Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Aussie Spies Spooked By Cyberwar

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the what-is-it-good-for dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Wikileaks cables released overnight revealed that Australia's top cyber spy agency (akin to the NSA) was unprepared for cyberwar in the view of other intelligence agencies in 2008. Australian agencies were so concerned they asked US intelligence to provide the framework to defend the country's critical information infrastructure, modelling on the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative. Spooks also discussed how Israel was preparing to take down Iran's nuclear program and how to stay relevant when so much information that was classified was now open source and available to anyone."

5 of 72 comments (clear)

  1. In retrospect... by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...asking the US for tips on information security wasn't probably the best idea.

    --
    THL phish sticks
  2. Heh. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Spooks also discussed how Israel was preparing to take down Iran's nuclear program and how to stay relevant when so much information that was classified was now open source and available to anyone.

    Well, they got *that* part right.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  3. Re:This isn't surprising. by naz404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Uhh... Does this mean Australia could have been taken down by Anonymous? They should have asked for help from Amazon instead :P

    --
    http://www.object404.com
  4. Re:Complete solution in five words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    why didn't they hire Julian Assange

    Any organization that deals with information security has an obvious (and paradoxical) problem when hiring talent: The most talented (if not experienced) people in information technology as well as security are hackers. Hackers are young, curious, idealistic, independent and anti-authoritarian. The very traits that comprise their talent also make them a potential liability in a rigid command structure.

  5. Re:Complete solution in five words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ask yourself: why didn't they hire Julian Assange? I am sure the cultural reasons will fill several pages for a start.

    He most likely never applied?

    Intelligence agencies are arguably disadvantaged with hiring because of the high level of secrecy involved. Some thoughts on why this may be the case:

    • Candidates have little knowledge of their role and responsibilities until they've completed the application process and ~12 month vetting process.
    • Other organizations can offer scholarships and internships to attract new graduate talent with little cost and risk involved. Intelligence agencies on the other hand will have a lengthy wait for security clearances and will be exposed to the non-recoverable processing costs.
    • Applicants have a degree of uncertainty about career progression in an intelligence agency due to the lack of public visibility.
    • Applicants may incorrectly assume that something in their past would disqualify them from a position.
    • The application processes used by intelligence agencies are lengthy and invasive. It is much easier for candidates to apply for related jobs in a no/low security environment.
    • There exists a perception in some circles that public sector workers are inferior to their private sector counterparts.
    • Successful applications are making a life long commitment.
    • Successful applicants are limited in what they can discuss about their job and skills in public (and to acquaintances in the private sector). There isn't much glamor or fame to be had.

    Note that many of the points I highlighted above may in fact be desirable in their ability to filter out undesirable candidates. These issues may reduce the size of the pool of talent available when compared to a private sector organisation so there may be less talent to pick from.