Slashdot Mirror
Mock Cyber Attack Shows US Unpreparedness
An anonymous reader writes with word that the outcome of the large-scale cyberattack simulation promised a few days ago isn't too rosy. From the Help Net Security article: "During the simulated cyber attack that took place yesterday in Washington and was recorded by CNN, one thing became clear: the US are still not ready to deflect or mitigate such an attack to an extent that would not affect considerably the everyday life of its citizens. The ballroom of the Washington's Mandarin Oriental Hotel was for this event transformed into the White House Situation Room, complete with three video screens displaying maps of the country, simulated updates and broadcasts by 'GNN,' an imaginary television network 'covering'
the crisis."
simulated updates and broadcasts by 'GNN,' an imaginary television network 'covering' the crisis.
Gotham News Network?
Living With a Nerd
This way - the demonstration shows that they need to implement more "Security Features" that encroach upon the rights and freedoms of the average American.
Another reason to take more of our civil liberties in the name of 'national security'
Security is almost by definition an illusion - by making information accessible to someone, you make it potentially available to anyone. Completely enforcing security ideals to a logical extreme would result in complete paralysis, depleting enormous resources along the way (see: the cold war). If you want to keep anything secret, you have to limit its use, and limit the amount of things you keep secret - otherwise the cost of maintaining that secret status becomes prohibitive and unrealistic.
It's the same thing with 'virtual borders' as it is with real borders - you can't keep eyes, or even cameras, or even CPU cycles going on all potential borders. It just won't work - you have to observe effects and target responses, use honeypots and similar tactics, and marshal your resources to minimize the effects of breaches. Better yet, improve relations and economies on both sides of the border, and make such breaches meaningless while still enforcing your limited security goals - you'll be serving all your underlying motivations at the same time.
Then again - security always seems to be a 'temporary' thing, that happens to almost always be escalating. Don't you love your family enough to own the latest and greatest killing machine? Inside most real life monsters lies the desire for securing safety for one's interests - with the lines of priorities drawn right through the property/face of someone else. That's not something we're likely to be getting over anytime soon, conflicting interests, and aggressive 'defense'.
Ryan Fenton
So when they launch a false flag attack on the internet in order to shut it down and censor it they can have a report and say, "See, we told you!"
If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
Nobody who does anything remotely important or meaningful with computers would ever use the prefix "cyber" in any shape or form. It's clearly just some misdirection being carried out by a D.C. PR/Marketing firm retained by the DoD to keep the Chinese off-balance.
After reading the article, I'm still not sure how this was simulated. Was it basically a situation where a bunch of agency heads sat around, were given a scenario, and asked 'what would you do'? Was this a test of department decision making, or an actual test of doing something? I'm just having a hard time understanding the 'format' of this simulation.
While I don't disagree that we could do more in the area of computer security, one needs to look closely at the affiliations of the people running this "exercise."
They're both loyal Neocon insiders. John Negroponte is the former Bush Director of National Intelligence. Michael Chertoff is the former Director of Homeland Security, and co-author of the Patriot Act. And both of these positions were just the last in a string of appointments by Bush/Cheney.
And as career neoconservatives, they've been at the forefront of fearmongering and prevarication in order to lead the US to war and erode civil liberties. These are not opinions, these are well-documented facts.
The neocons are a one trick circus; this is just their newest pony. If you've been paying attention the past nine years, how can you possibly doubt that this is anything else?
I can see the fnords!
Ugh. And Michael Hayden. Bush's chief wiretapper.
Please. These people are among the threats we need security from.
I can see the fnords!
Regarding a possible shutdown of the cell phone and Internet service to prevent a cascading effect, the group found out that federal agencies actually don't have the authority to do so, and that companies providing these services might be unwilling to do it when asked.
Another thing that might prove to be an issue is the Governors' reluctancy to put their power in the hands of the federal government, which would possibly lead to a nationalization of the National Guard.
Federal Times reports that "Attorney general" Gorelick mused on the idea of introducing laws that would allow the government to seize broader power for the time it takes to suppress a nation-wide cyber attack.
A simple two step plan for advancing authoritarianism:
1. Scare People
2. Seize More Power
What, precisely, would lead us to believe that the Federal government is sufficiently adept at cyber-security to improve upon the staged outcome of this theatrical "attack"? I want better cyber-security and think it is important, much like health care. I do not, however, believe that our government has the skills, the lack of corruption, the honor, or the honesty to do it well. Much like health care.
Tell me, fear-mongers, what you are going to do to solve the problem. Not just a thousand pages of blather within which to hide giveaways to key lobbying groups. Real solutions that the information science and economics communities can scrutinize. If you cannot provide that, you are just asking for power. You are taking liberty with a vapid hint that maybe it will help security. Nay, not even that -- you are taking liberty by shouting fire in a crowded theater.
Bullshit. Start by presenting the solution. Shove your fear-mongering up your ass.
And as for you CNN: You should be ashamed for being their puppet. Sacrificing your journalistic integrity at the alter of the exclusive. What will your pretty shock-graphic story title say? How about: "Cyberwar: Public at Peril"
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
"All warfare is based on deception."
-Sun Tzu
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
I used to think there were two groups of paranoid-insane people in the US, those who believe that 'they' were manipulating people in high places to confirm that Obama was born in the US, and those who believe that 'they' were behind the 9/11 attack.
Now I think there is only one group of insane-paranoid people, the ones who believe in 'they.'
Qxe4
> You are going to need security from the MS13 punk who lives down the street from you when the power grid has been down 1-2 days.
On August 14, 2003 the power grid was down for 1-2 days. I didn't see any punks looting or attacking. But my neighborhood did come out of their houses for once and everyone got to meet each other. The kids got to know each other and had a great time playing instead of hiding inside from the big bad world. We made lasting friends and the neighborhood has been better for it in the years since that.
Stop fear mongering.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
They want you to think that, yes they do.
Yeah, but these people aren't faceless, they aren't nameless. The president of the CIA has a name, the leader of the republican party has a name, the members of the PNAC are publicly known, and they made their goals clear. There is no hidden Moriarty pulling the strings of the criminal world. Even the leaders of historical secret criminal organizations that actually existed, were known long before they've been convicted, the Mafia, Al Capone, the Zetas. The leader of the Mossad is public information. The Nazi leadership was all well known before they overthrew the government.
The fact is, it is really hard to rule the world secretly. When you start saying 'they' are doing it, it makes you sound clueless, and you fit in the same category with the birthers, because 'they' could have forged the birth certificate on file in Hawaiian government offices.
Critical thinking is gathering evidence before making wild guesses; 'questioning everything' alone is not critical thinking, it's braindeadedness. If your questioning doesn't come with research then it is not called critical thinking, it is called closing your eyes.
Qxe4
some well placed bombs could knock the power out for a lot of people really quickly.
The interesting thing is that bombs don't do "much" to power lines. A "sooper soaker" three man sling shot, a couple dozen lengths of chain, and a substation, now you're talking. Transmission towers and cutting torches don't mix very well either.
I have this jewish friend, real jewish like cousins in Israel type of jewish. Anyway, he explains that real terrorists do about a hundred attacks against structures for every time they hit people. Broken glass, molotov fires, graffiti, cut wires, etc. Thats because you never know when a person will whip out an uzi and fight back (well, actually, in the gun control areas in the us, you know they're sitting ducks), but aside from darwin award winners, structures never fight back. Thats how I've always known the "terror threat" in the US is bogus, because no one ever hits our structures.
Now, if we were sitting in the dark, with no water or sewers, no radio or TV, no gas stations, no natural gas, all shop windows broken, all forests on fire, then I'd believe we are under a real terrorist threat... But when its just Reichstag fire acts followed immediately by passage of enabling legislation, followed within a couple years of invasion of multiple innocent countries...
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
This was not a mock cyber attack, but in fact it was a media event hosted by the U.S. government.
Seriously, this is the prelude to new legislation that will in practice be used to justify terminating all kinds of service to clamp down on free speech, in the name of prevention of terrorism. And if you try to discuss it, you'll just lose your connection to the internet. When will we wake up and build a mesh network permitting an end-run around the Powers That Be?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Maybe the US is unleadable. If a liberal says something then conservatives automatically declare it to be completely wrong and goes against American values. If a conservative says anything, liberals declare it to be completely wrong and suspect that its part of some hidden agenda to bring about fascism.
How do you lead a country like this? You suggest improving healthcare and you have people arming themselves and willing to fight to the death against the evil socialist government. WTF? People in the US pick a team, either liberal or conservative and are absolutely against whatever the other team is saying.
Congress is completely broken, they can't make changes even when they have a super-majority. What can the executive branch do when the legislative branch is so fucked up (other than start wars) ? How can you lead a country where half the population is going to disagree with what you say, just because it was you that said it?