then I'll consider joining.
This isn't to say that I'm comfortable with the hysterics of the "Religious Right", it's just that I don't find the hypocrisy of the "Sectarian Left" any more pleasant or rational.
You seem to have confused people exercising their first amendment right with attacks on the first amendment.
Criticism of someone else's speech is not an attack on the first amendment. Geographically restricting free speech, on the other hand, is.
No, instead they exclude the non-Christians, do their best to game the rules to punish them, and actively try to suppress their education and rights. Once you stop your stupid Creationist backdoor indoctrination campaign, leave women's bodies to themselves, stop butting into my bedroom and entertainment and start acting like good neighbors THEN I will stop bashing 'Christians'. Every time I have debated religion with a lay 'Christian' I have always known more about the true teachings of Jesus than they have, they only know the hate and vemon spat from the pulpit and pushed by their local conservative politicos.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
I hold all republicans and their supporters guilty of high treason for this.
While I agree with a lot of what you say, I think you're overstepping a line here. Find the scumbags who've actually done something wrong, and hold them responsible for their wrongdoing. Charge them with treason if they've committed it.
But don't hold innocent republicans, or those who innocently vote republican, responsible. At least not if you value the rule of law.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
I hate neocons just as much as you do, and I lean more left than right (so the republicans wouldn't get my vote, were I eligible to cast it) but I will defend them here in spite of that, so that someone will defend me when I need it.
I've never persecuted Christians or people of any other religion. The 'worst' thing I have ever done is try to keep their views out of schools and the workplaces I have been a part of. I am perfectly willing to discuss religion in a non-antagonistic manner outside of work hours. As I said my personal experience living in a battleground state is that there has been a lot more attempts by the religious right to control people than the other way around.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.