Slashdot Mirror
Air, Land, Sea, Cyber: NATO Adds Cyberspace To Operation Areas (phys.org)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via Phys.Org: On Tuesday, NATO decided to make cyber operations part of its war domain, along with air, sea, and land operations. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the decision is not aimed at any one particular country, just that allies need to be able to better defend themselves and respond to computer network attacks. Phys.Org reports: "The decision has been long in coming, particularly amid rising tensions with Russia, which has proven its willingness to launch computer-based attacks against other nations. About a year ago, U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter told NATO that it must improve its ability to protect itself before it builds its cyberwar capabilities. And he pledged that the U.S. would used its expertise to help allies assess their vulnerabilities and reduce the risk to their critical infrastructure. In 2014, after years of debate, NATO finally agreed that a cyberattack could rise to the level of a military assault and could trigger the Article 5 protections, which allow the alliance to go to the collective defense of another member that has been attacked. New research from the Pew Research Center shows that cyberattacks are the second most-feared entity among Americans after ISIS.
Spies have been around since before "air" and did much the same thing: information warfare. If IW wasn't a domain before computers there's no reason for it to be a domain now. the only new situation is programs that make decisions without human intervention and for the moment that's a very few drone, missile, and Close In Weapons Systems.When robot armies march o'er the land and are making tactical decisions this will make sense, but not before. This meaningless posturing is going to cost billions.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Defence against 'computer network attacks', that would be like trying to stop their Microsoft Windows computers being hacked. No one in their right minds would put Microsoft Windows anywhere near a war domain. Have they that short a memory:
Software glitches leave Navy Smart Ship dead in the water
Technical Analysis of the August 14, 2003, Blackout:
Slammer worm crashed Ohio nuke plant network
>> New research from the Pew Research Center shows that cyberattacks are the second most-feared entity among Americans after ISIS.
#3 on the most feared list, slighly above manbearpig, is dihydrogen oxide. We MUST ban this dangerous compound now. Think of the children!
http://www.dhmo.org/
War without borders, war without end
war on a stick, cut to the quick!
PSYOPs at iHOP rumors of war,
war-on-a-rope, Contras for dope,
securing the slippery slope
Spray war, stick-on-war, war paint
(apply DIRECTLY to the FOREHEAD)
war in the East, war in the West
war up North, war down South
WAR KITTENS
IPv4 war, cryptowar, acronymwar
all made possible by excitable folk
using Microsoft PowerPoint
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
Hi, I'm a modern day Cassandra... I've been shouting for years about a solution that can actually fix computer security, and render all this "cyberwar" crap obsolete...
Even the Wikipedia page is a mess, but you'll find the solution buried in it... it's called the Principle of least Privilege, and I figure it's 10 more years of hell before people catch on and actually start to fix things.
It is entirely possible to give users a modern GUI interface which transparently and intuitively allows them to decide which resources a program should be allowed to access, which doesn't add any cognitive load, and results in a system which can't be hacked, given a reasonably careful user. Also, by reasonably careful, I mean someone like your parents - someone who understands how cash and credit cards and social engineering work, and hasn't been scammed out of real money. You don't have to be the NSA to secure your PC, but you do have to have an OS that doesn't trust everything. (Good luck finding one!)
> allows them to decide which resources a program should be allowed to access ...
> an OS that doesn't trust everything. (Good luck finding one!)
We've had that for 15 years. That's called SELinux (Security-enhanced Linux). Other alternatives are gresecurity and AppArmor.
> a modern GUI interface which transparently and intuitively
That's what is missing.
Right now, the easiest tools to use include a default set of rules, then show violations and let you add rules to allow it next time.
Yes, spies have been around forever. What's new is today most organizations can't function without their computer networks. In WWII, the combatants bombed each other's railroad networks, because with the railroad shut down the enemy couldn't move men and materials, production would largely shut down in the affected areas, etc. Today we're even more reliant on computer networks than we ever were on railroad networks.
If an enemy were to do substantial damage to our computer and network infrastructure, that would seriously hamper our economy and our ability to fight a major war (it's hard to build more fighter jets or missiles when the network is down).
In addition, a very prolific spy of the 1950s might steal thousands of pages of documents. Thousands of pages was a major, major haul. Today, thousands of pages is a typical script kiddie. Unit 61398 steals thousands of pages every DAY.
I now feel the need to snap some.
Time to offend someone
I am the very model of a modern Cyber General
I've information secretive and knowledge technological
I know my way around the tubes and quote the cryptological
From Adi, Bruce and Len to Ron in order alphabetical!
While I wish I could have claimed it as my original that belongs to Arancaytar with this post.
Time to offend someone
U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter told NATO that it must improve its ability to protect itself before it builds its cyberwar capabilities
talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Most smart nations govs and mils can function just fine without consumer grade computer networks tracked by NATO.
Many have finally understood the NSA and GCHQ interest in all their local networks and communications systems going back to the 1960's.
Why not give the West something creative to find, worry about and read on local servers and watch for the reaction and leaks to the press about exotic projects countered by contractors and the mil?
The ability to keep data on a base or area for select trusted staff is the key to ensuring all other networked data is just everyday expected junk or very complex bait.
ie other nations focus on the smarter human aspect and have placed generations of human spies deep in the more advanced nations govs, mil, contracting and mil educational sectors of other nations. As they are loyal they are not doing it for cash or a passport out after a new years of high risk and often limited collection or access to tainted bait files.
NATO is dreaming that other nations are as connected and network open thanks to low quality private sector contractors and the use of consumer grade telco networks connections over decades.
The real skill was to have actual MI6 or CIA skills to back up any found network data about another nations projects. The West spent all its cash on digital spying and that is now becoming a policy issue. Not having a human side to actually verify found digital files is getting to be interesting. Other smarter nations dont have to use digital networks or can fake messages, create vast fictional projects to be found by the West on an open network. The West was sold on been totally connected and trusting what it finds deep in other nations databases cannot be fully understood.
Who will win? The nations with the best real human spies sitting in meetings, shaping the West's policy as its been made over decades. Having new Western embassy staff "buy" a local spy is often a local trap and ends up on the news, wigs, equipment and 'offer' on display for the worlds press.
NATO has the ability to see other nations moves in real time, but thats often way too late, totally expected and now well understood by most govs and their mils. NATO only has the in country trick of funding NGO's and color revolutions but even that policy of local dissident support is been understood and can now be tracked with local informants and well funded, skilled human counterintelligence.
Other nations can create the 'Thousands of pages" digitally everyday and the West as very few ways of understanding if its true, useful, a trap, limited hangout or useful. Way too many Western contractors and private experts kept on selling the West's mil/gov on digital only methods. Great for their own brands growth, but other useful methods lost too much funding. If all thats been collected from other nations is consumer junk and careful disinformation, more NATO funding is not going to help much other than saving local jobs. Probing of the distant networks is now expected and is finally well understood.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"