Slashdot Mirror


Meet the Military's Cyber-Security Forces

destinyland writes "How exactly would the military fight a cyber war? In August 2009, the U.S. Air Force activated its new cyberspace combat unit, the 24th Air Force, to 'provide combat-ready forces trained and equipped to conduct sustained cyber operations.' It's commanded by former Minuteman missile and satellite-jamming specialist Major General Richard Webber. (And under his command are two wings, the 688th Information Operations Wing and the 67th Network Warfare Wing, plus a combat communications units.) Meanwhile, to counter the threat of cyber warfare, DARPA is still deploying the National Cyber Range, a test bed of networked computers to test countermeasures against 'cyberwar.' (According to one report, it provides 'a virtual network world — to be populated by mirror computers and inhabited by myriad software sim-people "replicants," and used as a firing range in which to develop the art of cyber warfare.') The Obama administration has even added a military cybersecurity coordinator to the National Security team."

98 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Stop saying cyber by Reason58 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That word bugs the hell out of me. It's like watching a "hacker" in the movies waving around a power glove while a graphic of a virus attacks things. And you used it 9 times in that summary. Just stop it.

    1. Re:Stop saying cyber by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

      Especially since cyber, is also a verb and abbreviation of cyber sex.

      GTG, Major General Richard Webber is trying to cyber me.

    2. Re:Stop saying cyber by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      That explains the need to populate the cyber test range with virtual people... maybe I should reconsider and join the Air Force after all.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    3. Re:Stop saying cyber by ndogg · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on, the government needs some sort of iBranding. And if it's that time of the month, they can just get an iPad.

      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
    4. Re:Stop saying cyber by Orga · · Score: 2, Interesting

      2013: Cyber Unit disbanded after all virtual sims found to be male.

    5. Re:Stop saying cyber by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

      I feel for you. But the other side of the coin is what name DO you give guys who are attacking or defending systems on a network? The problem is no matter what you call them, it sounds cliche. Military hackers. Cyber Warriors. Network fighters. Nerd Soldiers. None of it's good. I say we all just use 'cyber' and feel slightly guilty about it because we know it doesn't really work but don't have anything better.

      --
      I do security
  2. Same as anyone else by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Funny

    How exactly would the military fight a cyber war?

    Post a carefully worded call to arms on 4chan.

    1. Re:Same as anyone else by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Funny

      4chan is not your personal army.

    2. Re:Same as anyone else by ndogg · · Score: 1

      Or just post their web site posted to the front page of /..

      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
    3. Re:Same as anyone else by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

      4chan is not your personal army

      No, it's more like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea. As Hannibal showed the Romans elephants may not consider themselves a part of your army, but once you point them in the right direction they can still get the job done.

    4. Re:Same as anyone else by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      (That's just the line most 4channers will tell you if you ask them to do something)

  3. Related link that is not down by Meshach · · Score: 1
    --
    "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
    Aldous Huxley
  4. American Homeland Defense Firewall? by h00manist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So are they now going to propose a Homeland Defense Firewall, to protect and defend american business and citizens against foreign cyber attacks? Or will they be "simply monitoring" the routers coming in and out of the country? I wouldn't be surprised. Of course, no privacy invasions, no espionage will occur over the monitoring channels. Only criminal and terrorist investigation. And even then, only with a warrant. Of course we can be assured of that. Of course you can trust the military to always defend Americans and respect American law and use of decency. Of course. We all agree on that.

    --
    Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
    1. Re:American Homeland Defense Firewall? by kevinNCSU · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wait, so the army trains on how to fight with enormously destructive weapons, and how to interrogate and search people efficiently, but now that they're learning how to conduct warfare on some copper and fiber wires you're scared?

    2. Re:American Homeland Defense Firewall? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      They might put up some defenses for military systems, but they wouldn't be monitoring it. They're job is to conduct Cyber Warfare.

      How often do you see the -Military- performing investigations on US Soil?

      War and espionage are on a blurry line but you can rest assured the Armed forces are in it for the War. The FBI will do domestic cases and the CIA Will try to keep up to date on wold cyber affairs.

    3. Re:American Homeland Defense Firewall? by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

      I honestly think we'll end up with an internet made of defended virtual areas (the same way that US territories are physically defended). They may not all be government areas either. Maybe the military and the national infrastructure reside within the governments defended areas. And Comcast defends it's area. Or you can pay and be part of Googles defended area.

      My guess is the defended areas will only explicitly talk to each other. So if Google and comcast don't come to agreement about what they're willing to pass back and forth, they refuse to talk. Or, maybe google and china's walled areas talk. Except if china starts to break their agreement, google disconnects them.

      network space is simply a representation of the physical world except the level of granularity is lower (real world we're still discovering smaller and smaller particles while networks are very discrete) and in network space, things happen much much faster.

      --
      I do security
  5. Important notice by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    Any comments in this story will be monitored by the 24th Air Force for suspicious activity. Suspicious activity includes disclosing the activities of ... ow! hey! don't taze me ... NO CARRIER

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    1. Re:Important notice by MXPS · · Score: 1, Funny

      Let's just hope that they don't get mod points or we are all finished.

  6. Airforce? by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Funny

    *jumps into flame suit *

    Or would that now be called the Chairforce?

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Airforce? by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Just because it started, or you first heard it, ten years ago doesn't mean it isn't still accurate and hence funny.

      Not that they haven't been trying to eliminate from the service those members that fit the stereotype. In fact their campaign against people that didn't look dashing in their rediculous uniforms was a major contributor to me not re-enlisting. Pretty much the only thing I really miss about the military was the prices of groceries at the Commisary.

    2. Re:Airforce? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      They've always been the Chair Force. Or the Hair Force. Or Air Farce. Take your pick.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    3. Re:Airforce? by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Troll is troll but it's a topic I love.

      Yes I am fat. I did not get forced out in anyway. I did receive an LoR at one point for not passing the PT test after my first three months on the fat kid program. I did keep an accurate food diary for those three months, and the three months until I did eventually pass. I was always under the my calorie budget by several hundred calories. I worked out aerobically for at least 45 minutes five times a week, three of those days I would also participate in regular group PT after my own aerobic period.

      After six months of that I finally passed by cheating the system a bit. I wrapped my gut with a neoprene belt and a wide leather weight lifters belt for the 14 hours prior to my testing. That allowed me to get my gut from 42 inches to 40 just long enough to get measured before doing the rest of the test. I maxed out pushups and situps and ran the mile and a half in twelve minutes flat.

      The only derogatory comment on my record ever was that LoR for the PT test. I deployed once and all I was allowed to do was watch TCN's construct a 35,000 cubic meter cement pad in a resort air base. When I volunteered for deployment to Iraq my bosses boss talked the chief out of letting me go because they "needed" me to sit on my ass for six months at the office instead. I did manage to qualify as expert all four or five times I shot the M16, the last time I got 49/50 because the instructor made it a specific challenge. And I got to play as an SF augmentee a few times because the Chair Forces idea of 100% manned in a career field is running every thing on a skeleton crew.

      I don't know where you were stationed but the commisary here is almost always cheaper for anything than a local store. We have 10% sales taxes on everything including food, off base. And the displayed prices for meats here were usually 30% cheaper than at even Walmart. BX/PX was always pretty much a waste though.

      Yes, everyone thinks they are better than they in reality are. But in an organization that supposedly cares foremost about accomplishing the mission I found the concern about whether or not I looked pretty in a blues uniform to be retarded. Ultimately the pay, benefits and working environment is better as a civilian, even working just one building over from my old office.

  7. Cyberwarfare? by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

    to be populated by mirror computers and inhabited by myriad software sim-people 'replicants,' and used as a firing range in which to develop the art of cyber warfare.")

    Oh, yeah, I remember these guys. We invited the general to come and post on slashdot a few years back. They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian. Hacking, or "cyberwarfare", or whatever you want to call it, all requires a high degree of creativity combined with the ability to see patterns in seemingly random information. Both of these skillsets are a rarity in the general population -- most people are linear sequential thinkers, which means they can't start one task without stopping another. Everything about this theatre is contrary to conventional military discipline.

    This is an organization that still believes that only men should be in their little club, gays are bad, and if you're over 30 you're too old. Maybe that works well when you're comparing gun sizes, but in this theatre the groups they're excluding have exactly the human resources such an operation needs: Women are generally able to multitask and see the "big picture" easier than men, gays stereotypically gravitate towards creative endeavors (theatre, graphic design, etc.), and the over 30 crowd has exactly the kind of in-depth understanding of the technology and experience necessary to use it that a bunch of twenty-somethings just can't match, no matter how good the training.

    They're putting themselves at a huge handicap -- and they can't afford to do that. Especially when China has more honor students than we have students in whole. They can afford to be prejudiced. They can afford to throw a million people over a cliff to fund public works projects. Meanwhile, our antiquidated notions of what a soldier is puts us at a substantial risk of being obliterated in the global theatre.

    Sad. Where's an angry four star general when you need one?

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      My Dad (age 57) was hired by the NSA at age 52 (MS Comp Sci - Information Assurance). He's now a GS15 and did a year-long stint in the White House OSTP (inter-agency tour). He's heavily involved with defense/threat assessment and is getting ready to go to the "Dark Side" (offense).

      He did a ton of drugs in college (35 years ago). He pirates software (now). Somehow he got hired and is moving up the ladder nicely.

    2. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Yold · · Score: 1

      I walked into the Navy recruiter about a year ago, and asked him what I could in the Navy with a degrees in computer sciences and statistics. I am also physically-fit and have a high GPA. The officer (not enlisted) basically told me "not a goddamn thing, try the Army". The Army guy was the typical pushy recruiter; he told me to enlist and try for OCS (I'd probably end up on a convoy in Afghanistan).

      I disagree with what you said about gays and women in the military; recent statistics suggest that 33% percent of female veterans have been raped, and 70% experienced some form of sexual harassment. As for gays being "more creative", that is a stereotype. Furthermore "hacking" is not really a creative endeavor in the artistic sense, it is more analytical and methodological. The best hackers are human compilers (i.e. understand how C code may be exploited), and have encyclopedic knowledge of security. I agree that age shouldn't matter for people with a high degree of technical skills (if under 50).

    3. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Simulant · · Score: 1

      "They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian."

      Not only that, but I've been in MD for a year now and every day I see job postings for "Linux Sys Admin with active full scope poly clearances" and I keep wondering where the hell they expect to find them. I mean it's one thing to find a good Linux sys admin but finding one with an active clearance? If you do find one you'd just be stealing them from some other agency/contractor.

      NSA is ramping up a cyber security force at Ft. Meade.

    4. Re:Cyberwarfare? by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian.

      The same way they recruit very bright people for other specialized fields - they recruit the people who aren't anti-authoritarian, or who are anti-authoritarian but can submerge that enough to get along and do their jobs properly. (The Submarine Service and the various special forces are well stocked with the latter.) It may not appeal to stereotypical 'average Slashdotter', but then that is a fairly small demographic even within the IT world.
       

      Everything about this theatre is contrary to conventional military discipline.

      Or so goes the meme/stereotype outside the military... In reality, the military knows very well how to handle a wide variety of personality types. Half the guys on my crew (including me) would have been in the brig had we been in the surface Navy rather than the Submarine Force. But our chain-of-command knew well the demands of dealing with the energy of guys in their early to mid twenties with above average intelligence - so long as we did our jobs, didn't endanger ships safety, and didn't cause physical harm... almost the sky was the limit.
       

      This is an organization that still believes that only men should be in their little club, gays are bad, and if you're over 30 you're too old. Maybe that works well when you're comparing gun sizes, but in this theatre the groups they're excluding have exactly the human resources such an operation needs: Women are generally able to multitask and see the "big picture" easier than men, gays stereotypically gravitate towards creative endeavors (theatre, graphic design, etc.), and the over 30 crowd has exactly the kind of in-depth understanding of the technology and experience necessary to use it that a bunch of twenty-somethings just can't match, no matter how good the training.

      Again with the stereotypes... First off, this is 2010 not 1910. There's been women in the service for decades now. The military 'officially' believes gays are bad because the law requires it, down at the working troop level it's not a problem. And given the number of chiefs and senior offices I knew and know that are over thirty... Well, like the rest of your stereotypes, you're simply wrong.

    5. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Thaelon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      : Women are generally able to multitask and see the "big picture" easier than men, gays stereotypically gravitate towards creative endeavors (theatre, graphic design, etc.), and the over 30 crowd has exactly the kind of in-depth understanding of the technology and experience necessary to use it that a bunch of twenty-somethings just can't match, no matter how good the training.

      Wow, that was not where I thought you were going with that.

      And it doesn't seem very rational. All of the in/famous hackers I can think of are at least men, and most are Caucasian. DVD John, Kevin Mitnic, Stroustrup, Paul Lutus, Linus Torvalds, Woz, Stall Man, Wall, Knuth, Shimomura, Johnathan James, and Adrian Lamo... And I don't think any of them are homosexual.. Do you have any counter-examples that would alter this perception?

      I think the only thing these people have in common is they aren't just empty suits like the government seems to love to employ, but they are all men.

      --

      Question everything

    6. Re:Cyberwarfare? by tibman · · Score: 1

      Yikes, you threw a lot of stereotypes out there.

      Women can join any US military branch but cannot (as in not allowed) perform Combat duties. You can join the US Army at 42 without a waiver.. so 30 is not too old. Gay men and women are tolerated because they are just as good as everyone else.. the problem comes in when a guy is sitting on the bench outside the shower room watching everyone go in and out (this happens!) and everyone freaks out and stereotypes all gay guys to be that way.

      Finally, most services are very regimented and rigid but all branches have their "weirdo" groups/units to put the special people into. Usually you have to earn your way in and not just be non-conformist. Which means you have to be able to play ball AND bring something extra to the table. If you can't bottle up your non-compliance and bring your special skillset.. you are a loose cannon and not wanted. Which is a good thing!

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    7. Re:Cyberwarfare? by girlintraining · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And it doesn't seem very rational. All of the in/famous hackers I can think of are at least men, and most are Caucasian. DVD John, Kevin Mitnic, Stroustrup, Paul Lutus, Linus Torvalds, Woz, Stall Man, Wall, Knuth, Shimomura, Johnathan James, and Adrian Lamo... And I don't think any of them are homosexual.. Do you have any counter-examples that would alter this perception?

      It's a mark of arrogance that just because you don't see them doesn't mean they don't exist. Esther Dyson, Sally Floyd (TCP/IP), Susan Kare, Jeri Ellsworth (C64), Mary Lou Jepsen (CTO of OLPC), Radia Perlman (invented the Spanning Tree Protocol)... and the list goes on.

      We aren't visible because this is a male-dominated field -- that doesn't mean the same potentialities don't exist in women, recurring generation after generation, only to perish because society can't find a way to support women in science and technology. Some brave souls do so in spite of the obstacles -- and if they don't make headlines as often, that's no proof against their abilities, but rather social commentary on existing prejudices.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    8. Re:Cyberwarfare? by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      ...and if you're over 30 you're too old.

      You haven't been paying close enough to their despiration (and attrition).

    9. Re:Cyberwarfare? by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 2, Funny

      Stall Man
      Is he the superhero that can never keep his jet aloft?

    10. Re:Cyberwarfare? by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      You can join the US Army at 42 without a waiver.. so 30 is not too old.

      This branch is run by the Air Force, where the limit is 27.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    11. Re:Cyberwarfare? by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      You haven't been paying close enough to their despiration (and attrition).

      It's 'desperation', and they revised their enlistment requirements in August 2009. The enlistment age for the Air Force is 27 now. Did you read the rest of this thread before posting that?

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    12. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

      Care to point me in the direction of any women who have managed to make General, in any branch of service? Last I checked, there were none. So women may be in the military, but they either lack the same potential as men -- or environmental factors are holding them back. Which one do you suppose it is?

      You didn't check hard enough:

      http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/23/woman.general/index.html

      http://www.army.mil/women/profiles.html

      There are a bunch of women generals (up to 4 star) past and present in the army.

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    13. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

      Currently I believe 39 is the maximum age to enlist...but there may be waivers for certain fields.

      --

      Lodragan Draoidh
      The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
    14. Re:Cyberwarfare? by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most people in IT aren't anti-authoritarian just to be an ass -- they are because they have a low tolerance for people who try to order them around that they have no respect for or feel are less capable of doing the job than they are. That's readily cured with training -- but that's an up-front cost that I don't think the military is willing to absorb because skimming off the top is cheaper. They haven't had to dig into the labor pool. Maybe they don't need to, I don't know -- but the whole point of basic is to change attitudes, which is all that is. It's an artificial barrier.

      Well, your stereotype of basic training, like all your stereotypes is flat out wrong. The point of basic is to instill discipline and modify behavior. The military doesn't give a rat fuck about your attitude so long as it doesn't affect your discipline, behavior, or work. (And you also seem to be ignorant of the fact that the military does hire civilians in special cases, and even assigns them to operational and deployed units.)
       

      I made a general statement that holds true for the general case.

      Except, like each and every one of your other general statements and stereotypes, you are flat out wrong. I quoted one specific case, but that does not invalidate my other statement.
       

      Care to point me in the direction of any women who have managed to make General, in any branch of service? Last I checked, there were none.

      Why not just check Google? (I imagine you haven't bothered to check Google in a couple of decades because stereotypes are easy and you're lazy.)
       

      And given the number of chiefs and senior offices I knew and know that are over thirty... Well, like the rest of your stereotypes, you're simply wrong.

      I was referring to recruitment, and I am not wrong.

      Well, other than your general laziness, why didn't you say recruiting? And even so, you're still wrong. The military has long waived the age requirements for narrow and specialized fields where civilian experience is desirable and not available among younger people. If they don't want to put them in uniform for some reason, they hire 'em as DoD civilians.

    15. Re:Cyberwarfare? by tibman · · Score: 1

      In that case, my only argument about the age of USAF enlistment can be: They must think that ~50 is the typical retirement age and back-dated from there. I would hope someone over 27 could still get in with a waiver.. but that would be a fight.

      I do agree with you that military service doesn't blend well with free-thinking folks. I can't see why a non-conformist would join such a rules/regulations based organization. But i'd like to put forth that Clear goals and purpose are attractive to many people including free-thinkers. So many people have treasure troves of knowledge and skills that they don't have a reason to apply.. sometimes a person will accept discomfort for the opportunity to become useful to a large group of people.. at the expense of themselves. To have purpose is everything.

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    16. Re:Cyberwarfare? by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For example, playing LARP, or liking the original Star Trek (TNG is apparently okay) is a mark against you for some security clearances.

      Having done both those things, *and* having a high security clearance while doing them, *and* working with nuclear weapons - I can comfortably say, like everything else you've posted in this thread, you haven't a fucking clue what you are talking about.

    17. Re:Cyberwarfare? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      In my experience, people who handle nuclear weapons are told not to publicize that fact. They also don't swear on a public forum just to prove a point, they tend to be very cool and reserved. So, I'm thinking you should sue your face for slander.

      Well, again, your 'experience' (read: stereotypes) are utterly and completely wrong. Which should come as no surprise.
       
      Heck, here's an public form organized for and by USAF missile types. Here's a public site and organization for USN nuclear weaponeers.

    18. Re:Cyberwarfare? by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The military doesn't give a rat fuck about your attitude...

      I would gather that you have not been in the military. In my experience, they're confident enough of their service and their statements about it to not resort to terms like "rat fuck". As well, if they honestly do have a problem with someone, it's solved quickly and quietly so they can go back to their drinks.

      Well, like the rest of your stereotyping - you're dead wrong. (Again, no surprise.) I was in the USN Submarine service from 81-91. On top of that, the area I live in is a Navy town so I count a large number of active duty, discharged, and retired military among my friends and acquaintances and the same for DoD civilians.
       

      (And you also seem to be ignorant of the fact that the military does hire civilians in special cases, and even assigns them to operational and deployed units.)

      I didn't mention any of that in my original post, nor do I see it's relevance.

      No, you didn't mention it. (But given your general ignorance, I'm not surprised.) It is relevant because you seem to be under the misapprehension that the only way for the military to obtain personnel with special skills is to induct them into uniform.
       

      You are attempting to muddy the waters with irrelevant commentary to detract from the fact that you don't like me personally and are throwing irrational argument after irrational argument.

      Translation: My mind is made up, don't bother me with facts.
       

      And even so, you're still wrong. The military has long waived the age requirements for narrow and specialized fields where civilian experience is desirable and not available among younger people.

      Citation aaaand... citation. Care to revise your statement, sir?

      I'll go you one better - and cite the actual law of the land rather than some third party website.

    19. Re:Cyberwarfare? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      LARP: AArmy frowns on Dungeons and Dragons

      Reading comprehension - get some. That article is about the Isreali army.
      Or, in other words, as the grandparent implied - you're pulling stuff out of your ass.

    20. Re:Cyberwarfare? by chill · · Score: 1

      I think you mean "attempted suicide", otherwise your implying that not only is there an afterlife, it is boring enough you sit around posting to /.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    21. Re:Cyberwarfare? by chill · · Score: 3, Informative

      He, and you, forgot Admiral Dr. Grace Murray Hopper, lead of the team that invented COBOL and erroneously attributed to finding an insect (bug) in a computer that cause a fault and popularizing the "bugs in the system" saying.

      Yes, you said the list goes on, but Dr. Hopper deserves a specific mention.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    22. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      The Navy even named a destroyer for a female admiral who just did computers.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hopper
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper

      "As of June 23, 2008, there are 57 active-duty woman serving as generals in the armed services, five of whom are lieutenant generals, according to the Pentagon"

    23. Re:Cyberwarfare? by LuckySweetheart · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      Also in conversations I've had with interviewers (for myself and other people) have hobbies been discussed. They're much more worried about whether or not you drink too much or do "recreational" drugs.

      I knew a woman once who had a high security clearance and was a stripper in college. I also knew a guy who knew a guy who had a high security clearance who frequented strip bars. Neither seemed to keep the government from issuing clearances. And these were issued before the 90-day deadline to clear people was enacted.

    24. Re:Cyberwarfare? by baKanale · · Score: 1

      It may not be true in the American military (or whichever country you served with), but it is true in the Israeli military: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3052074,00.html

    25. Re:Cyberwarfare? by acalltoreason · · Score: 1

      That's an excellent point. In a virtual world, the only qualities that matter, are, as you said girlintraining, the necessary talent along with a creative mind. I am assuming, correct me if I am wrong, that you would need Top Secret clearance to work on a project as sensitive as this. This would present a problem, especially if you are trying to recruit talent, aptly described above as anti-authoritarian. The government's plan to create a cyber-warfare division is a good one that has been a long time coming; however, the flaw is that they placed this division in the armed forces. This division, in my opinion, should be a civilian division placed under the DoD or DHS. They should be given a lot of leeway in order to work which can not happen in a rigorous military environment. To work in that sort of environment would stifle any sort of creativity that the "hacker" sorely needs in order to perform well. This also brought to mind a question that I have been discussing with some friends of mine. We are of the opinion that the next great war will be a cyber war. Considering that the vast majority of pretty much everything is run on some sort of network, that is our most vulnerable spot. It's not just us either, it's most of the developed world. I'm just interested in what the Slashdot community thinks about this.

      --
      Where has reason in the world gone? Have we abandoned it in favor of power and politics?
    26. Re:Cyberwarfare? by sgt_doom · · Score: 1
      And on a more serious note, since we are talking about the military-congressional-corporate-complex here:

      From an interview with Auriea Harvey and Michael Samyn, creators of The Endless Forest:

      "We think our contemporary world is a horrible place. Our cultures are being swallowed by the economic machine, politics have degraded into cheap television propaganda, and violence is condoned, if not encouraged, as the way of choice for dealing with any conflict. All of this is against a backdrop of ever-increasing poverty and the diluting of humanistic democratic ideals into free markets and globalization. Direct political action has been perverted by fashion and media and only contribute to the overwhelming climate of antagonism and violence. People are becoming increasingly sour, mean, and cynical --- which throws us into a vicious circle that can only be broken by extreme events."

    27. Re:Cyberwarfare? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      We invited the general to come and post on slashdot a few years back. They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian.

      That's what military contractors are for.

    28. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

      Care to point me in the direction of any women who have managed to make General, in any branch of service? Last I checked, there were none. So women may be in the military, but they either lack the same potential as men -- or environmental factors are holding them back. Which one do you suppose it is?

      Last you checked must have been before 1970 when the Army promoted their first general:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Mae_Hays
      Airforce in 1971:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Holm
      Navy in 1972:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alene_B._Duerk

      There are plenty of women generals. Maybe you should actually check and recognize the accomplishments of some great women rather then just saying women can't succeed in the military. Women fill officer ranks in higher proportion then women in military and they're promoted faster.

      In 2005
      http://prhome.defense.gov/poprep2005/summary/summary.html
      Women are 15% of military
      Women are 16% of Officers
      Women received 16% of promotions
      Women received 20% of officer promotions
      92% of career fields are open to women

      But when you take the numbers of Military with 25+ years in military it's far less. Which is why there's the holes in highest ranks (only 8% for 4-star generals the highest rank). That's not a matter of personal potential or environmental factors, it's a matter of 25 years ago things weren't as good as they are now.

      Recruitment of women sucks (it actually started declining after the war started too), despite several attempts to target women for recruitment. Maybe they're driven away by the same ancient myths that women can't succeed in the military.

    29. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Rathkan · · Score: 1

      You both also forgot Alan Turing.

    30. Re:Cyberwarfare? by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      Are you aware of the shit you write sometimes?

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    31. Re:Cyberwarfare? by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1
      The answer is first, contractors. They can be quickly hired to do the job and get to keep their over-weight, gay, female, anarchist, old, whatever family life.

      In the long term however the military will train young recruits in cyber warfare. You seem to believe you can't train someone to conduct cyber warfare. That sounds like saying you can't train someone to run strait into oncoming gunfire rather than circumventing the enemy. The people creating the ciriculum or doing the training may be over-weight, gay, female, anti-social, and old but they will be passing the k nowledge to the standard young, intelligent soldiers.

      --
      I do security
    32. Re:Cyberwarfare? by chill · · Score: 1

      We were naming women, not gay men. They have their own thread in this discussion.

      Ah, progress!

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  8. Navy has one too by Waynelson · · Score: 1
    The navy is standing up a cyber-warfare group as well

    Tenth Fleet will be reactivated in October 2009 as the U.S. Navy's Fleet Cyber Command/10th Fleet.[2] The command will be the Naval component of United States Cyber Command. Its first commander will be VADM Bernard J. McCullough III. [3]

    From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Tenth_Fleet#Fleet_Cyber_Command

    1. Re:Navy has one too by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Tenth Fleet will be reactivated in October 2009 as the U.S. Navy's Fleet Cyber Command/10th Fleet.

      Yay - send aircraft carriers with 105mm gus to attack spammers - gets my vote!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    2. Re:Navy has one too by chaos579 · · Score: 1

      so they are converting the 10th fleet into a mobile boat of hackers?

  9. AF cyberspace command is a joke... by Anik315 · · Score: 1

    Most people in the military are severely lacking in kind of skills needed to protect America's electronic infrastructure. It has to do with military culture more than anything else. Techies just don't get promoted the way fighter pilots do. I would shut the whole thing down and start a new branch or something. Otherwise, it's a giant waste of money.

    1. Re:AF cyberspace command is a joke... by CByrd17 · · Score: 1

      Most people in the military will not be serving in this command. Only the qualified will. A few years ago we could have said that most people in the military are severely lacking in the kind of skills needed to operate UAVs, and yet that particular foray into technology seems to be going okay. Fighter pilots are going away...techies are up and coming. Even the military adapts.

    2. Re:AF cyberspace command is a joke... by L3370 · · Score: 1

      There are plenty of people in the military with the competency to do the task at hand. Bringing the talent in is NOT the issue. Its KEEPING THEM. A person that enlists in the Air Force for 4-6 years into a computer systems job has the oppurtunity to gain valuable skills.

      On the outside, 4-6 years of experience with those skills can get you double the salary the military can provide. Paycheck rules.

  10. Paranoid much? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 3, Funny

    Actually, I wouldn't expect that from them at all. The military has no real interest in spying on the civilian population. Perhaps the FBI, CIA, or NSA might do the stuff you were spouting off about, but the military is going to be focused on conducting electronic and cyber warfare, i.e. destroying the enemy's electronic infrastructure and protecting our military's infrastructure.

    if you want to be hysterically paranoid, at least do it about the right things...

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Paranoid much? by Yold · · Score: 1

      "..the FBI, CIA, or NSA does the stuff you were spouting off about.." FTFY.

      It is fairly well-known that the NSA has been listening in since 9/11; even former NSA analysts have come forward to voice their concerns about listening in on the conversations of normal American citizens.

    2. Re:Paranoid much? by Marcika · · Score: 1

      "..the FBI, CIA, or NSA does the stuff you were spouting off about.." FTFY.

      It is fairly well-known that the NSA has been listening in since 9/11

      The CIA/NSA has been listening in since the 70s or even the 60s -- they are not allowed to spy domestically (even if they do), but they are allowed to monitor all cross-border voice and data traffic - and they've been doing so for a long time (just google for Echelon).

    3. Re:Paranoid much? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Listen yes, from Non-US locations. Perfectly legal. Look up Echelon. At least (right now) the Government isn't proposing using remote spy drones to monitor the population like has been proposed in the UK.

      "normal" citizens? Not hardly, only targeted calls from people who might be terrorists or helping terrorists and most of that international calls. I don't think even the NSA has the compute power to monitor every landline, cell, VOIP call in the USA. They also need good probable cause, Ahmed's call back home to check on his lapis mine in Afghanistan isn't going to get him monitored.

      If they were really do monitor convo's by everyday citizens as you said then prosecutors for ciriminal cases like murder, rape, etc. should also be get those transcripts to put the criminal away. And wow, the good that data could do in civil cases like divorce. I can just see the divorce lawyer getting those transcripts of the calls to your girlfriend or prostitute..slam dunk divorce and she gets everything.

    4. Re:Paranoid much? by clampolo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the FBI, CIA, or NSA might do the stuff you were spouting off about

      Speaking of the NSA. Why do we need a Cybercommand when all of its functions look like what the NSA is supposed to be doing?

    5. Re:Paranoid much? by chaos579 · · Score: 1

      because they want it to appear that the government is actually doing its job CORRECTLY

  11. Army of Darkness by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    In cyberspace, traditional "army" concepts have no meaning, specially the partt when we talk about huge number of active/willing participants. The only thing that could have army-like numbers are zombie PCs, something that "should" not be used (your country hacking your pc to attack what they consider enemies? and leaving the door open so potentially youir enemy could use your pc too?. They should behave as firefighters (taking measures/educating to limit a lot the odds that someone gets zombified) or terrorists/commandos (skilled individuals could make big differences).

    In fact, the weapons in cyberwar only have meaning because no or weak defenses. And a good attack would be improving those "defenses", both at consumer level (they should punish or do official statements about recommending NOT using vulnerable software, as i.e. did several countries last weeks about IE, promote secure practices and alternative software and platforms, etc) as an enterprise level (from security scanning/assessment of critical and general places). And that is no work of military but of government.

    1. Re:Army of Darkness by hargrand · · Score: 1

      > And that is no work of military but of government.

      Last time I checked the military was part of the government. At least that's the case in the U.S. I suppose it could be different where you live.

      That aside, I think you're overreacting somewhat. Most in the military see the network as another domain in which to operate (much like the air or sea). The purpose of gaining air or sea supremacy is to ensure that you can effectively use that domain while denying your adversary the use of it. The big difference though is that while it's not really normal to have to contest regions of air or space, the normal state of affairs is that the "cyber" domain is very much being contested on a daily basis. These organizations are intended to provide the expertise and equipment / software needed to effectively operate in this contested domain.

    2. Re:Army of Darkness by hargrand · · Score: 1

      > to contest regions of air or space

      Meant to say "air and sea", but the same could be said of space as well.

    3. Re:Army of Darkness by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      > Last time I checked the military was part of the government.

      The government is a lot of things, not just military. You have there public education, public safety, health and economy sectors, and a lot of other areas that could be related and take part of this. But network safety and good practices (as in every participant on it) should be a civil matter, not militar one.

      Putting the base of all of this in military level is like declaring war on a foreing country because there is a disease there, instead of educating people on healthy living, avoiding infections or developing and administering vaccines. Just the prevention have a lot of positive incomes, even if no danger of getting "attacked" by sick people.

    4. Re:Army of Darkness by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      That aside, I think you're overreacting somewhat. Most in the military see the network as another domain in which to operate (much like the air or sea). The purpose of gaining air or sea supremacy is to ensure that you can effectively use that domain while denying your adversary the use of it. The big difference though is that while it's not really normal to have to contest regions of air or space, the normal state of affairs is that the "cyber" domain is very much being contested on a daily basis. These organizations are intended to provide the expertise and equipment / software needed to effectively operate in this contested domain.

      The problem is that information systems are not physical environments. In the physical realm, we have to deal with the laws of physics. The only thing we can do about that is gain a better understanding of them (providing technology and capabilities that weren't possible previously). But in the end, we don't get to re-write the laws of physics. You can make it hard to physically occupy a given space but ultimately there's nothing that makes it impossible to occupy a given space. With information systems, we write the rules. Don't like how a protocol works? Update it or use a different one. Voila. The rules have changed.

      Information warfare is espionage. It is not a battleground. We need to make sure we're applying the right concepts to this environment. And we need to ensure that military involvement is appropriate. We do not need a military force to "fight" a "cyber war." But we may need a military force to disable / destroy / capture equipment related to an information warfare operation.

    5. Re:Army of Darkness by hargrand · · Score: 1

      But what better part of the government to protect military networks than the military? What better part of the government to conduct offensive actions against hostile actors than the military? None of the other functions you site really make sense in the current make up of the U.S. Federal Government.

    6. Re:Army of Darkness by hargrand · · Score: 1

      > The problem is that information systems are not physical environments.

      I never meant to imply that they were. It's an admittedly artificial domain we use to provide shared awarenss and force synchronization. It's a domain our adversaries use for the same purpose. If they impact our ability to use it, it impacts our operational effectiveness just as much as not having air supremacy affects ground forces or having sea supremacy impacts our ability to allow the sea lines of communication to remain open.

      > Information warfare is espionage.

      That's a very narrow view.

    7. Re:Army of Darkness by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      I never meant to imply that they were. It's an admittedly artificial domain we use to provide shared awarenss and force synchronization. It's a domain our adversaries use for the same purpose. If they impact our ability to use it, it impacts our operational effectiveness just as much as not having air supremacy affects ground forces or having sea supremacy impacts our ability to allow the sea lines of communication to remain open.

      You may not mean to imply that they are, but all your examples certainly do. The whole Cyber Warfare language revolves around the concept that networks are akin to physical domains. I find that absurd. And it's especially frustrating to see, time and again, physical security concepts being applied to a non-physical domain while real issues go misunderstood / unidentified.

      I agree that my characterization of information warfare as espionage is somewhat narrow. But I believe it better characterizes the environment and issues than calling it a battlefield. And it certainly is a more accurate term than "cyber warfare."

    8. Re:Army of Darkness by hargrand · · Score: 1

      > You may not mean to imply that they are, but all your examples certainly do.

      Then you mistake an analogy for an implication. Sorry, can't help you there.

  12. HaCKERZ by RedTeflon · · Score: 1

    Does this mean the president will have his thumb on a little red button to release the HaCKERZ now?

    1. Re:HaCKERZ by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Does this mean the president will have his thumb on a little red button to release the HaCKERZ now?

      "Madame Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:... They're trashing our rights man! They're trashing the flow of data! Hack the planet!"

  13. Inspiring! by lymond01 · · Score: 1

    There is a threat to our knowledge, our words, our very sense of self. It permeates the ether, watching, waiting for us to lower our guard. Although we sit on the brink of moral decay, staring back from the abyss towards an enemy unseen, we shall not falter in our duty. We must stand firm against these intruders. Our very credit scores are at stake. And I tell you this: wherever they are, they will be met with strength. We shall fight them on the wireless. We shall fight them at the backbone. We shall never surrender. And though these days may be marked as the darkest days in the history of the MacOS, it is history that will one day show that we did not give ground where it was not taken. G-Force!

  14. We could just fix our OS problem instead by ka9dgx · · Score: 1

    Instead of spending yet another astronomical amount of resources to try to patch up our "defenses", why not fund a few open source projects to get a some implementations of the Capability Security Model out into circulation?

    A few well placed millions (or heck, even thousands) could fix the internet for good, and then we could all get on with general purpose computing, without the need for virus scanners, etc.

  15. Encryption for the masses. by khasim · · Score: 1

    Maybe this will be the kicker needed to get businesses and such to really use encryption in their Internet traffic.

  16. Wrong much? by megamerican · · Score: 1

    Actually, I wouldn't expect that from them at all. The military has no real interest in spying on the civilian population. Perhaps the FBI, CIA, or NSA might do the stuff you were spouting off about, but the military is going to be focused on conducting electronic and cyber warfare, i.e. destroying the enemy's electronic infrastructure and protecting our military's infrastructure.

    if you want to be hysterically paranoid, at least do it about the right things...

    You're calling someone paranoid by because they aren't correctly identifying which part of the government is spying on them illegally? That's a new one.

    However, you'd be wrong anyway.

    In late 2008 the U.S Army Reserve spied on peaceful protests against the Federal Reserve.
    http://www.infowars.com/images/reserve1.jpg
    http://www.infowars.com/images/reserve2.jpg
    http://www.infowars.com/images/reserve3.jpg

    In 2005, NBC obtained a secret 400-page Defense Department document listing more than 1,500 “suspicious incidents” across the country related to peaceful anti-war demonstrations. “The Defense Department document is the first inside look at how the U.S. military has stepped up intelligence collection inside this country since 9/11, which now includes the monitoring of peaceful anti-war and counter-military recruitment groups,” NBC reported.

    In the wake of the terror attacks on September 11, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon established the Counterintelligence Field Activity. CIFA illegally conducted broad domestic operations that targeted antiwar and other dissident domestic groups and logged these in the TALON database. After the unit received negative publicity, the Pentagon’s senior intelligence official, James R. Clapper, recommended to Sec. Def. Gates that the counterintelligence field office be dismantled and that some of its operations be placed under the authority of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

    Please be more informed before you speak. Thanks.

    --
    If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
    1. Re:Wrong much? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      In late 2008 the U.S Army Reserve spied on peaceful protests against the Federal Reserve.
      http://www.infowars.com/images/reserve1.jpg [infowars.com]
      http://www.infowars.com/images/reserve2.jpg [infowars.com]
      http://www.infowars.com/images/reserve3.jpg [infowars.com]

      You call THAT spying??

      Look, do yourself a favor:

      1. Stop reading infowars.
      2. Think for yourself instead of swallowing every half baked conspiracy theory you come across.

      There's enough real scary stuff going on in the world - you don't need to make up crazy shit in order to feel even more threatened.

  17. codename by hitmark · · Score: 1

    echo mirage?

    --
    comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  18. Cyber Militia by cenc · · Score: 1

    I don't understand why they don't properly organize a cyber-militia. Russia and China sure seem to have their own going.

    We could pounce them 5 to 1 with all the private computer networks and crackers around the World that might contribute. They just need a proper command and control system, otherwise I could totally see more than a few friendly fire incidents ( "sorry about that L.A., I thought I was pulling the plug on the power grid in Bejing").

  19. Airforce handicaps by mrheckman · · Score: 1

    Few women, no gays, age limit. Then, too, there's the religious intolerance that has been reported at the Air Force Academy. (Google it, there are a lot of articles, most when it was first reported in 2005, but also since then.) I wonder what percentage of people with the talents needed to be "cyberwarriors" are evangelical Christians?

  20. Finally! by Phizzle · · Score: 1

    US is going to open a can of whoop-ass with its own Kuang Grade Mark Eleven icebreaker!

    --
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
  21. Carefully arranged techno-babble by Arancaytar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This summary read like the back cover of a sequel to Neuromancer.

  22. Re:Except by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    That lots of the people who would make up your cyber militia would be the type who are inherently anti-authoritarian and distrustful of organizations of any sort - and thus would be self-excluded.

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  23. More to the point...how should USA protect its IP? by obliquereference · · Score: 1

    If economic strength, drives political strength and international standing (hopefully no one has any illusions that it doesn't do both). And USA's economic strength is currently predicated on intellectual property (which can then manufactured somewhere else) then how do we (as a nation...or any nation) protect ourselves from the array of network attacks that are launched against us? I think some sort of national firewall or cooperative agreement is a good idea to help protect against those countries that steal our strength. Maybe this can be optional/opt-in by company, but the high-costs and large holes of network defense right now are letting 100's of billions of $ fly out of the country every year. There may eventually be a separate secure network and the wild-wild west internet we know today.

  24. Hell yes it's Operation Screaming Fist!!!!!!! by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    What a gas!! Loved all those green thingy lines -- really gucci, doods and doodettes!

    Geez, and those guys -- those were the same buckaroos at the 1999 Silicon Valley conference where they made that fantasy proclamation about something called "The New Economy" (where they hell did they hide that thing, anyway????). That's where no money had to be spent on any hardware or install testing, all the software was downloaded from the 'net (I believe that's what they called those interpipe thingies).

    Oh yeah...I take this very seriously guys.

    Especially because, wooooo, looky there, there's my fav braless newsy, Leslie Stahl, go baby go!!!!

    Geez Louise! I haven't seen here on the TV since I gave up watching that 60 Minutes show when she gushed over that Taliban jet pilot, who lived in the US but occasionally went back to Afghanistan to bomb the hell out of those innocent civilians who refused to join the Taliban. (Now those are the bad guys? Am I right here -- or still confused????)

    Keep on gushing, braless Leslie....

  25. PROTECT OCEANA! by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 1

    FROM EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN!

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  26. Aaaahhhhh..... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    ....like the way Wall Street and the Republicrats fight the Class War, only better????

    Is there a prize if I got the right answer?????

  27. Re:Except by cenc · · Score: 1

    I never said it would be good militia. Then also we kind of got the U.S. because a bunch of "inherently anti-authoritarian and distrustful of organizations of any sort" types.

    Perhaps a better way would be to treat them like privateers. The U.S. government can just put out bounties on targets, and watch the hackers take them down.

  28. A World Populated By Replicants? by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

    Hmmm...maybe we'll have to bring back Harrison Ford to "retire" all of these replicants;

  29. Operators are Standing By by agrif · · Score: 1

    So, really, how many of us came here hoping, at least for a second, that it would be called Public Security Section 9?

    It's OK, don't be ashamed. You're among friends.

  30. Simple answer: by mjwx · · Score: 1

    If economic strength, drives political strength and international standing (hopefully no one has any illusions that it doesn't do both). And USA's economic strength is currently predicated on intellectual property (which can then manufactured somewhere else) then how do we (as a nation...or any nation) protect ourselves from the array of network attacks that are launched against us? I think some sort of national firewall or cooperative agreement is a good idea to help protect against those countries that steal our strength. Maybe this can be optional/opt-in by company, but the high-costs and large holes of network defense right now are letting 100's of billions of $ fly out of the country every year. There may eventually be a separate secure network and the wild-wild west internet we know today.

    Get a sustainable economic model and stop relying on a product that needs artificial scarcity (which is easily overcome) to be created.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  31. and don't forget ada lovelace by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    which sounds like someone who starred in a '70s era pornographic movie

    but the truth is that the world's first computer programmer was a woman. and if you look at her method for writing a computer program, it's really more like an extended effort at a clever hard hack. in which case, you're talking about the world's first hacker too

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it