Slashdot Mirror
Obama's Portrait of Cyberwar Isn't Complete Hyperbole
pigrabbitbear writes "It's hard to imagine what cyberwarfare actually looks like. Is it like regular warfare, where two sides armed with arsenals of deadly weapons open fire on each other and hope for total destruction? What do they fire instead of bullets? Packets of information? Do people die? Or is it not violent at all — just a bunch of geeks in uniforms playing tricks on each other with sneaky code? Barack Obama would like to clear up this question, thank you very much. In an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal the president voiced his support for the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 now being considered by the Senate with the help of a truly frightening hypothetical: 'Across the country trains had derailed, including one carrying industrial chemicals that exploded into a toxic cloud,' Obama wrote, describing a nightmare scenario of a cyber attack. 'Water treatment plants in several states had shut down, contaminating drinking water and causing Americans to fall ill.' All because of hackers!"
...and I can't say that about his predecessor.
I keep wondering who will be responsible for cleaning up the thousands or millions of pc's that get infected (or re-infected) years after a "cyber" war is over. I have never heard an answer to that.
Obama's Portrait of Cyberwar Isn't Complete Hyperbole
No, it's only 99.8% hyperbole. Someone has calculated the half-life of the current set of "crises", and decided that we need another urgent problem to address.
To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
I have an answer . . . MyCleanPC!!!1! I just installed it on my PC and I'm re++--_#*$NO CARRIER
Bankers have already pulled off a caper far worse than the unlikely scenario described here. Obama can direct his justice department to hold these bankers responsible under laws that already exist. How serious can he be about protecting America when he refuses to prosecute criminals who have damaged our national security so thoroughly?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
In the '80s the United States sent oil pipeline controls with a trojan in it to the Soviet Union....it's not far fetched.
"Obama does a good job of facilitating thinking..."
And I can't say that. At all. I'd be lying.
This is nothing but fear-mongering to sucker people into increasing the power of the federal gov't. "Oh but it won't be used in that way"... since when has that EVER been true?
I can't say that I agree with his content, but Obama does get Joe SixPack to realize that power plants and trains switches can be inadvertently connected to the internet (and to wonder what else it connected.) Hyperbole it is, but it's useful for the non-specialist.
Obama does a good job of scaring the shit out of people and saying, "Let the government be the solution. Let us spy on your web habits via your ISP, and your cellphone via tracking. And oh yeah, we've decided to expand the TSA's mission to busstops, train stations, along highways, and at pulic facilties like malls and hotels."
In that respect he's a hell-of-lot-smarter than George "duh" Bush but ultimately it's the same fucked-up destination. Let both the (D) and (R) president burn in hell.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
It's not likely that anything will be done to harden the US infrastructure without legislation. The necessary work requires money to be spent and neither public nor private organizations will do that unless there is some sort of legal requirement that they do so.
People who think the president was "over the top" have little imagination - I'm quite certain there are some very bright people in various countries working to create a series of Stuxnet type products to attack the infrastructure of Western nations. Be in no doubt, no nation has a monopoly on brains or computer technology. Access to details of of Western infrastructure is either openly available or have already been stolen. Figuring out the weak spots and how to attack them probably isn't that hard.
However, it's not obvious exactly how to solve the problem. It's not obvious that the current cybersecurity bill will help. The sad fact is that it's been written by lawyers and politicians who have no idea about the technological challenges and how to resolve them, so they are doing what they know - add bureaucracy. Until computer scientists and engineers are taking the lead nothing worthwhile will be done.
Maybe you were scratching yourself at that time, but I spent many hours fixing applications because of the Y2K bug. If it wasn't for the effort of thousands of geeks all around the world, instead of a few systems failing here and there we could have had a huge problem worldwide.
What are you doing in a nerds website? Comments like yours usually come from laypeople who have no idea what had to be done because of Y2K.
If the world's IT systems have had a meltdown, every body would be blaming the geeks for not having done anything. Because the geeks made a great job, guess what, nothing happened. Then people blamed the geeks for having been alarmist, instead of thanking them.
That's a big problem with us, geeks. When you do a great job, nobody notices it because things go smooth. If you fuck up, everybody notices you.
>>>Strawman. Stop using them.
There's no strawman. Obama really has expanded the TSA to busstops, train depots, post offices, et cetera. It's not my fault you don't keep-up with the news and remain unaware of that fact.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
In the '80s the United States sent oil pipeline controls with a trojan in it to the Soviet Union....it's not far fetched.
Subtle but important difference - the story is that the russians were known to be stealing control software so the CIA arranged for the copy that they stole to contain sabotaged code.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Cyber "war" is just applied mathematics. Get it right, and you're untouchable. Its impact is unreliable and the expenditure is out of all proportion to its impact. Give me what was spent on Stuxnet and I could do far more damage to infrastructure than that ever did.
[FUCK BETA]
I should really make a locked-down *nix appliance that secures devices behind a keyfile-secured VPN or SSH tunnel and requires cryptknock before allowing access, and a software suite (like PuTTy and some scripts) to make connecting easy from a Windows computer, and then sell the setup for a ridiculously high price calling them "unbreakable infrastructure security terminals."
If that big dumb idiot who ran HBGary can be a rich executive, why not me?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
How so? Obama came into office on "hope" & "change", and he just helped consolidate the police state Bush kicked off even more. Oh, and he went from torture to "kill lists", and he payed banks for being too greedy for their own good. He didn't change a fucking thing, he just lubed it up for you, all nice and sophisticated and bullshit-y.
No, all he (well, his handlers) did was pulling one on you, and you just sit there and celebrate it with empty phrases like "he facilitated thinking". For fucks sake? What does that even mean? Your BRAIN would facilitate thinking, IF you had one.
I'm pretty sure they simply implemented the same policies that are chugging along all the time, anyway, and this time with the diction of Tuvok instead of dumb smirks.
Give me what was spent on Stuxnet and I could do far more damage to infrastructure than that ever did.
Woh there, cowboy... put your gun back in its holster. The reason for the expense is that Stuxnet was a subtle, precise strike. The main advantage of which is that it didn't give Iran a clear Casus Belli against Israel. No kidding it would have been cheaper and far less complicated to just drop some bombs on Iran's centrifuges... but that could have led to pretty brutal regional conflict. Why use a baseball bat when you can use a scalpel?
-- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
I can't say that I agree with his content, but Obama does get Joe SixPack to realize that power plants and trains switches can be inadvertently connected to the internet (and to wonder what else it connected.) Hyperbole it is, but it's useful for the non-specialist.
yeah, but it's not because Americans has too much freedom on the internet. It's because goverment contractors are incopetent with basic security.
That's the 100% false hyperbole that The Man is shoving down your troat.
He is not saying the truth, it would be "hi citzens, we screwed up wasting all your tax dollars on systems a 5yr old could misuse and then we added insult to the injury by connecting them online. now we are going to prosecute all the bad contracts we made and fix it with secure applications"
instead he is saying "the internet is dangerous, we will collect information from everyone everywhere and will violate all your privacy, because the internet is dangerous"
How the hell can i use my mod points on the article? it's clearly flamebait.
This is completely backward. Infosec is actually applied anthropology. Humans will get the math wrong. They will get the design, the implementation, the policies, the procedures, the operation wrong. Security is about assuming mistakes will be made and overlapping protections to the extent that the impact of those inevitable fuck-ups is minimized.