Slashdot Mirror
US To Create the Independent US Cyber Command, Split Off From NSA (pbs.org)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from PBS: After months of delay, the Trump administration is finalizing plans to revamp the nation's military command for defensive and offensive cyber operations in hopes of intensifying America's ability to wage cyberwar against the Islamic State group and other foes, according to U.S. officials. Under the plans, U.S. Cyber Command would eventually be split off from the intelligence-focused National Security Agency. The goal, they said, is to give U.S. Cyber Command more autonomy, freeing it from any constraints that stem from working alongside the NSA, which is responsible for monitoring and collecting telephone, internet and other intelligence data from around the world -- a responsibility that can sometimes clash with military operations against enemy forces. Making cyber an independent military command will put the fight in digital space on the same footing as more traditional realms of battle on land, in the air, at sea and in space. The move reflects the escalating threat of cyberattacks and intrusions from other nation states, terrorist groups and hackers, and comes as the U.S. faces ever-widening fears about Russian hacking following Moscow's efforts to meddle in the 2016 American election.
The goal, they said, is to give U.S. Cyber Command more autonomy, freeing it from any constraints that stem from working alongside the NSA...
[sarcasm] Great... A government agency with less accountability than the NSA. Just what we all needed more of. [/sarcasm]
Well, the head of the NSA refused to pledge loyalty to our current President, so...
#DeleteChrome
Well, the head of the NSA refused to pledge loyalty to our current President, so...
Which is a good thing, in the US no-one ever pledges loyalty to any individual. They might make a pledge to uphold the Constitution, but as far as I can tell the current President is the first to need personal loyalty from his officeholders.
Usually the question goes the other way: do you have a reason to *trust* them. Anyhow, there are a few things that make me question them, yes.
They've helped destabilize or backed coups in Iran, Guatemala, North Vietnam, Hungary, Laos, Haiti, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Zaire, Brazil, Indonesia, Greece, Bolivia, Cambodia, Chile, Afghanistan, and probably other places. They've run operations like Operation Mockingbird, they helped with Watergate, etc.
The current operation is about like the lies over the WMD. Secret evidence, tons of stories with nothing in them but anonymous quotes.
And even the ODNI report you allude to is getting inflated. It merely said that hacking the election was something Russia might like to do, it didn't give any actual evidence if you read the damned thing. But what the heck does the Coast Guard know about this, anyhow? Oh, right, you probably didn't know who the members of that were. Or that the people who signed this report were just a couple of political appointees.
Same way you guys probably never read the Trend Micro report which everyone talked about and I think only Ars actually bothered to link to.
But sure, please feel free to show me the 'mountain of evidence' of CNN/WaPo stories that all cite each other, anonymous/secret sources, or the ODNI, Crowdstrike or Trend Micro reports that have jack all in them but an old copy of P.A.S. freeware and some Tor exit nodes. But hey, that Advanced Persistent Threat Fancy Bear is everywhere.