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."

18 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 Orga · · Score: 2, Interesting

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

  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 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.

  3. 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?

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

    *jumps into flame suit *

    Or would that now be called the Chairforce?

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  5. 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 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.

    2. 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

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

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

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.

    7. 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.
  6. 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!
  7. Carefully arranged techno-babble by Arancaytar · · Score: 2, Interesting

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